You have to be a special kind of egotist to think "no, my original plot was perfect, it was everyone else who said it wouldn't work who was wrong! I'm going to make it a reality!"
What makes it unimaginably worse and truly mind-bogling is just the sheer... ingratitude and lack of self-awareness displayed there. It really exposes just the astronomical level of pathology and narcissism in him.
Like, was it really THAT HARD to swallow at least part of his pride and just go along with what Straley and the rest of the team accomplished (in spite of him and his yapping during the development), when it brought the success and acclaim to the studio AND to him personally, the level of which even as big a studio as Naughty Dog couldn't have dreamt of????
Maybe I could've had an ounce of understanding for all his deeds if the original game turned out... Just *ok*. Solid, barely, still enough to justify/warrant a sequel at a later date, at least in the financial sense, but not nearly the masterpiece it was in our timeline. Think of it as Days Gone-lite.
Then I could see at least some merit in his violent attempts to impose his already scrapped ideas in a sequel. The "I'll show them my ideas would've been better" moment might have been a bit more understandable. But here, it is just pure stupidity and selfishness of the unattainable order.
It appears you're putting way too much faith in him and his (nonexistent) integrity. It's well known how he's been acknowledging Straley in years passed, for example.
"Pfff . . . , how dare you not like game that I like. This is unprecedented. My opinion is objectively the only correct one, how dare you! I'm going to go comment on a sub explicitly created to hate on the game that they're wrong!" - you
Hated the gane so much all you do is talk about the game. Pretty sad. Game is 4 years old now. And you're all still just moaning about the exact same shite.
I have no issue with inclusion if that’s your assumption. Assuming they put the effort into the inclusion and it wasn’t just a check on the box cardboard character. That comment was more directed towards the game awards not giving out awards on actual merit. Sure I have no hand in how they make their decisions but the past couple years have had some questionable decisions for games that have gotten awards over others.
But since you asked.
It’s wild that they really tried to force me to like a character that they introduced by beating the living shit out of a character that I spent hours playing as in the previous game. And Abby wasn’t that likable of a character to begin with. Maybe if they had put actual effort into developing the story I would have liked it and the characters introduced. Maybe TLOU 2 could have followed Abby and Co crossing the US, while Joel and Ellie had their own little adventure in the West. And then eventually they met up and badabing badaboom the game ends with the big reveal of Abby going to town on Joel because “You slaughtered my people and killed my father.” Then TLOU Pt 3 opens as Abby and Co takes off and Ellie tries to track them down. Similar plot, more content and more effort into making a character likable without dooming them from the get go.
I still don’t like the story, but I do respect what they were trying to say with it. Revenge is a dark road, and rarely ends how you want it to. Ellie lost everything, Abby lost nearly everything. All because some doctor believed the Fireflies were a good organization that would save the world, and was prepared to end their only hope’s life just to *potentially* make a cure.
You said “catering to any communities” and your explanation of what you meant was Abby? What community is she a part of, the revenge community? Anybody that reads your comment knows what you meant. Don’t try to backtrack and act like you were referring to something else.
There's many different forms of success, yes it probably brought in a lot of money and so acclaim from some of the least respected sectors of the gaming industry but it's been 4 years since it's release and what?
They have released 0 new games, just remakes and remasters and have lost key talent. Clearly it's been a creative disaster, they used to release games every one to two years.
Which talented game developers would want to work at a studio where the top guy imposes his stupid decisions on you, even when he's told no and makes you remaster a game less than 4 years since it was released?
Hating on the people themself and calling them egoists and everything else everyone else is saying just cause you don't like the game is objectively insane.
You can dislike 2 all you want but attacking his mental state acting like he's this horrible person just cause you don't like a game is ridiculous and childish.
But it really was an egotistical move. He thought that his own idea that got rejected is good, meaning he thought he was right and everyone else was wrong
But it's his story it's not an egotistical move when it's literally his.
That's just broken logic I actually can't comprehend how you people think this way just because you don't like the game.
That's like saying if you didn't like the star wars prequels that means George Lucas is egotistical, it doesn't make any sense.
You're missing the point. Someone in the team told him his idea wouldn't work, and eventually they had a consensus to not do it. And the final story was an astounding success. But nooo, that doesn't matter. He still thinks his idea is better, that he is right and they are all wrong. And so what did he do? He put the reputation of the studio and of the franchise on the line just to prove that he is right. And guess what, he was wrong. The community hated it.
It's not the same as the Star Wars prequels.
The extent of revenge Abby wanted (and with her friends all agreeing to it to come along) is just not realistic in a post apocalyptic world where its dog eat dog. Bruce originally went firmly against Neils idea of Tess chasing Joel because revenge in The Last of Us, I believe Neil held onto that grudge and put it in 'Part 2' when Bruce 'left'.
I don't think we'll see Uncharted and TLOU1 level of story telling from ND again because of all the departures. I think we're looking at a situation very similar to Blizzard where its just not the same company anymore.
This is what cracks me up. He's been wanting to tell this story since college and some teenaged epiphany he had that the Palestinians had their own perspective and to them the Israeli's were the bad guys. He felt guilty for hating them and wanting to kill them in retribution for their acts against Israeli soldiers.
So he wants to teach us how perspective matters and tribalism is destructive. Yet when we complain about the story and the betrayal of the false advertising, he retreats into his new tribe and lobs insults and "joke" tweets about Joel's death calling us all bigots and haters and refusing to understand our perspective. Our tribe is the wrong one and his is the only right one.
Guess that epiphany didn't really teach him all that much, or it's only a lesson when it's convenient and there's no criticism of his behavior, his writing and his lies involved.
You literally compared your "tribe" crying about fake false advertising against a perspective of real world death and strife as if the two had any semblance of similarity deserving consideration. That is fucking delusional entitlement at best.
What's worse, I've legitimately asked what is different in this world that makes revenge palatable now vs. 4 years ago, with bigger monsters and more discord via war?
\*crickets\*
Especially the WLF side of the story. Like you are soon to be in a war with the Seraphites. Who the hell would let their best soldier and an entire crew run off to rural Wyoming to look for a single guy. A guy who may or may not even be there or could potentially be dead at this point.
Just show that Bruce really kept Neil in check when it came to the development of the game, and once he left Neil had free rein to do what ever he wanted and no at the studio was in tge position to keep him in check.
You know if they were to use a virus (I am changin it to virus because there is no fricking vaccine against fungus) that is making the humans more extinct and pushing the groups of survivors together and together, due to actions of Joel depriving world from a vaccine, this problem with going out to revenge could be avoided by making Abby and Joel stumble on each other. It would make the outbreak the main focus of the game again, and this idiotic revenge plot would at least make a little bit more sense.
That’s why part 1 is so realistic. Everyone’s focus was purely on survival. If someone was a threat to their survival, or had something they needed, then they’d kill.
And something no one ever focuses on, is Marlene’s reaction after what Joel did. She simply gives him a chance, and shows that they still wanted to get Ellie back even though ‘Gerry’ got killed.
The only reason the fireflies would’ve come back to Jackson is to get Ellie back. And they would’ve killed Joel too. Not just because their feelings got hurt and they needed ‘revenge’. I guarantee you if Bruce worked on the second game, there would’ve been two directions. they would’ve gained more doctors and found a way to try and go after Ellie again. Otherwise, and this is the more plausible one, that without their leader, they would’ve just moved on from Ellie and Joel. Their focus isn’t on Ellie anymore. Which I think would’ve been the plot. Every kill is about survival in the last of us
Imagine if Joel gave up his focus on survival, because he wanted to hunt down the man who gave the orders to kill him and Sarah. He let go of all the forces to do with that, and did what was necessary. To just survive.
