By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - SPOILERS The Last Of Us P2 SPOILERS

zealen said:
When did violently killing people became politically correct?

Because it isn't really about political correctness. It's about money. PC is only pushed into the foreground to make more of it. It helps to counter balance the guts&gore, to make the game tolerable.



Hunting Season is done...

Around the Network

nm



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

lol



If you have no better idea to do with est character than just kill them off in the direct sequel. Then don't make the game about them at all and create an entirely new cast and focus entirely on them. Chrono Cross is a good RPG but a bullshit sequel. What they did with the original cast is just dumb. At best just allude in small easter eggs they are maybe out there. Druckman should write for TWD.



Bite my shiny metal cockpit!

A lot of the criticism I’ve seen I feel is an over-reaction. You’ve not even seen some of the characters before, let they game actually introduce them and build them up before saying you don’t care about them. That said, it does seem odd that Joel seemingly isn’t a playable character. A lot of it seems to be driven by a negative reaction to Ellie being a lesbian, and calling it pandering - whereas Ellie is actually a great example of a game not pandering this sort of thing. I’ve seen a rumour about Abby’s character though that I’m not sure if it’s true, but it seems to add more fuel to the fire.

Naughty Dog have definitely taken a big risk here, if the stuff about Joel is true I’ll give them props for taking the story in that direction, rather than having a more typical story. It is the sort of one that will invoke a reaction as the fanbase is attached to him.

Last edited by SecondWar - on 30 April 2020

Around the Network
sub-zero-TM said:
zealen said:
So, do you guys think that is going to hurt sales?

Yes it will especially when people actually play through this nonsense.

The only thing we can hope for is that all of this leaked stuff is some scrapped storyline that they decided not to go with.

It seems unlikely. Read the Wikipedia article on the game. The quotes from Troy Baker and Neil Druckmann align with stuff in the leaks.p, like Baker saying he believes gamers will be ambivalent to it.



We don't even know Abby's characteristics, it's all based on speculation.



sub-zero-TM said:
zealen said:

Yeah, played all of them.

And the reason i used that random guy from the train level is to prove a point it's because he's a nobody an unimportant/insignificant character. So apparently Abby's parents (that roided up girl or a guy or who the heck knows with Naughty Dog anymore) that you play as him/her for the other half of the game, his/her parents where one of the surgeons Joel kills in the first game while trying to save Ellie..

Now that's lazy storytelling at it's finest here.

How is that lazy story telling? Something a character did earlier in the series has a unintended and unforeseen consequence that comes back to bite them in the future. It adds more depth to the story.



Ka-pi96 said:
sales2099 said:

Thank you. I had the unpopular opinion that the Firefly massacre was completely undeserved deaths. Those people were trying to find a cure and Ellie consented to the operation. Joel was selfishly protecting a misplaced sense of fatherhood when he killed those people. 

Except she didn't. She didn't even know there was going to be an operation. She was unconscious when she got there and if they had had their way she never would've woken up again.

Now if she had been conscious and consented to things that would have changed things, but she wasn't and she didn't.

I actually wouldn't have a problem with the whole situation if Joel had killed only the combatants in the building, but the doctors were unarmed and pleading for their lives. He DID NOT have to kill them, but he chose to do so anyways. That's when he crossed the line for me.

Now, actions bring consequences. The Fireflies got the consecuences for their actions and now Joel got the consequences of his.



abronn627 said:
sales2099 said:

Thank you. I had the unpopular opinion that the Firefly massacre was completely undeserved deaths. Those people were trying to find a cure and Ellie consented to the operation. Joel was selfishly protecting a misplaced sense of fatherhood when he killed those people. 

Not really, it's easy to look at the Fireflies like the good guys wanting to save humanity, but with all that happened over the years, everyone or every groups are walking the fine line of being good or bad. The military was prone to act like a totalitarian state while also providing some form of safety and security, while the Fireflies were offering freedom and justice, but also bordering on anarchy which basically caused the fall of the Pittsburgh quarantine zone.

There was no way for Joel to know if by killing Ellie, without even let her the time to regain consciousness and make her own informed decision, they will actually find a cure. And if they were able to, how can he be sure that they will not use it for their own agenda. What is clear from Joel's action, is that he beleive that humanity as reached a point of no return and sacrificing the girl he developped feeling for, will serve nothing.

Including both Ellie and Joel. I don't know why people want them to be immune to the rules of the world. Like I said before, actions bring consequences.

This actually reminds of the scene in Kill Bill were the bride kills the black woman in front of her daughter then looks a the little girl and tells her "If you're still mad about this in 20 years, I will be waiting."

See? The bride knew why she killed that woman and why she felt entitled to do so, but she also knew that the little kid will have a reason to want to kill her as well.