I'm still taking issues with some of the writing in TLoU2:
the portion of Abby's father rescuing a zebra.
He's a doctor! The writers don't need to contrive such a scenario to make us like the guy, just show him doing doctor things. Doctors are generally very well-respected and admired, all you needed now was to show him caring for patients. Hell, you could even show him teaching Abby with Abby once wanting to become a doctor like her father. Would have been great! Instead, we have this zebra scene which was just excessive and it makes me like the characters less.
The doctor is helping me see right through the writing: NEVER let a reader see through the writing. You can do this with natural scenarios like a doctor caring for a number of patients and Abby wanting to be a doctor like her father as opposed to artificial scenarios like the rescue of a zebra.
If ND's writers wanted us to like Abby and her story, I'm afraid they've failed at it considering how some take great pleasure in watching Abby get killed.
Also, the ending. Ellie doesn't kill Abby... WHY!? After risking so much and sacrificing so much, Ellie doesn't kill Abby? WHY!?
It seems so dishonest. I don't believe for a second killing-machine Ellie would let Joel's killer go. There's even the fact that Ellie is armed when she confronts Abby at the end but never uses her gun for whatever reason but is perfectly willing to use a knife against Abby.
Then there's Ellie getting her fingers bitten off. As a result, she can't play guitar at the end. This too feels contrived.
I think Ellie keeping her fingers would have been a better ending: that way, when she leaves the guitar behind, we could assign deeper meaning to the gesture like "she wants to leave tragic events behind her and move on and the guitar just reminds her of said tragic events". Instead, we might have to consider she left the guitar behind simply because she's missing fingers thus cannot play it. It's a little more shallow of a reason.
One great thing about TLoU1 is the ending: at the end, we were left to grapple with a very compelling question: "how far are you willing to go for a loved one?" In Joel's case, he'd rather see the world stay in hell than lose his daughter a second time. It's a tough but understandable answer.
In TLoU2, the question I'm left with is "was revenge worth it?" Ellie doesn't kill Abby so the clear answer seems to be "no, revenge or attempt thereof wasn't worth it". Had Ellie killed Abby and returned home to an empty house, the question "was revenge worth it?" seems more compelling and harder to answer. You got your revenge but at what cost?
Then there's also Ellie being so angry at Joel for lying to her. Sure, it sucks Joel lied to Ellie but he also saved her life: surely his saving her life would help to soften the blow. Why is she so angry at Joel!? It makes Ellie a more miserable character in TLoU2 when Ellie in TLoU1 was a more upbeat and snarky character which contrasted with Joel's rougher and more cynical character.
I think ND lost considerable talent when Amy Hennig left.