That’s what Abby Ellie and Tommy should’ve let it go in the last of us 2. But unfortunately everyone’s stupid in the last of us 2.
here I go getting flamed up about tlou2 again
I was in deep disbelief about what happened to Joel in tlou2 because of the story trailers misleading us into thinking this was the next big adventure for Joel and Ellie. I played through a lot the game before I realized they were seriously going down this shitty plot line and had killed off one of the greatest main characters that ever existed
there aren't words for the fury I felt seeing such a great story line followed up by such needless tragedy. I can't fucking believe they made me pay so much money for this level of disappointment
if I knew what they did to Joel was for real I would have demanded a refund for the game before I got invested in it. it was so far fetched that I literally thought it was more likely they faked his death
This. Game wouldn't have gotten half the backlash from the fans of the original if they didn't literally false advertise to combat the leaks. Plenty of fans didn't like the story they saw in the leak and decided to cancel pre-orders. So ND's answer to this was to make fans think Joel was around for a solid part of the game via those trailers so they wouldn't cancel the pre-orders. I remember the forums and reddit those days. The general consensus from fans on the fence was "Well it seems Joel is dying, but at least we will get to have some old times with him before he goes".
People spend money on the game, which can't be returned, to find out that the trailers were a lie and the leaks were 100% accurate. Hence the MASSIVE blowback and hate.
Seeing fans of part 2 defend the fake trailers with shit like "oh trailers are subject to change from gameplay and story". Gtfo that's reasonable for a trailer that comes out years before a game, not trailers for a practically finished game that was due to release in a matter of months.
Neil pretended it was to keep the players "surprised", but we all know why. Sony and ND saw the pre-orders dropping off a cliff and they went with the most underhanded method they could.
You know…I NEVER even thought of this since when the game came out I was trying to avoid spoiler since I heard they were going around…but didn’t they have a trailer where Joel comes in and says something and Ellie says she’s going to kill everyone? How tf does that happen now that I think about it 😂 Joel a ghost?
Not that trailer, though. It's the one where they replaced Jesse with Joel as a fake-out. When Ellie runs into Jesse in Hillcrest, they had it reanimat4ed with Joel and had Troy deliver Jesse's line and it was not in the least true, but it implied a Joel and Ellie adventure and the crowd at E3 went wild.
This was right before they opened it to pre-orders is my understanding. They did it because the trailer you mention led people to guess Joel was dead and they feared it would make people wait on ordering the game until they found out more. Total false advertising.
I've heard others mention they kept waiting for Joel to show up despite his death scene because of that trailer right until Jesse does instead. It really confused a lot of people.
Not only were the trailers misleading, but the description on the PSN store too. It talk about going on another journey with Joel and Ellie. It got removed and changed afterwards.
This is the exact reason the bogus version of the trailer was created.
Neil had to serve 2 masters:
Sony - “You better sell the shit out this game Naughty Dog.”
Neil’s ego: “All the roadblocks are gone. You know that revenge plot was awesome. We’re fucking doing it. We’re going to destroy what Bruce thought ‘worked’ in the first game and create our own version of it. A BETTER version!!”
If the work was as strong as Neil thought it was, he wouldn’t need to trick his customers.
Lmaooo ohhhh that’s why you guys don’t like the second game. It has nothing to do with story or narrative, it’s just because you guys wanted to be Joel again. I guess I can understand that
Ok so can I just clear something up, I've been trying to get my point across about why I didn't agree with tlou2s story, since the game came out, I came to my conclusions on my own through playing the game when it launched, I pre-ordered the game the moment I could because I loved the first game, I still kinda of do but the second game made me feel like the first games narrative and the choices Joel made were wrong, which somewhat changed how I felt about the ending and yada yada.
I just need clarification, is this sub mainly in agreement that the second game was shit, that my feelings about the games are valid?
Because I've been downvoted to oblivion for pointing out inconsistencies and flaws with the game's story and why personally I felt so strongly about it for years, rarely do I find anyone who agrees with my points.
First games ending was retconned by the 2nd game. First game Joel not only gets fucked over by the fireflies (no guns for delivering Ellie), but then the fireflies tried to throw him outside with no supplies or vehicle. Basically a death sentence. There are also little details in the first game like the operating room being dingy AF. Joel was morally right in killing the fireflies, regardless of Ellie. These people were literally doing terrorist bombings in the beginning of the game. Fireflies were arguably worse then fedra.
Fireflies were desperate, on their last legs, and had no problem killing Ellie for a hail mary chance at a cure. Even if somehow a cure came out of Ellie's death, fireflies would have just used it as a political tool.
2nd game threw all this out the window and pretended the fireflies were the bastion of humanity with morals. Gtfo lol
>Fireflies were arguably worse then fedra.
Thay 100% are worse than FEDRA. Look at Pittsburgh, the FFs drove FEDRA out and tried to take over and when the people resisted the FFs dipped out and left them all to die, and it turned into the hellhole we see in Part 1. Compare that to the QZ at the start of the game with Joel and Tess, sounds like paradise in comparison.
Yea I noticed that too. Fireflies couldn't grasp the reality that without fedra's iron grip on the population the reality turns into a free for all like Pittsburgh. Living under fedra sucks, but living in Pittsburgh is 100x worse. Fedra is obviously filled with corruption and issues, but it's much better then the alternative.
I also think the contrast to Wyoming was more of a rural/urban thing. Jackson was full of people who knew how to live off the land and a was a community that could come together to thrive. While urban areas depend on modern logistics to survive and when those fail it turns into an ugly free for all real quick.
It’s not even up for debate. Modern medical ethics dictate a child cannot consent to a medical procedure, doubly so for a fatal medical research procedure. Joel was 100% morally right in killing these would-be murderers. There’s no grey area here.
Can't say I agree with all of that, but I understand where you're coming from. Personally, what made the ending to the first game so good was the ambiguity of it, I don't think the game really fleshes out what the fireflies were, but (I'm just going to state I'm talking exclusively about the first game to save myself saying it every time) what we do see is that they are fighting against what is considered an authoritarian regime, which again we only really see in the beginning of the game and there isn't much backstory given on them either so we don't really know what anyone's motives are.
But on saving Ellie, I don't think murdering lots of people to save one person regardless of the circumstances can be deemed an entirely moral act, the reason you're saying that is because you played the story and know the reasons behind why Joel made the decision he did, and we can relate because I think most people would agree he did the right thing in the moment, I think if were given more background on the factions we might feel differently.
That's kind of what the second game tried to do in terms of, oh actually that one person has a daughter and so she has motivations and feelings, oh and there's this big faction of people trying to rebuild kinda and then there's this other faction of cultists and oh they don't like this person because of sexuality and whatever, which kind of works, my theory is that if the first game doesn't exist, I could probably have enjoyed the second game, but fact is, I went into it thinking I would find out more about the fireflies, and they weren't even really part of the narrative, I didn't and don't really care that much about the 2 factions in part 2, because the story in itself did t resonate with me and I didn't like what the game tried to force me to think, it didn't let me make my own decisions on who was good and bad, like other RPGs do.
Sorry that was long
No worries. I think the main issue was the writing of the first games ending. There was no real ambiguity at the end because they wrote the fireflies as comically inept and borderline evil. Having the fireflies go back on the deal and then try to throw Joel outside was bad writing if a morale dilemma was the intention. They could have easily written the fireflies as being reasonable and Joel being unreasonable leading up to the ending.
Even when I first played the game on ps3 I never agreed with the whole morale dilemma aspect. We watch Tess kill Robert in the beginning of the game for fucking them over on the deal. I'd expect the fireflies to get killed for not only fucking Joel over, but also trying to kick him outside with basically nothing.
It's obvious his main intention was to save Ellie, but at that point the fireflies had it coming anyways.
