Forums - Politics Discussion - (POSSIBLE SPOILERS INSIDE) The agenda and political discussion of Naughty Dog

Have politics damaged the quality of ND games

No 28 39.44%
 
Yes 43 60.56%
 
Total:71

@Hiku, @the -pi-guy, what do you think about this review video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5bw4CmLZcY
(heads up: there are spoilers for other people clicking)

And this one which is about everything (gameplay, graphics)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTDJJ5VlZ0A

Last edited by padib - 4 days ago

Around the Network
the-pi-guy said:
EricHiggin said:

It would require a re-write. I'm not necessarily saying they had to change the overall direction, but it would either have to be shorter, or extended so that some of what was there, could play out in the third. Which might also mean juggling when certain moments in the game take place and filling them in.

I think the game would have benefitted from being shorter, but it would require a completely different game to try splitting up.

Spoiler!

The core part of the story is that Ellie gets revenge for Joel, and through that she finally understands the actions that he made during the end of the last game.  

Abby's story is important as well, because it gives the motivation for Abby, it also puts Ellie's actions into context.  The people that she killed were people had names.  

The game doesn't work without seeing both sides.  

The game would end up somewhat different, correct. The question, as Neil likes to ask, is how much would that change things overall? If the story get's to the same point eventually, what does a slightly shorter story or more useful filler story in between really matter?

Let's just say the Joel outcome could have remained the same but happened closer to the end, or could take place in the beginning portion of the third game. That doesn't mean it would be impossible for a similar Joel beating scene to take place, where Abby's group are forced to retreat and finish things later. It could easily be done in a manner that has Ellie go after them anyway. Joel eventually tries to catch up, etc. I'm not going to lay out every possible scenario they could have taken, but I don't think the one they chose was the best by far for the franchise overall. Depends what their ultimate goals are really.

DonFerrari said:
EricHiggin said:

That probably would have helped a little, but it would all get out their quickly and the worst scenario would still get a similar reaction. While it's way too late now, some of this character development should have been foreshadowed or hinted at in the very least in TLOU, and then expanded upon in Part II. Then some of the story (narrative) of Part II should have been saved for Part III. It doesn't flow well and almost feels rushed.

The fact it's called Part II just makes it worse. You automatically expect it's simply a continuation of everything you've known from the first. When it doesn't turn out to be that way, or is considerably different, you're almost always going to get a negative reaction. Killing off a beloved main character is tough to do period, but if you're going to do it, it has to be in an acceptable manner to the story as told/known. If you want people to be able to swallow it that is.

While it's not quite the same equivalence, imagine if at the start of Horizon II, that Aloy get's brutally murdered by some new character, and then you play as Sylens to go after them. Whether that new character had previously 'legitimate' unknown reasons to the player, like Abby did, it would still be ridiculous and many people would not like it.

There are times stories can shift a bit, and points in the story for shock and awe, but I think ND messed up this time around.

Don't think it would work on Aloy case because we having played as Joel knew full well that he have done shit and killed many people. Aloy I don't remember doing anything that would make she expected to be killed for justifiable reasons.

As soon as Joel was killed I already imagined it was people from the fireflies and knew it was totally justifiable from their perspective. Hell even Abby knew it was justifiable that even though she spared Ellie twice it was expected that she would still want revenge, it is just that besides being a little dumb and consumed by hatred against Joel she came to understand that Joel done what she would have done for someone she loved (she was with Lev for a short time and killed a lot of her partners for her, so how can she condem Joel for killing people he didn't know for the only person he loved?).

The game explain everything well enough that we can easily fill the blanks.

Aloy kills all kinds of people along the way. You could easily say someone close to those 'bad guys' who were just trying to survive like everyone else, wants revenge against Aloy. Though you know darn well that's not what the story is going to be, because it would be hugely disappointing.

It's not like TLOU2 makes no sense whatsoever, though it certainly has flaws, it's who really thought this would be the direction the game would take if you hadn't been given hints or leaks while it was being developed? Even taking this direction, the timing and poor execution of the Joel scene is really surprising from my point of view.

Hiku said:
padib said:

I truly haven't, I watched a number of portions of the game, and I appreciated what I saw. But I did not play it myself.

