By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
theprof00 on 26 June 2020
Edit Thread
iron_megalith said:
theprof00 said:

Also quick follow up question:

Have you actually even played the Last of Us? Like, do you have ps trophies from TLOU? 

This is something you said: "Case in point, when Joel meets Henry and Sam. It took them a while before he completely trusted them. For Abby and her friends, it was almost instaneous. Why he did so is everyone's guess."

but... it's the opposite? Im honestly confused how you can have the story so backwards, but act like an authority on the story.

What does my fucking trophies have to do with this argument? You want me to share my PSN info here just to validate my arguments? If you want to discuss the story, stick with that please.

And also how is it different in this scenario? Is it because Joel did the saving this time around and put himself in danger? Well let me tell you that Joel isn't really a fan of taking risks just for anybody else. At least in the first game.

Even if we disregard Joel, what about Tommy completely inviting strangers he barely even spoke to? If you say he was just expressing his gratitude, they could have done that in a more believable manner that is in line with the premise and the character's behavior. They just acted as if the trauma they experienced in TLOU1 never ever happened.

No I don't need to see them, I'm just confused. Like I said, you have the two backwards. My point being that Joel accepted Henry faster than he accepts Abby. Your "case in point" ie, the best example you could use, was Henry. And your Henry example shows him as less cautious. Now you're saying Joel wouldn't even have saved Abby in the first place. But in your own words...that's an assumption. 

Regarding Tommy, in what way do you think it even matters that he invited them? Inviting them had no impact on Joel's death whatsoever. At best, offering home and help as collateral potentially could have dissuaded any violence, and maybe that's why he offered. it's another assumption, yes but it doesn't support your case either. 

Regardless, you won't even address that I'm right about Henry, which is making me second guess even having this debate with you because it comes off as stubborn, and that means I'll just be wasting my time on someone who has clearly already made their mind up.