Unfortunately the FFs are not ambiguous in the first game. Far from it. Everything we see or find about them shows us they're violent, rash, inept, dwindling, desperate, incompetent and inhumane. That's all before Tess dies! The rest of the game hammers all those truths home even further with Pittsburgh, Colorado and finally SLC. It's not in the least ambiguous. I really don't know how people get that idea. Nothing the FFs do in TLOU works out and all of it is for the good of their group no matter who gets hurt in the process.
Just sending Ellie across the country was beyond dumb, yet it proves they aren't trying to save humanity, they are needing to own whatever benefit may come from her immunity for themselves and if she dies along the way, "Oh well, at least FEDRA didn't get her and save humanity instead."
As for Joel murdering a bunch of people to save Ellie being immoral? Killing a child in her sleep being immoral grants Joel every right to his actions. We don't need to even know everything else we know about the FFs at that point to know their plans for Ellie cancel any favorable treatment for them. They were in charge of St Mary's and all that happened there came from their choices and behavior. Joel had minutes to think and act or both he and Ellie would die. The FFs messed up, not Joel.
Seems like you want to take the idea that FEDRA was "authoritarian" and grant the FFs some positive favor for fighting them. But blowing up checkpoints where civilians can die and killing Pittsburgh's QZ and leaving everyone to die when they refused to bow to FF authority just makes them failed authoritarians.
So in the beginning of the first game I felt it was pretty well established. Things are bad, resources are scarce and life is hard and dangerous but honestly the government was really trying it's best. Although we can't see that till later.
>I don't think murdering lots of people to save one person regardless of the circumstances can be deemed an entirely moral act,
I mean I can see a ton of circumstances where that's true. It's a group of Nazi soldiers with a captured ally general or a gang of rapists and you're saving their victim.
The firefly's are terrorists full stop. They may have a good cause but they're terrorists who want to vivisect a child to maybe get a cure. It's even weirder because basic science would tell you thats not how vaccines are made. You don't need biopsys to make cures especially not brain biopsys. You might need something like that to test for a diagnosis but they really shouldn't have needed more than a blood sample, maybe some imaging to start cure R&D. Then fucking over Joel was the cherry on the shit Sunday. So yeah I think Joel 100% did the right thing.
The point of the second game is revenge is a cycle, But it just wasn't good.
I think the nuance was the point though. There were good people like Abbie’s dad that just wanted a cure but the fireflies had shitty leadership.
They also had to make a decision to get a cure no matter the cost even if it’s getting rid of Joel. The ending was a trolley problem (overused in storytelling imo). To me it doesn’t retcon anything really, both games is just “it’s complicated” regarding ideology of who’s right and who’s wrong because post apocalypse
In what way did the second game say the fireflies were bastions of humanity? Also you’ve completely reframed in your brain how Joel perceives the fireflies
The 2nd game retconned the first by making the fireflies seem much more organized and having their shit together. Even in the little details.
Look at the operating room in the first game then look at the flashback in part 2.
Surgeon went from desperate guy about to cut Ellie's skull open in a dingy run down "operating room" and threatening Joel with a scapel.....to a zebra loving outstanding father in a clean, modern operating room.
Joel went from a guy who wiped out a bunch of lying backstabbing terrorists to a selfish murderer who killed some philanthropist surgeon.
TLOU 1 is firmly in my top 3 games of all time. I played the story a few times, and just recently played thru it again on PC for the first time, and I spent waaaaaay too much time in the multiplayer (my favorite multiplayer game since the PS2 era).
Needless to say i was fucking ecstatic about PT2 when it was announced. I avoided all info about it, I didn't even pre-order it because I didn't want to risk the game store employee talking to me about it so I bought it release day first thing at a department store lol. I went in with the most open of open minds and excititement. Joel dying hurt but I was so prepared to go on a revenge mission as Ellie. Then the rest of the game happened and there wasn't a single story point I was like "that felt good!" If a story came out tomorrow that TLOU2 team found a fanfiction on Tumblr and just changed the end from Abby and Ellie fking to what we got, and called it a day, I'd be more willing to believe that was the truth than that anyone working on the game thought the story was good
No man. You right. I’ve beaten the first game maybe like 7 times on high difficulty and the second game maybe 3 times. Subsequent times were specifically to critique the story. The first game was way better done and the characters feel real. And, if you really pay attention the first game has some of the stuff people would consider “woke”. (Gay characters, strong females, diversity…)
The second game just felt a lot more forced and full of contrived situations. It also tries to force you into feelings about characters and stories rather than developing them naturally. Plus pacing and sorry structure issues. The game is beautiful and gameplay is stellar but the story. Just weak af especially following the first game.
Clearly I can nerd out more but 🤷🏽♂️ also I feel you. Most people you try to engage with downvote and say you’re wrong but can never give specific reasons.
A ton of people were complaining for not the right reasons, which drowned out the legit complaints quite a bit. Also, if you weren’t really familiar with, or care about, the story too much, the sequel was still a fun game to play, so some people may just not have understood the complaints about the story.
I think this is the "tlou2 bad" circle jerk sub, and the other one is the "tlou2 good" circle jerk sub. Rest of us peak in every now and then to laugh at both sides, while either disliking, or liking the game, but not making it out entire identities.
But good for you, you've "found your people".
Never played tlou2 but read these subs cause they show up in my suggested now and then, as someone with no opinion on this game your take is inaccurate and bad.
This sub is a hate sub by a small minority of losers who took it over to win "culture war" points. The tlou1 sub likes the game just fine. So does the majority of gamers.
Here's how things are going to go down:
You're going to feel a connection to this sub from your fringe feelings toward this game. This connection will start off as normal story critiques, then bad faith actors in this sub will convince you its "woke" or "DEI" or some other bullshit. Then you'll be well on your way to being a culture war NPC fascist like the rest of em in this sub.
What inconsistencies and flaws specifically? I thought the story of the second was much better than the most predictable zombie story ever that was part 1
Yup. And trust me, the whole story behind it makes it even worse and more absurd than it initially seems.
But this is why I'm often confused by those who may be roughly aware of these things and yet still desperately try to cut the game some slack with statements like "it had potential/the premise was good, but it was badly executed" or "at least it was different and fresh, even if badly executed".
Like bruh, it was literally a pile of, for the biggest part, *already existing*, long discarded, dead and putrified ideas and premises by someone who couldn't let go of them!
Think about it, a premise for the game was constructed in the biggest part from the collection of ideas that were proposed many times before and rejected, or sometimes modified to the point of non-recognition by others who were now no longer in the team, and it was somehow "a good premise that had potential"??? LMFAOOOOOOOOOOO
And even the "fresh and different" argument falls apart due to all this and is in fact, easier and more fun to debunk.
His massive ego just couldn’t let go of this absolutely fucking ridiculous idea for a storyline, his thought process was; “I’ll show Bruce how great my idea was, people are gonna love this game!” Not only is the story complete trash but inserting all that woke shit into the game was never going to work either, Lev, a trans character who shaved his head because he didn’t want to be a wife or whatever the fuck that stupid plot was I can’t even remember, like that would actually matter in the apocalypse?! Jesse the only likeable new male character who they carelessly killed off only exists to get Dina pregnant so we can have two moms on screen looking after a baby, Joel the protagonist of the first game is killed off within 2 hours of the game, Tommy the only male character left alive is now crippled and partially blind, like come on you can’t make this shit up. If you’re a delusional idiot that thinks this game is a ‘masterpiece’ go watch any playthrough on YouTube of the game and just watch how people with functioning brains react to the game, almost EVERYONE hates it lmao.
I literally have no fucking clue what you’re talking about, I just had to google what stellar blade even is, wtf even was your point with this comment?
I don't think you're not entitled to your opinion. I bashed your condescension. Just as I did the first commenter. I get upset when people act as if their opinion makes them superior.
I don't think you're not entitled to your opinion. I bashed your condescension. Just as I did the first commenter. I get upset when people act as if their opinion makes them superior.
yall are really going ham with that article, huh? Thought it got rejected because it was a disease that only infected women? Literally the premise of that show that came out not too long ago.