Spoiler!
However when it comes to the way Joel was killed and what he had to do for it to happen, I feel like it's out of character for the protagonist of the first game, I feel like it was forced into the story. If it happened later, at least players would have appreciated playing as Joel for a bit longer. Also, if what happened was done at the hands of an antagonist that would have been very difficult to watch, but at least the players would not have to play as the character who did that vile thing. Still, it felt cheap and of course it had to be done at the hands of a girl, which makes it even nastier. You know, we saw Ned Stark die at the hands of Geoffrey Baratheon, that worked because Geoffrey was a piece of shit and it only made his character more detestable. But here, Abby is the protagonist of the game, and it felt like girl power being forced into yet another game, and I personally see through it and, while I'm not a fan of TLOU (though I respect the game), it makes me angry that this kind of thing is creeping into media and entertainment.

I see.
I'll give a similar answer to Eric below, so I'll type it there.

EricHiggin said:

That probably would have helped a little, but it would all get out their quickly and the worst scenario would still get a similar reaction. While it's way too late now, some of this character development should have been foreshadowed or hinted at in the very least in TLOU, and then expanded upon in Part II. Then some of the story (narrative) of Part II should have been saved for Part III. It doesn't flow well and almost feels rushed.

The fact it's called Part II just makes it worse. You automatically expect it's simply a continuation of everything you've known from the first. When it doesn't turn out to be that way, or is considerably different, you're almost always going to get a negative reaction. Killing off a beloved main character is tough to do period, but if you're going to do it, it has to be in an acceptable manner to the story as told/known. If you want people to be able to swallow it that is.

While it's not quite the same equivalence, imagine if at the start of Horizon II, that Aloy get's brutally murdered by some new character, and then you play as Sylens to go after them. Whether that new character had previously 'legitimate' unknown reasons to the player, like Abby did, it would still be ridiculous and many people would not like it.

There are times stories can shift a bit, and points in the story for shock and awe, but I think ND messed up this time around.

I think people point out 'what' happened, but not 'why, they're commonly missing what TLOU2 tried to do that was unique to it unlike other revenge stories. Finding out the motive of an antagonist not unusual. Being able to play as them likewise.

Some of what makes TLOU2 unique in this regard could only have been achieved this way. Not if this was foreshadowed more in other parts, split into two games, or saved for Part 3, etc.

The first key factor is how Abby was introduced.
The second is the timing of the events.
And the third is the way Abby and Ellie are explored after that.

Spoiler!

Joel meets a very brutal and pathetic end for such a developed and beloved character. We barely got to see much of him before it happened. And it was at the hands of an almost completely undeveloped new character. With a very imposing stature as well. All these things mattered, as they made it that much easier to hate Abby.

If we had previously been introduced to her in TLOU1, or if we got to play as her more before this event happened, and this scene occurred near the middle or end of the game instead, or if she was just a cute scrawny little 14 year old like Ellie was, we'd be more sympathetic to her, and the purpose of the scene wouldn't have been as effective.
The goal here was to make people hate Abby, and this whole situation, as much as possible. Even questioning Naughty Dog's writing. And it worked.

I wanted to see her beaten to death with a golf club. I saw more than one person make that exact same remark. I can't recall feeling that strongly about killing a character before.
People were angry, sad, even nauseated.

It soon became apparent that they were going to try to make us sympathize with Abby, through flashbacks and by playing the game from her perspective.
And I was quickly resigned to the idea that no matter what they show, I'm not going to think that what happened in that scene was ok. How it happened. And when it happened. I never considered that that could have been the point.

I've watched a few Youtubers since to see their reaction, and I commonly saw the same reaction to when they started playing as Abby. "I get that they want me to feel for Abby, but..."
There was always this reservation because of how and when that initial scene played out. Even when we got happy flashbacks of Joel and Ellie, there was a dark cloud looming over it. You can't forget what happened.

Finding out Abby's motivation still didn't change much about how I felt. And I don't think that was the point. It's everything that happened while we were busy thinking about how nothing will make that scene ok.
Because that scene occurred very early in the game, it gave us that much more time to get to know the killer after already hating her with a passion. That's why it happened so early. And that's something I haven't experienced before when being able to play as the antagonist.

I initially thought of anything in Abby's story unrelated to Joel as more of a distraction from the most important issue. And because of that, before I realized it, I was invested in a separate storyline with new characters I cared about such as Yara and Lev.
And this character I initially hated with a passion and wanted to see killed with a golfclub, I did not want that any more.