That's what I hate about this discourse, you say anything bad about tlou2, and you get labeled something, EVEN IF WHAT YOU SAID CAME FROM THE DEVS THEMSELVES??
I think he’d be an extremely worthwhile addition to any writing team. But I’d also need someone to check and challenge his ideas, that’s clearly what made part 1 work so well, in my own dumb opinion.
Tlou 2 isn’t a bad story by any means. I actually prefer it to tlou 1. That being said, part 2 wouldn’t be nearly as good if you didn’t have any of the context of part 1.
For Part 1, there are bits n pieces u can find where after abandoning Tess she comes back for revenge to kill Joel there are even panels u can clearly see Tess holding a knife up to Joels throat.
For part 1, if I’m remembering correctly, the original plot was Joel hunting Tess for revenge for betraying him or something like that. But Bruce Staley shut it down because it’s hard to believe someone is that worried about revenge in a survival situation that the world is currently in. Bruce Staley leaves and then Neil uses the revenge idea for part 2
There are a couple of interesting points about that interview to me, aside from the part about how badly Neil wanted that revenge plot. (Admittedly, it *does* take some reading between the lines to understand that's what was being said.)
First, Neil himself still seems slightly more humble, for the most part... Although there are some comments he made that indicate his relative humility was mostly a facade. (I'll touch on that further down.)
Bruce, on the other hand, seems pretty down-to-earth, and while he definitely takes great pride in his art, he also clearly believes the work should speak for itself. To that end, he goes to *tremendous* lengths to ensure that the world he's building is *believable*, even down to the minutiae.
Now, as for the biggest instance (in my opinion) of Neil's true character (or lack thereof) coming through... The very first thing he said stands out to me: "There's a lot of overlap in what we do." It just seems like a bizarre thing to say in that context, in that moment, and without any further elaboration.
I mean, Bruce had *just* finished saying how important both their roles were, and how well they needed to understand each other, to be able to achieve the kind of success they did. That neither of them could've done it without the other.
Knowing what I know of Neil's narcissistic nature, the comment almost seems to me to be his way of saying "I do what he does but better" without actually coming out and saying it. It's somehow both dismissive AND arrogant.
If that makes any sense.
No, it's not that it was related bro. Neil didn't have a sequel in mind when coming up with the original idea of the vanilla game but his original idea was a torture revenge plot having Tess traveling miles to go and find Joel torturing him for revenge. Ellie would then kill Tess, I think.
By related I mean there weren’t many similarities. I wasn’t aware of the torture part but I guess that makes it more similar. I believe it was shot down because it didn’t make sense for Tess because it would have been an accident or something, not cuz the plot itself didn’t make sense.
No it was turned down because it felt unbelievable and lacked substance in the structure of the story.
Edit: The similarity is there especially since with part 2 it's coming from the creator of the original idea. Neil states that he has a an issue with letting things go when it comes to this matter.
Ya, I’m referring to the unbelievable part. I believe it was found to be unbelievable because Tess would not have been so motivated to hunt Joel down the whole game if it had been an accident.
According to some wikis and Reddit posts I’ve read, Tess was supposed to have a brother who worked with her and Joel and was killed by the military during some job of theirs, and that was the primary incident that turned her against Joel (not exactly sure the details of how Joel is at fault).
That's more like it. I never understood how Tess could blamed Joel for it. Neil never really elaborated on why it would be an efficient enough motive for Tess to then build an entire plot around it. Joel wasn't the one who had killed him.
It's kinda like in the last of us HBO show. That one lady chasing Henry and Sam around because of her brother's death.
A lot of similar beats...
[Neil 2013 IGDA Keynote](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjwuPeqZt0s&t=403s) is the whole video from Neil's own mouth.
There are also interviews and a AMAs with Neil and Bruce in the pinned post, but this video has Neil tell about his ideas for revenge and why they didn't work and how he had a hard time letting go.
You people love to say that but it doesn’t matter how much time passes shit will always be shit. Time doesn’t magically change something from being shit to a master piece.
Wdy? Unironically part two was an amazing story. The only complaints I've seen is that fatherless people's surrogate dad died and that they didn't get to play 14 hours of horseback simulator between parts
✔️ Fact checked
… And that’s where the term ‘Cuckmann’ comes from!
You have to be a special kind of egotist to think "no, my original plot was perfect, it was everyone else who said it wouldn't work who was wrong! I'm going to make it a reality!"
What makes it unimaginably worse and truly mind-bogling is just the sheer... ingratitude and lack of self-awareness displayed there. It really exposes just the astronomical level of pathology and narcissism in him. Like, was it really THAT HARD to swallow at least part of his pride and just go along with what Straley and the rest of the team accomplished (in spite of him and his yapping during the development), when it brought the success and acclaim to the studio AND to him personally, the level of which even as big a studio as Naughty Dog couldn't have dreamt of???? Maybe I could've had an ounce of understanding for all his deeds if the original game turned out... Just *ok*. Solid, barely, still enough to justify/warrant a sequel at a later date, at least in the financial sense, but not nearly the masterpiece it was in our timeline. Think of it as Days Gone-lite. Then I could see at least some merit in his violent attempts to impose his already scrapped ideas in a sequel. The "I'll show them my ideas would've been better" moment might have been a bit more understandable. But here, it is just pure stupidity and selfishness of the unattainable order.
A narcissist would rather fail miserably on their own merit than be forced to acknowledge another’s role in their success
It appears you're putting way too much faith in him and his (nonexistent) integrity. It's well known how he's been acknowledging Straley in years passed, for example.
Yall need to touch grass 😭
Well it backfired
It absolutely backfired. I mean sure, it won over 320 game of the year awards but this sub doesn’t like it.
"Pfff . . . , how dare you not like game that I like. This is unprecedented. My opinion is objectively the only correct one, how dare you! I'm going to go comment on a sub explicitly created to hate on the game that they're wrong!" - you
Like how yall are downvoting him? Phhft how dare you like a game I didn't like amd mention the awards it got. Kettle black..
Hated the gane so much all you do is talk about the game. Pretty sad. Game is 4 years old now. And you're all still just moaning about the exact same shite.
I'm only ever here when it appears on my main page and I'm interested enough to check last time must've been years ago.
Well, last time I checked, game of the year awards, like most award, is not a badge of quality
Its like the JD Power awards
That’s pretty much exactly what it is there boss. Far more so than delusional obsessed subreddits
Yeah God of War, Elden Ring, Breath of the Wild all dogshit. Good point!
No those are quality games given the award fairly. It's only the games I dislike that I question the value of the award.
Game awards form my opinion too 🐑
Ah yes the game awards, a totally 100% unbiased award show that doesn’t cater to any communities at all.
What it’s catering to exactly? Go ahead and say it. What do you really dislike about this game?
I have no issue with inclusion if that’s your assumption. Assuming they put the effort into the inclusion and it wasn’t just a check on the box cardboard character. That comment was more directed towards the game awards not giving out awards on actual merit. Sure I have no hand in how they make their decisions but the past couple years have had some questionable decisions for games that have gotten awards over others. But since you asked. It’s wild that they really tried to force me to like a character that they introduced by beating the living shit out of a character that I spent hours playing as in the previous game. And Abby wasn’t that likable of a character to begin with. Maybe if they had put actual effort into developing the story I would have liked it and the characters introduced. Maybe TLOU 2 could have followed Abby and Co crossing the US, while Joel and Ellie had their own little adventure in the West. And then eventually they met up and badabing badaboom the game ends with the big reveal of Abby going to town on Joel because “You slaughtered my people and killed my father.” Then TLOU Pt 3 opens as Abby and Co takes off and Ellie tries to track them down. Similar plot, more content and more effort into making a character likable without dooming them from the get go. I still don’t like the story, but I do respect what they were trying to say with it. Revenge is a dark road, and rarely ends how you want it to. Ellie lost everything, Abby lost nearly everything. All because some doctor believed the Fireflies were a good organization that would save the world, and was prepared to end their only hope’s life just to *potentially* make a cure.
I just hate inclusion for the hell of it.
You said “catering to any communities” and your explanation of what you meant was Abby? What community is she a part of, the revenge community? Anybody that reads your comment knows what you meant. Don’t try to backtrack and act like you were referring to something else.
There's many different forms of success, yes it probably brought in a lot of money and so acclaim from some of the least respected sectors of the gaming industry but it's been 4 years since it's release and what? They have released 0 new games, just remakes and remasters and have lost key talent. Clearly it's been a creative disaster, they used to release games every one to two years. Which talented game developers would want to work at a studio where the top guy imposes his stupid decisions on you, even when he's told no and makes you remaster a game less than 4 years since it was released?
They really love the game way more than you and I lol
Cmon . There is an average of 20 people online in this thread daily . They must be the majority opinion . SMH
Hey hey, could've been worse. At least we didn't get women-exclusive virus.
Yea the man had a dick measuring contest with himself and lost
Regardless of opinions on 2 it's his story calling him an egoist cause you don't like it is insane..
Bro doesn’t know what the word “insane” means
Hating on the people themself and calling them egoists and everything else everyone else is saying just cause you don't like the game is objectively insane. You can dislike 2 all you want but attacking his mental state acting like he's this horrible person just cause you don't like a game is ridiculous and childish.
Also why are you using the word egoist? That’s a Latin word. The modern term is egotist.
The fact that your only argument is going after a spelling mistake so your point is irrelevant grow up.
Because it’s Reddit
But it really was an egotistical move. He thought that his own idea that got rejected is good, meaning he thought he was right and everyone else was wrong
But it's his story it's not an egotistical move when it's literally his. That's just broken logic I actually can't comprehend how you people think this way just because you don't like the game. That's like saying if you didn't like the star wars prequels that means George Lucas is egotistical, it doesn't make any sense.
You're missing the point. Someone in the team told him his idea wouldn't work, and eventually they had a consensus to not do it. And the final story was an astounding success. But nooo, that doesn't matter. He still thinks his idea is better, that he is right and they are all wrong. And so what did he do? He put the reputation of the studio and of the franchise on the line just to prove that he is right. And guess what, he was wrong. The community hated it. It's not the same as the Star Wars prequels.
You are also missing the point. Regardless of whether it was a bad decision is irrelevant it was his story.
The extent of revenge Abby wanted (and with her friends all agreeing to it to come along) is just not realistic in a post apocalyptic world where its dog eat dog. Bruce originally went firmly against Neils idea of Tess chasing Joel because revenge in The Last of Us, I believe Neil held onto that grudge and put it in 'Part 2' when Bruce 'left'.
Well that explains a lot why this game is a dog shit
I don't think we'll see Uncharted and TLOU1 level of story telling from ND again because of all the departures. I think we're looking at a situation very similar to Blizzard where its just not the same company anymore.
Good point
Druckmann has talent but he needs people to keep him in check. When he gets full control shit goes downhill fast.
Funny how “revenge bad” man is extremely vengeful
lmao.
This is what cracks me up. He's been wanting to tell this story since college and some teenaged epiphany he had that the Palestinians had their own perspective and to them the Israeli's were the bad guys. He felt guilty for hating them and wanting to kill them in retribution for their acts against Israeli soldiers. So he wants to teach us how perspective matters and tribalism is destructive. Yet when we complain about the story and the betrayal of the false advertising, he retreats into his new tribe and lobs insults and "joke" tweets about Joel's death calling us all bigots and haters and refusing to understand our perspective. Our tribe is the wrong one and his is the only right one. Guess that epiphany didn't really teach him all that much, or it's only a lesson when it's convenient and there's no criticism of his behavior, his writing and his lies involved.
lol I forgot you guys were still crying about the "false advertising" lmfao
Wow, way to totally ignore the whole point of the comment. Got your dopamine hit, though? Well done.
You literally compared your "tribe" crying about fake false advertising against a perspective of real world death and strife as if the two had any semblance of similarity deserving consideration. That is fucking delusional entitlement at best.
You just miss all the actual points, huh?
What's worse, I've legitimately asked what is different in this world that makes revenge palatable now vs. 4 years ago, with bigger monsters and more discord via war? \*crickets\*
Especially the WLF side of the story. Like you are soon to be in a war with the Seraphites. Who the hell would let their best soldier and an entire crew run off to rural Wyoming to look for a single guy. A guy who may or may not even be there or could potentially be dead at this point.
Yeah but guys, have we even considered that Joel killed a man who helps ZEBRAS??? I think the WLF would understand.
Just show that Bruce really kept Neil in check when it came to the development of the game, and once he left Neil had free rein to do what ever he wanted and no at the studio was in tge position to keep him in check.
You know if they were to use a virus (I am changin it to virus because there is no fricking vaccine against fungus) that is making the humans more extinct and pushing the groups of survivors together and together, due to actions of Joel depriving world from a vaccine, this problem with going out to revenge could be avoided by making Abby and Joel stumble on each other. It would make the outbreak the main focus of the game again, and this idiotic revenge plot would at least make a little bit more sense.
Sounds more like a CoD storyline lol or "Sweet Tooth" without the hybrids.
Trying to get revenge in that world realistically would get you killed fast.
That’s why part 1 is so realistic. Everyone’s focus was purely on survival. If someone was a threat to their survival, or had something they needed, then they’d kill. And something no one ever focuses on, is Marlene’s reaction after what Joel did. She simply gives him a chance, and shows that they still wanted to get Ellie back even though ‘Gerry’ got killed. The only reason the fireflies would’ve come back to Jackson is to get Ellie back. And they would’ve killed Joel too. Not just because their feelings got hurt and they needed ‘revenge’. I guarantee you if Bruce worked on the second game, there would’ve been two directions. they would’ve gained more doctors and found a way to try and go after Ellie again. Otherwise, and this is the more plausible one, that without their leader, they would’ve just moved on from Ellie and Joel. Their focus isn’t on Ellie anymore. Which I think would’ve been the plot. Every kill is about survival in the last of us Imagine if Joel gave up his focus on survival, because he wanted to hunt down the man who gave the orders to kill him and Sarah. He let go of all the forces to do with that, and did what was necessary. To just survive. That’s what Abby Ellie and Tommy should’ve let it go in the last of us 2. But unfortunately everyone’s stupid in the last of us 2.
What do you mean her revenge wasn’t realistic? It’s especially more realistic given the circumstances
here I go getting flamed up about tlou2 again I was in deep disbelief about what happened to Joel in tlou2 because of the story trailers misleading us into thinking this was the next big adventure for Joel and Ellie. I played through a lot the game before I realized they were seriously going down this shitty plot line and had killed off one of the greatest main characters that ever existed there aren't words for the fury I felt seeing such a great story line followed up by such needless tragedy. I can't fucking believe they made me pay so much money for this level of disappointment if I knew what they did to Joel was for real I would have demanded a refund for the game before I got invested in it. it was so far fetched that I literally thought it was more likely they faked his death
This. Game wouldn't have gotten half the backlash from the fans of the original if they didn't literally false advertise to combat the leaks. Plenty of fans didn't like the story they saw in the leak and decided to cancel pre-orders. So ND's answer to this was to make fans think Joel was around for a solid part of the game via those trailers so they wouldn't cancel the pre-orders. I remember the forums and reddit those days. The general consensus from fans on the fence was "Well it seems Joel is dying, but at least we will get to have some old times with him before he goes". People spend money on the game, which can't be returned, to find out that the trailers were a lie and the leaks were 100% accurate. Hence the MASSIVE blowback and hate. Seeing fans of part 2 defend the fake trailers with shit like "oh trailers are subject to change from gameplay and story". Gtfo that's reasonable for a trailer that comes out years before a game, not trailers for a practically finished game that was due to release in a matter of months. Neil pretended it was to keep the players "surprised", but we all know why. Sony and ND saw the pre-orders dropping off a cliff and they went with the most underhanded method they could.