I now also began to view Ellie as more antagonistic. Yet another thing that was not on my Bingo card when I first booted up this game. In the boss fight against Ellie, she's the cowardly boss with the gun while you're unarmed and have to try to sneak up on her. Mirroring the fight against David in the first game.

The more extreme that initial scene was, the more heavily the game could challenge our views.
It started with Ellie and Abby on the opposite ends of two extremes. And as you kept playing, they slowly began to drift towards the same center. Abby more and more clearly became a counterpart to Ellie. She went through very similar things. Ellie went to a museum with Joel. Abby went to an aquarium. Ellie lost her father. Abby lost her father. They both did shitty things, and they both did good things. Neither one was either good or evil.
How everyone ends up feeling about each character depends on the person. But I don't recall experiencing something like this anywhere else.
And that's something I can take away from this game.

Another theme they highlighted with this game is the regret of staying mad at your loved ones when you don't know how much time you have with them.
Ellie was mad at Joel for years, even though she loved him and she knew he loved her. And they had just began to patch things up right before this happened.
Because Ellie and Joel are such established and beloved characters, and we waited 7 years for a sequel, Naughty Dog were able to hammer home this point a lot harder than most stories possibly could. And that last flashback scene of them trying to patch things up was so powerful.

I will say though that I think the writing majorly falters at the final act. Before that, seeing Ellie, Joel, Abby or anyone else as both good or evil depending on who's perspective you're looking from made perfect sense in this kind of world. And I'm glad Naughty Dog decided to explore that, while challenging our established views of these characters.
However, I could not buy that Tommy would be this petty, vindictive and manipulative person that he is in the end. Both in this game and the first one they mention that Tommy has done some bad things, so you can say it was foreshadowed. But foreshadowing is not development.

Likewise, I also could not believe that Ellie would accept the proposal to once again go after Abby. After already killing so many of Abby's friends, and Abby letting her live, twice? Killing so many of Abby's friends should have been enough. "It has to be", as both her and Tommy decided earlier when they planned to turn back and go home. And that was before Abby let her live for the second time.

Ellie losing everything in the end, facing her worst possible nightmare of being alone, not even being able to play the guitar that Joel gave her, was the price for pursuing vengeance. If her motivations in the final act had felt more in character, I could have appreciated this part more.

I'll agree it's more unique, but it sort of comes out of nowhere. A game that goes from getting a girl to the fireflies to potentially come up with a cure, to chasing Abby down for revenge because of what she does, is quite unexpected.

That's not to say it makes it a bad direction automatically, and ND can do whatever they want, but to some people it's like ND turned the car around and decided on a new destination. Well some people already got in the car expecting Disneyland and they don't want to go to the Miami Speedway.

DonFerrari said:
Hiku said:

I see.
I'll give a similar answer to Eric below, so I'll type it there.

I think people point out 'what' happened, but not 'why, they're commonly missing what TLOU2 tried to do that was unique to it unlike other revenge stories. Finding out the motive of an antagonist not unusual. Being able to play as them likewise.

Some of what makes TLOU2 unique in this regard could only have been achieved this way. Not if this was foreshadowed more in other parts, split into two games, or saved for Part 3, etc.

The first key factor is how Abby was introduced.
The second is the timing of the events.
And the third is the way Abby and Ellie are explored after that.

Spoiler!

Joel meets a very brutal and pathetic end for such a developed and beloved character. We barely got to see much of him before it happened. And it was at the hands of an almost completely undeveloped new character. With a very imposing stature as well. All these things mattered, as they made it that much easier to hate Abby.

If we had previously been introduced to her in TLOU1, or if we got to play as her more before this event happened, and this scene occurred near the middle or end of the game instead, or if she was just a cute scrawny little 14 year old like Ellie was, we'd be more sympathetic to her, and the purpose of the scene wouldn't have been as effective.
The goal here was to make people hate Abby, and this whole situation, as much as possible. Even questioning Naughty Dog's writing. And it worked.

I wanted to see her beaten to death with a golf club. I saw more than one person make that exact same remark. I can't recall feeling that strongly about killing a character before.
People were angry, sad, even nauseated.

It soon became apparent that they were going to try to make us sympathize with Abby, through flashbacks and by playing the game from her perspective.
And I was quickly resigned to the idea that no matter what they show, I'm not going to think that what happened in that scene was ok. How it happened. And when it happened. I never considered that that could have been the point.

I've watched a few Youtubers since to see their reaction, and I commonly saw the same reaction to when they started playing as Abby. "I get that they want me to feel for Abby, but..."
There was always this reservation because of how and when that initial scene played out. Even when we got happy flashbacks of Joel and Ellie, there was a dark cloud looming over it. You can't forget what happened.

Finding out Abby's motivation still didn't change much about how I felt. And I don't think that was the point. It's everything that happened while we were busy thinking about how nothing will make that scene ok.
Because that scene occurred very early in the game, it gave us that much more time to get to know the killer after already hating her with a passion. That's why it happened so early. And that's something I haven't experienced before when being able to play as the antagonist.

I initially thought of anything in Abby's story unrelated to Joel as more of a distraction from the most important issue. And because of that, before I realized it, I was invested in a separate storyline with new characters I cared about such as Yara and Lev.
And this character I initially hated with a passion and wanted to see killed with a golfclub, I did not want that any more.

I now also began to view Ellie as more antagonistic. Yet another thing that was not on my Bingo card when I first booted up this game. In the boss fight against Ellie, she's the cowardly boss with the gun while you're unarmed and have to try to sneak up on her. Mirroring the fight against David in the first game.

The more extreme that initial scene was, the more heavily the game could challenge our views.
It started with Ellie and Abby on the opposite ends of two extremes. And as you kept playing, they slowly began to drift towards the same center. Abby more and more clearly became a counterpart to Ellie. She went through very similar things. Ellie went to a museum with Joel. Abby went to an aquarium. Ellie lost her father. Abby lost her father. They both did shitty things, and they both did good things. Neither one was either good or evil.
How everyone ends up feeling about each character depends on the person. But I don't recall experiencing something like this anywhere else.
And that's something I can take away from this game.

Another theme they highlighted with this game is the regret of staying mad at your loved ones when you don't know how much time you have with them.
Ellie was mad at Joel for years, even though she loved him and she knew he loved her. And they had just began to patch things up right before this happened.
Because Ellie and Joel are such established and beloved characters, and we waited 7 years for a sequel, Naughty Dog were able to hammer home this point a lot harder than most stories possibly could. And that last flashback scene of them trying to patch things up was so powerful.

I will say though that I think the writing majorly falters at the final act. Before that, seeing Ellie, Joel, Abby or anyone else as both good or evil depending on who's perspective you're looking from made perfect sense in this kind of world. And I'm glad Naughty Dog decided to explore that, while challenging our established views of these characters.
However, I could not buy that Tommy would be this petty, vindictive and manipulative person that he is in the end. Both in this game and the first one they mention that Tommy has done some bad things, so you can say it was foreshadowed. But foreshadowing is not development.

Likewise, I also could not believe that Ellie would accept the proposal to once again go after Abby. After already killing so many of Abby's friends, and Abby letting her live, twice? Killing so many of Abby's friends should have been enough. "It has to be", as both her and Tommy decided earlier when they planned to turn back and go home. And that was before Abby let her live for the second time.

Ellie losing everything in the end, facing her worst possible nightmare of being alone, not even being able to play the guitar that Joel gave her, was the price for pursuing vengeance. If her motivations in the final act had felt more in character, I could have appreciated this part more.

I did understand the killing of Joel from the beggining and didn't hate Abby because of it. But because of the grouping and torturing.

After finishing the game it became clear that Abby wasn't bad but consumed by hate. Owen was just doing it because he loved her and Mel had a grudge but didn't had on her to really do it. But the rest of the people there were really bad people and you can see it from the convos.

Dante9 said:

Yeah. Look, take any other game or movie that people loved because of the dynamics of the two main characters and their journey together. Bad Boys with Will Smith and Martin Lawrence comes to mind off the top of my head(yeah, it's ancient because I'm ancient, I know, although the third movie came out this year). Imagine people waiting for 7 years to get that second movie and then suddenly Mike or Marcus is brutally killed like 10 minutes into the film. Then the killer takes over the movie and never faces real consequences of what he has done. What the hell is that? The heart of the thing would have been destroyed and you would expect people to just love it and applaud the bold new direction? Well, apparently some people would. I mean, I accept now that Druckmann simply wanted to do something unexpected and controversial and that's his right of course. I just didn't find it appealing and I'm not alone.