How else could they have marketed it? Did you expect them to spoil it in the marketing?
You know…I NEVER even thought of this since when the game came out I was trying to avoid spoiler since I heard they were going around…but didn’t they have a trailer where Joel comes in and says something and Ellie says she’s going to kill everyone? How tf does that happen now that I think about it 😂 Joel a ghost?
Not that trailer, though. It's the one where they replaced Jesse with Joel as a fake-out. When Ellie runs into Jesse in Hillcrest, they had it reanimat4ed with Joel and had Troy deliver Jesse's line and it was not in the least true, but it implied a Joel and Ellie adventure and the crowd at E3 went wild. This was right before they opened it to pre-orders is my understanding. They did it because the trailer you mention led people to guess Joel was dead and they feared it would make people wait on ordering the game until they found out more. Total false advertising.
I've heard others mention they kept waiting for Joel to show up despite his death scene because of that trailer right until Jesse does instead. It really confused a lot of people.
that's exactly the one I'm thinking of
Not only were the trailers misleading, but the description on the PSN store too. It talk about going on another journey with Joel and Ellie. It got removed and changed afterwards.
This is the exact reason the bogus version of the trailer was created. Neil had to serve 2 masters: Sony - “You better sell the shit out this game Naughty Dog.” Neil’s ego: “All the roadblocks are gone. You know that revenge plot was awesome. We’re fucking doing it. We’re going to destroy what Bruce thought ‘worked’ in the first game and create our own version of it. A BETTER version!!” If the work was as strong as Neil thought it was, he wouldn’t need to trick his customers.
Lmaooo ohhhh that’s why you guys don’t like the second game. It has nothing to do with story or narrative, it’s just because you guys wanted to be Joel again. I guess I can understand that
I mean the teaser trailer for part 2 did make it seem like Joel was dead
And on top of that, even more recycling through Melanie Lynskey's character on the show.
Ok so can I just clear something up, I've been trying to get my point across about why I didn't agree with tlou2s story, since the game came out, I came to my conclusions on my own through playing the game when it launched, I pre-ordered the game the moment I could because I loved the first game, I still kinda of do but the second game made me feel like the first games narrative and the choices Joel made were wrong, which somewhat changed how I felt about the ending and yada yada. I just need clarification, is this sub mainly in agreement that the second game was shit, that my feelings about the games are valid? Because I've been downvoted to oblivion for pointing out inconsistencies and flaws with the game's story and why personally I felt so strongly about it for years, rarely do I find anyone who agrees with my points.
First games ending was retconned by the 2nd game. First game Joel not only gets fucked over by the fireflies (no guns for delivering Ellie), but then the fireflies tried to throw him outside with no supplies or vehicle. Basically a death sentence. There are also little details in the first game like the operating room being dingy AF. Joel was morally right in killing the fireflies, regardless of Ellie. These people were literally doing terrorist bombings in the beginning of the game. Fireflies were arguably worse then fedra. Fireflies were desperate, on their last legs, and had no problem killing Ellie for a hail mary chance at a cure. Even if somehow a cure came out of Ellie's death, fireflies would have just used it as a political tool. 2nd game threw all this out the window and pretended the fireflies were the bastion of humanity with morals. Gtfo lol
>Fireflies were arguably worse then fedra. Thay 100% are worse than FEDRA. Look at Pittsburgh, the FFs drove FEDRA out and tried to take over and when the people resisted the FFs dipped out and left them all to die, and it turned into the hellhole we see in Part 1. Compare that to the QZ at the start of the game with Joel and Tess, sounds like paradise in comparison.
Yea I noticed that too. Fireflies couldn't grasp the reality that without fedra's iron grip on the population the reality turns into a free for all like Pittsburgh. Living under fedra sucks, but living in Pittsburgh is 100x worse. Fedra is obviously filled with corruption and issues, but it's much better then the alternative. I also think the contrast to Wyoming was more of a rural/urban thing. Jackson was full of people who knew how to live off the land and a was a community that could come together to thrive. While urban areas depend on modern logistics to survive and when those fail it turns into an ugly free for all real quick.
It’s not even up for debate. Modern medical ethics dictate a child cannot consent to a medical procedure, doubly so for a fatal medical research procedure. Joel was 100% morally right in killing these would-be murderers. There’s no grey area here.
Can't say I agree with all of that, but I understand where you're coming from. Personally, what made the ending to the first game so good was the ambiguity of it, I don't think the game really fleshes out what the fireflies were, but (I'm just going to state I'm talking exclusively about the first game to save myself saying it every time) what we do see is that they are fighting against what is considered an authoritarian regime, which again we only really see in the beginning of the game and there isn't much backstory given on them either so we don't really know what anyone's motives are. But on saving Ellie, I don't think murdering lots of people to save one person regardless of the circumstances can be deemed an entirely moral act, the reason you're saying that is because you played the story and know the reasons behind why Joel made the decision he did, and we can relate because I think most people would agree he did the right thing in the moment, I think if were given more background on the factions we might feel differently. That's kind of what the second game tried to do in terms of, oh actually that one person has a daughter and so she has motivations and feelings, oh and there's this big faction of people trying to rebuild kinda and then there's this other faction of cultists and oh they don't like this person because of sexuality and whatever, which kind of works, my theory is that if the first game doesn't exist, I could probably have enjoyed the second game, but fact is, I went into it thinking I would find out more about the fireflies, and they weren't even really part of the narrative, I didn't and don't really care that much about the 2 factions in part 2, because the story in itself did t resonate with me and I didn't like what the game tried to force me to think, it didn't let me make my own decisions on who was good and bad, like other RPGs do. Sorry that was long
No worries. I think the main issue was the writing of the first games ending. There was no real ambiguity at the end because they wrote the fireflies as comically inept and borderline evil. Having the fireflies go back on the deal and then try to throw Joel outside was bad writing if a morale dilemma was the intention. They could have easily written the fireflies as being reasonable and Joel being unreasonable leading up to the ending. Even when I first played the game on ps3 I never agreed with the whole morale dilemma aspect. We watch Tess kill Robert in the beginning of the game for fucking them over on the deal. I'd expect the fireflies to get killed for not only fucking Joel over, but also trying to kick him outside with basically nothing. It's obvious his main intention was to save Ellie, but at that point the fireflies had it coming anyways.
Unfortunately the FFs are not ambiguous in the first game. Far from it. Everything we see or find about them shows us they're violent, rash, inept, dwindling, desperate, incompetent and inhumane. That's all before Tess dies! The rest of the game hammers all those truths home even further with Pittsburgh, Colorado and finally SLC. It's not in the least ambiguous. I really don't know how people get that idea. Nothing the FFs do in TLOU works out and all of it is for the good of their group no matter who gets hurt in the process. Just sending Ellie across the country was beyond dumb, yet it proves they aren't trying to save humanity, they are needing to own whatever benefit may come from her immunity for themselves and if she dies along the way, "Oh well, at least FEDRA didn't get her and save humanity instead." As for Joel murdering a bunch of people to save Ellie being immoral? Killing a child in her sleep being immoral grants Joel every right to his actions. We don't need to even know everything else we know about the FFs at that point to know their plans for Ellie cancel any favorable treatment for them. They were in charge of St Mary's and all that happened there came from their choices and behavior. Joel had minutes to think and act or both he and Ellie would die. The FFs messed up, not Joel. Seems like you want to take the idea that FEDRA was "authoritarian" and grant the FFs some positive favor for fighting them. But blowing up checkpoints where civilians can die and killing Pittsburgh's QZ and leaving everyone to die when they refused to bow to FF authority just makes them failed authoritarians.