Did you watch the second movie? Because that is almost what happens. And Abby had very real and direct immediate consequences. Actually Joel was the one that gone without consequence for a long time and you were ok with it because you liked him since you played with him. That is probably why people often like and sides with criminals if they are close enough.

Whatcha gunna do when Abby/Ellie comes 4 you?

The third BB movie even more so in a way. Though the thing is they never fully go TLOU2 route because most people wouldn't accept it, especially because you definitely wouldn't expect that type of direction in the third film let alone the second.

I agree that ND can take TLOU franchise wherever they want, it's their choice, but if people aren't down with the direction, that's their choice as well.

At least the people who disagree aren't trying to cancel it...



EricHiggin said:
the-pi-guy said:

I think the game would have benefitted from being shorter, but it would require a completely different game to try splitting up.

Spoiler!

The core part of the story is that Ellie gets revenge for Joel, and through that she finally understands the actions that he made during the end of the last game.  

Abby's story is important as well, because it gives the motivation for Abby, it also puts Ellie's actions into context.  The people that she killed were people had names.  

The game doesn't work without seeing both sides.  

The game would end up somewhat different, correct. The question, as Neil likes to ask, is how much would that change things overall? If the story get's to the same point eventually, what does a slightly shorter story or more useful filler story in between really matter?

Let's just say the Joel outcome could have remained the same but happened closer to the end, or could take place in the beginning portion of the third game. That doesn't mean it would be impossible for a similar Joel beating scene to take place, where Abby's group are forced to retreat and finish things later. It could easily be done in a manner that has Ellie go after them anyway. Joel eventually tries to catch up, etc. I'm not going to lay out every possible scenario they could have taken, but I don't think the one they chose was the best by far for the franchise overall. Depends what their ultimate goals are really.

DonFerrari said:

Don't think it would work on Aloy case because we having played as Joel knew full well that he have done shit and killed many people. Aloy I don't remember doing anything that would make she expected to be killed for justifiable reasons.

As soon as Joel was killed I already imagined it was people from the fireflies and knew it was totally justifiable from their perspective. Hell even Abby knew it was justifiable that even though she spared Ellie twice it was expected that she would still want revenge, it is just that besides being a little dumb and consumed by hatred against Joel she came to understand that Joel done what she would have done for someone she loved (she was with Lev for a short time and killed a lot of her partners for her, so how can she condem Joel for killing people he didn't know for the only person he loved?).

The game explain everything well enough that we can easily fill the blanks.

Aloy kills all kinds of people along the way. You could easily say someone close to those 'bad guys' who were just trying to survive like everyone else, wants revenge against Aloy. Though you know darn well that's not what the story is going to be, because it would be hugely disappointing.

It's not like TLOU2 makes no sense whatsoever, though it certainly has flaws, it's who really thought this would be the direction the game would take if you hadn't been given hints or leaks while it was being developed? Even taking this direction, the timing and poor execution of the Joel scene is really surprising from my point of view.

Hiku said:

I see.
I'll give a similar answer to Eric below, so I'll type it there.

I think people point out 'what' happened, but not 'why, they're commonly missing what TLOU2 tried to do that was unique to it unlike other revenge stories. Finding out the motive of an antagonist not unusual. Being able to play as them likewise.

Some of what makes TLOU2 unique in this regard could only have been achieved this way. Not if this was foreshadowed more in other parts, split into two games, or saved for Part 3, etc.

The first key factor is how Abby was introduced.
The second is the timing of the events.
And the third is the way Abby and Ellie are explored after that.

Spoiler!

Joel meets a very brutal and pathetic end for such a developed and beloved character. We barely got to see much of him before it happened. And it was at the hands of an almost completely undeveloped new character. With a very imposing stature as well. All these things mattered, as they made it that much easier to hate Abby.

If we had previously been introduced to her in TLOU1, or if we got to play as her more before this event happened, and this scene occurred near the middle or end of the game instead, or if she was just a cute scrawny little 14 year old like Ellie was, we'd be more sympathetic to her, and the purpose of the scene wouldn't have been as effective.
The goal here was to make people hate Abby, and this whole situation, as much as possible. Even questioning Naughty Dog's writing. And it worked.