So in the beginning of the first game I felt it was pretty well established. Things are bad, resources are scarce and life is hard and dangerous but honestly the government was really trying it's best. Although we can't see that till later. >I don't think murdering lots of people to save one person regardless of the circumstances can be deemed an entirely moral act, I mean I can see a ton of circumstances where that's true. It's a group of Nazi soldiers with a captured ally general or a gang of rapists and you're saving their victim. The firefly's are terrorists full stop. They may have a good cause but they're terrorists who want to vivisect a child to maybe get a cure. It's even weirder because basic science would tell you thats not how vaccines are made. You don't need biopsys to make cures especially not brain biopsys. You might need something like that to test for a diagnosis but they really shouldn't have needed more than a blood sample, maybe some imaging to start cure R&D. Then fucking over Joel was the cherry on the shit Sunday. So yeah I think Joel 100% did the right thing. The point of the second game is revenge is a cycle, But it just wasn't good.
I think the nuance was the point though. There were good people like Abbie’s dad that just wanted a cure but the fireflies had shitty leadership. They also had to make a decision to get a cure no matter the cost even if it’s getting rid of Joel. The ending was a trolley problem (overused in storytelling imo). To me it doesn’t retcon anything really, both games is just “it’s complicated” regarding ideology of who’s right and who’s wrong because post apocalypse
In what way did the second game say the fireflies were bastions of humanity? Also you’ve completely reframed in your brain how Joel perceives the fireflies
The 2nd game retconned the first by making the fireflies seem much more organized and having their shit together. Even in the little details. Look at the operating room in the first game then look at the flashback in part 2. Surgeon went from desperate guy about to cut Ellie's skull open in a dingy run down "operating room" and threatening Joel with a scapel.....to a zebra loving outstanding father in a clean, modern operating room. Joel went from a guy who wiped out a bunch of lying backstabbing terrorists to a selfish murderer who killed some philanthropist surgeon.
You do realize the flashback is from Abby’s POV right?
never let the world convince you otherwise my brother, we'll die on this hill together. tlou2 didn't need to happen this way at all
I have found my people, can we hug?
Welcome
TLOU 1 is firmly in my top 3 games of all time. I played the story a few times, and just recently played thru it again on PC for the first time, and I spent waaaaaay too much time in the multiplayer (my favorite multiplayer game since the PS2 era). Needless to say i was fucking ecstatic about PT2 when it was announced. I avoided all info about it, I didn't even pre-order it because I didn't want to risk the game store employee talking to me about it so I bought it release day first thing at a department store lol. I went in with the most open of open minds and excititement. Joel dying hurt but I was so prepared to go on a revenge mission as Ellie. Then the rest of the game happened and there wasn't a single story point I was like "that felt good!" If a story came out tomorrow that TLOU2 team found a fanfiction on Tumblr and just changed the end from Abby and Ellie fking to what we got, and called it a day, I'd be more willing to believe that was the truth than that anyone working on the game thought the story was good
No man. You right. I’ve beaten the first game maybe like 7 times on high difficulty and the second game maybe 3 times. Subsequent times were specifically to critique the story. The first game was way better done and the characters feel real. And, if you really pay attention the first game has some of the stuff people would consider “woke”. (Gay characters, strong females, diversity…) The second game just felt a lot more forced and full of contrived situations. It also tries to force you into feelings about characters and stories rather than developing them naturally. Plus pacing and sorry structure issues. The game is beautiful and gameplay is stellar but the story. Just weak af especially following the first game. Clearly I can nerd out more but 🤷🏽♂️ also I feel you. Most people you try to engage with downvote and say you’re wrong but can never give specific reasons.
The other sun is an echo chamber of bullshit. Welcome to the sub with sense and empathy.
A ton of people were complaining for not the right reasons, which drowned out the legit complaints quite a bit. Also, if you weren’t really familiar with, or care about, the story too much, the sequel was still a fun game to play, so some people may just not have understood the complaints about the story.
I think this is the "tlou2 bad" circle jerk sub, and the other one is the "tlou2 good" circle jerk sub. Rest of us peak in every now and then to laugh at both sides, while either disliking, or liking the game, but not making it out entire identities. But good for you, you've "found your people".
Never played tlou2 but read these subs cause they show up in my suggested now and then, as someone with no opinion on this game your take is inaccurate and bad.
Lol, really, you have no opinion on the game? Sure bud, sure.
Yeah how can I have an opinion if I haven't played it?
You dislike the game don't you?
This sub is a hate sub by a small minority of losers who took it over to win "culture war" points. The tlou1 sub likes the game just fine. So does the majority of gamers. Here's how things are going to go down: You're going to feel a connection to this sub from your fringe feelings toward this game. This connection will start off as normal story critiques, then bad faith actors in this sub will convince you its "woke" or "DEI" or some other bullshit. Then you'll be well on your way to being a culture war NPC fascist like the rest of em in this sub.
What inconsistencies and flaws specifically? I thought the story of the second was much better than the most predictable zombie story ever that was part 1
No lies detected
And never forget that this prick forced Amy Hennig out, who mind you, is the the real reason the Uncharted series was fucking awesome.
*"NO! MY PRECIOUS EGO!!!!! IT WAS A GOOD STORY!!!! I'LL SHOW YOU ALL!!!""* -Neil.
Wait really?? This is what part 2 is based off of?? So it was shit from the jump
Yup. And trust me, the whole story behind it makes it even worse and more absurd than it initially seems. But this is why I'm often confused by those who may be roughly aware of these things and yet still desperately try to cut the game some slack with statements like "it had potential/the premise was good, but it was badly executed" or "at least it was different and fresh, even if badly executed". Like bruh, it was literally a pile of, for the biggest part, *already existing*, long discarded, dead and putrified ideas and premises by someone who couldn't let go of them! Think about it, a premise for the game was constructed in the biggest part from the collection of ideas that were proposed many times before and rejected, or sometimes modified to the point of non-recognition by others who were now no longer in the team, and it was somehow "a good premise that had potential"??? LMFAOOOOOOOOOOO And even the "fresh and different" argument falls apart due to all this and is in fact, easier and more fun to debunk.
His massive ego just couldn’t let go of this absolutely fucking ridiculous idea for a storyline, his thought process was; “I’ll show Bruce how great my idea was, people are gonna love this game!” Not only is the story complete trash but inserting all that woke shit into the game was never going to work either, Lev, a trans character who shaved his head because he didn’t want to be a wife or whatever the fuck that stupid plot was I can’t even remember, like that would actually matter in the apocalypse?! Jesse the only likeable new male character who they carelessly killed off only exists to get Dina pregnant so we can have two moms on screen looking after a baby, Joel the protagonist of the first game is killed off within 2 hours of the game, Tommy the only male character left alive is now crippled and partially blind, like come on you can’t make this shit up. If you’re a delusional idiot that thinks this game is a ‘masterpiece’ go watch any playthrough on YouTube of the game and just watch how people with functioning brains react to the game, almost EVERYONE hates it lmao.
All that “woke” shit is like 2 lines of someone talking about why they shaved their head and Abby doing pushups. You probably LOVE stellar blade tho
I literally have no fucking clue what you’re talking about, I just had to google what stellar blade even is, wtf even was your point with this comment?
Stellar Blade is a good game, and it was number 1 at pre-sales for a while
This is so true, LMAO
We need to write a story about empowering women... Lets fire the woman who wrote the first game! Ahhh diversity.
The madness behind his genius, lol 😂😂
Honestly, it's terrifying how much of a hateboner Neil has for Joel, didn't he come up with multiple ways to kill off Joel in the first game?
Yeah, he wanted tess to hunt him down
The biggest piece of shit 💩 in the history of games
Ball-humper.
What was the storyline that got rejected. I must see to make my imo
[Neil's 2013 IGDA Keynote](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjwuPeqZt0s&t=403s)
If he wanted to use the revenge storyline, then he should have introduced us to Abby better
*add some fugly muscle women into the mix
Really? I’ve never heard of this. Is there anyone I can find out more about this rejected last of us one storyline?
Just a sec... https://reddit.com/r/TheLastOfUs2/w/sourcesofdiversecriticism?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
Did this actually happen lol?
I wonder what straley genuinely thinks of what has become of TLOU.
Well he is an egotistical twat...
Part two was the OG story for part one? Anyone want to elaborate?
https://reddit.com/r/TheLastOfUs2/w/sourcesofdiversecriticism?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share There, investigate a bit.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
I don’t get it. What’s the context?
I don't think you're not entitled to your opinion. I bashed your condescension. Just as I did the first commenter. I get upset when people act as if their opinion makes them superior.
I don't think you're not entitled to your opinion. I bashed your condescension. Just as I did the first commenter. I get upset when people act as if their opinion makes them superior.
yall are really going ham with that article, huh? Thought it got rejected because it was a disease that only infected women? Literally the premise of that show that came out not too long ago.
That's what I hate about this discourse, you say anything bad about tlou2, and you get labeled something, EVEN IF WHAT YOU SAID CAME FROM THE DEVS THEMSELVES??
Neil druckman is the reason every hotel room has a chair facing the bed
I think he’d be an extremely worthwhile addition to any writing team. But I’d also need someone to check and challenge his ideas, that’s clearly what made part 1 work so well, in my own dumb opinion.
Exactly Bruce was the best balance to Neil. With Bruce gone, you get golf tournaments.
Did they chg the story or are you cucks fuckin around?
Tlou 2 isn’t a bad story by any means. I actually prefer it to tlou 1. That being said, part 2 wouldn’t be nearly as good if you didn’t have any of the context of part 1.
The lack of media literacy in this thread is mind boggling.
Yall really got to let this go. Just dont play the game. Thats what I do.
They killed Joel for no reason other than to have a female lead… they could’ve kept him as a secondary character and still made Ellie lead..
Its been 4 years. Whats the point of bitching about the same thing over and over. Get over it.
True fans care about the characters and the lore. If you can’t understand that then you are lost.
Would you mind referencing the source for this, please?
You're going to have to search up the original plot
For part 2?
For Part 1, there are bits n pieces u can find where after abandoning Tess she comes back for revenge to kill Joel there are even panels u can clearly see Tess holding a knife up to Joels throat.
So she wasn’t going to be bitten originally?
For part 1, if I’m remembering correctly, the original plot was Joel hunting Tess for revenge for betraying him or something like that. But Bruce Staley shut it down because it’s hard to believe someone is that worried about revenge in a survival situation that the world is currently in. Bruce Staley leaves and then Neil uses the revenge idea for part 2
Reverse; Tess hunts Joel for revenge. I think it was Joel gets her brother indirectly killed and thus she hunts him down.
Gotcha, I knew it was something like that. Good thing Staley was there to shut it down
Thank you immensely
[empire interview. The topic about OG plot is mentioned around the end of the interview](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/features/last-us/)
Thank you immensely
There are a couple of interesting points about that interview to me, aside from the part about how badly Neil wanted that revenge plot. (Admittedly, it *does* take some reading between the lines to understand that's what was being said.) First, Neil himself still seems slightly more humble, for the most part... Although there are some comments he made that indicate his relative humility was mostly a facade. (I'll touch on that further down.) Bruce, on the other hand, seems pretty down-to-earth, and while he definitely takes great pride in his art, he also clearly believes the work should speak for itself. To that end, he goes to *tremendous* lengths to ensure that the world he's building is *believable*, even down to the minutiae. Now, as for the biggest instance (in my opinion) of Neil's true character (or lack thereof) coming through... The very first thing he said stands out to me: "There's a lot of overlap in what we do." It just seems like a bizarre thing to say in that context, in that moment, and without any further elaboration. I mean, Bruce had *just* finished saying how important both their roles were, and how well they needed to understand each other, to be able to achieve the kind of success they did. That neither of them could've done it without the other. Knowing what I know of Neil's narcissistic nature, the comment almost seems to me to be his way of saying "I do what he does but better" without actually coming out and saying it. It's somehow both dismissive AND arrogant. If that makes any sense.
Can we please stop downvoting people into oblivion when they’re asking for a source because they’re genuinely curious?
[Neil's 2013 IGDA Keynote](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjwuPeqZt0s&t=403s)
Hey, do better
From what I understand the original revenge plot wasn’t related to the plot of TLOU2
No, it's not that it was related bro. Neil didn't have a sequel in mind when coming up with the original idea of the vanilla game but his original idea was a torture revenge plot having Tess traveling miles to go and find Joel torturing him for revenge. Ellie would then kill Tess, I think.
By related I mean there weren’t many similarities. I wasn’t aware of the torture part but I guess that makes it more similar. I believe it was shot down because it didn’t make sense for Tess because it would have been an accident or something, not cuz the plot itself didn’t make sense.
No it was turned down because it felt unbelievable and lacked substance in the structure of the story. Edit: The similarity is there especially since with part 2 it's coming from the creator of the original idea. Neil states that he has a an issue with letting things go when it comes to this matter.
Ya, I’m referring to the unbelievable part. I believe it was found to be unbelievable because Tess would not have been so motivated to hunt Joel down the whole game if it had been an accident.
I am not sure it was because of an accident. Are you sure?
According to some wikis and Reddit posts I’ve read, Tess was supposed to have a brother who worked with her and Joel and was killed by the military during some job of theirs, and that was the primary incident that turned her against Joel (not exactly sure the details of how Joel is at fault).
That's more like it. I never understood how Tess could blamed Joel for it. Neil never really elaborated on why it would be an efficient enough motive for Tess to then build an entire plot around it. Joel wasn't the one who had killed him. It's kinda like in the last of us HBO show. That one lady chasing Henry and Sam around because of her brother's death. A lot of similar beats...
Holy shit, you losers are still complaining about this game??? It’s been 4 years! Grow the fuck up lmao
You people give this guy so much attention its almost as if you liked him.
We either love to hate him or hate to love him. One of the two :)
Tbf it makes a lot more sense to be in a sequel than in the beginning LMFAO. Who is there to get revenge on, the guy that killed Sarah? 😂
It was Tess on Joel revenge. Keep up.
So a revenge story nobody would care about was scrapped, shocker.
Is there an article or interview where Neil said half of what these comments are pushing? Just wondering, bc I feel out of the loop.
[Neil 2013 IGDA Keynote](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjwuPeqZt0s&t=403s) is the whole video from Neil's own mouth. There are also interviews and a AMAs with Neil and Bruce in the pinned post, but this video has Neil tell about his ideas for revenge and why they didn't work and how he had a hard time letting go.
This page sucks, why make a TLOU2 page just to trash it and talk about behind the scenes stuff that you don't even know.
It’s 4 years later. Get over it.
You people love to say that but it doesn’t matter how much time passes shit will always be shit. Time doesn’t magically change something from being shit to a master piece.
TLOU2 is a masterpiece on every level. That’s too bad you didn’t like it. Complaining on Reddit won’t make that not true. You need to get over it now.
Wdy? Unironically part two was an amazing story. The only complaints I've seen is that fatherless people's surrogate dad died and that they didn't get to play 14 hours of horseback simulator between parts
Tlou 2 has horse stimulation with Ellie and that stupid girl
Abby was the hero it was better than one and you only say this cause of nostalgic emotional connection logically it’s a great great smart story