I wanted to see her beaten to death with a golf club. I saw more than one person make that exact same remark. I can't recall feeling that strongly about killing a character before.
People were angry, sad, even nauseated.

It soon became apparent that they were going to try to make us sympathize with Abby, through flashbacks and by playing the game from her perspective.
And I was quickly resigned to the idea that no matter what they show, I'm not going to think that what happened in that scene was ok. How it happened. And when it happened. I never considered that that could have been the point.

I've watched a few Youtubers since to see their reaction, and I commonly saw the same reaction to when they started playing as Abby. "I get that they want me to feel for Abby, but..."
There was always this reservation because of how and when that initial scene played out. Even when we got happy flashbacks of Joel and Ellie, there was a dark cloud looming over it. You can't forget what happened.

Finding out Abby's motivation still didn't change much about how I felt. And I don't think that was the point. It's everything that happened while we were busy thinking about how nothing will make that scene ok.
Because that scene occurred very early in the game, it gave us that much more time to get to know the killer after already hating her with a passion. That's why it happened so early. And that's something I haven't experienced before when being able to play as the antagonist.

I initially thought of anything in Abby's story unrelated to Joel as more of a distraction from the most important issue. And because of that, before I realized it, I was invested in a separate storyline with new characters I cared about such as Yara and Lev.
And this character I initially hated with a passion and wanted to see killed with a golfclub, I did not want that any more.

I now also began to view Ellie as more antagonistic. Yet another thing that was not on my Bingo card when I first booted up this game. In the boss fight against Ellie, she's the cowardly boss with the gun while you're unarmed and have to try to sneak up on her. Mirroring the fight against David in the first game.

The more extreme that initial scene was, the more heavily the game could challenge our views.
It started with Ellie and Abby on the opposite ends of two extremes. And as you kept playing, they slowly began to drift towards the same center. Abby more and more clearly became a counterpart to Ellie. She went through very similar things. Ellie went to a museum with Joel. Abby went to an aquarium. Ellie lost her father. Abby lost her father. They both did shitty things, and they both did good things. Neither one was either good or evil.
How everyone ends up feeling about each character depends on the person. But I don't recall experiencing something like this anywhere else.
And that's something I can take away from this game.

Another theme they highlighted with this game is the regret of staying mad at your loved ones when you don't know how much time you have with them.
Ellie was mad at Joel for years, even though she loved him and she knew he loved her. And they had just began to patch things up right before this happened.
Because Ellie and Joel are such established and beloved characters, and we waited 7 years for a sequel, Naughty Dog were able to hammer home this point a lot harder than most stories possibly could. And that last flashback scene of them trying to patch things up was so powerful.

I will say though that I think the writing majorly falters at the final act. Before that, seeing Ellie, Joel, Abby or anyone else as both good or evil depending on who's perspective you're looking from made perfect sense in this kind of world. And I'm glad Naughty Dog decided to explore that, while challenging our established views of these characters.
However, I could not buy that Tommy would be this petty, vindictive and manipulative person that he is in the end. Both in this game and the first one they mention that Tommy has done some bad things, so you can say it was foreshadowed. But foreshadowing is not development.

Likewise, I also could not believe that Ellie would accept the proposal to once again go after Abby. After already killing so many of Abby's friends, and Abby letting her live, twice? Killing so many of Abby's friends should have been enough. "It has to be", as both her and Tommy decided earlier when they planned to turn back and go home. And that was before Abby let her live for the second time.

Ellie losing everything in the end, facing her worst possible nightmare of being alone, not even being able to play the guitar that Joel gave her, was the price for pursuing vengeance. If her motivations in the final act had felt more in character, I could have appreciated this part more.

I'll agree it's more unique, but it sort of comes out of nowhere. A game that goes from getting a girl to the fireflies to potentially come up with a cure, to chasing Abby down for revenge because of what she does, is quite unexpected.

That's not to say it makes it a bad direction automatically, and ND can do whatever they want, but to some people it's like ND turned the car around and decided on a new destination. Well some people already got in the car expecting Disneyland and they don't want to go to the Miami Speedway.

DonFerrari said:

I did understand the killing of Joel from the beggining and didn't hate Abby because of it. But because of the grouping and torturing.

After finishing the game it became clear that Abby wasn't bad but consumed by hate. Owen was just doing it because he loved her and Mel had a grudge but didn't had on her to really do it. But the rest of the people there were really bad people and you can see it from the convos.

Did you watch the second movie? Because that is almost what happens. And Abby had very real and direct immediate consequences. Actually Joel was the one that gone without consequence for a long time and you were ok with it because you liked him since you played with him. That is probably why people often like and sides with criminals if they are close enough.

Whatcha gunna do when Abby/Ellie comes 4 you?

The third BB movie even more so in a way. Though the thing is they never fully go TLOU2 route because most people wouldn't accept it, especially because you definitely wouldn't expect that type of direction in the third film let alone the second.

I agree that ND can take TLOU franchise wherever they want, it's their choice, but if people aren't down with the direction, that's their choice as well.

At least the people who disagree aren't trying to cancel it...

Yes I meant third movie.

And people expect Joel to be dead ever since they asked for a sequel, saying it would even be Ellie that would kill him because of the lie and destroying hope. And then when all the reveals, trailers, etc missed Joel most speculation was that his was dead even before the start of the game. I needed no leak to suppose he was dead.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

DonFerrari said:
EricHiggin said:

The game would end up somewhat different, correct. The question, as Neil likes to ask, is how much would that change things overall? If the story get's to the same point eventually, what does a slightly shorter story or more useful filler story in between really matter?

Let's just say the Joel outcome could have remained the same but happened closer to the end, or could take place in the beginning portion of the third game. That doesn't mean it would be impossible for a similar Joel beating scene to take place, where Abby's group are forced to retreat and finish things later. It could easily be done in a manner that has Ellie go after them anyway. Joel eventually tries to catch up, etc. I'm not going to lay out every possible scenario they could have taken, but I don't think the one they chose was the best by far for the franchise overall. Depends what their ultimate goals are really.

Aloy kills all kinds of people along the way. You could easily say someone close to those 'bad guys' who were just trying to survive like everyone else, wants revenge against Aloy. Though you know darn well that's not what the story is going to be, because it would be hugely disappointing.

It's not like TLOU2 makes no sense whatsoever, though it certainly has flaws, it's who really thought this would be the direction the game would take if you hadn't been given hints or leaks while it was being developed? Even taking this direction, the timing and poor execution of the Joel scene is really surprising from my point of view.

I'll agree it's more unique, but it sort of comes out of nowhere. A game that goes from getting a girl to the fireflies to potentially come up with a cure, to chasing Abby down for revenge because of what she does, is quite unexpected.

That's not to say it makes it a bad direction automatically, and ND can do whatever they want, but to some people it's like ND turned the car around and decided on a new destination. Well some people already got in the car expecting Disneyland and they don't want to go to the Miami Speedway.

Whatcha gunna do when Abby/Ellie comes 4 you?

The third BB movie even more so in a way. Though the thing is they never fully go TLOU2 route because most people wouldn't accept it, especially because you definitely wouldn't expect that type of direction in the third film let alone the second.

I agree that ND can take TLOU franchise wherever they want, it's their choice, but if people aren't down with the direction, that's their choice as well.

At least the people who disagree aren't trying to cancel it...

Yes I meant third movie.

And people expect Joel to be dead ever since they asked for a sequel, saying it would even be Ellie that would kill him because of the lie and destroying hope. And then when all the reveals, trailers, etc missed Joel most speculation was that his was dead even before the start of the game. I needed no leak to suppose he was dead.

That was a possibility, I can't deny that, but did you also assume anything to do with the rest of the story in relation to Abby? Imagine if Ellie had killed Joel. How much different could the game have turned out by taking that direction?



EricHiggin said:
DonFerrari said:

Yes I meant third movie.

And people expect Joel to be dead ever since they asked for a sequel, saying it would even be Ellie that would kill him because of the lie and destroying hope. And then when all the reveals, trailers, etc missed Joel most speculation was that his was dead even before the start of the game. I needed no leak to suppose he was dead.

That was a possibility, I can't deny that, but did you also assume anything to do with the rest of the story in relation to Abby? Imagine if Ellie had killed Joel. How much different could the game have turned out by taking that direction?

If we could guess the whole game before it is even made there would be little point in making it.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
EricHiggin said:

That was a possibility, I can't deny that, but did you also assume anything to do with the rest of the story in relation to Abby? Imagine if Ellie had killed Joel. How much different could the game have turned out by taking that direction?

If we could guess the whole game before it is even made there would be little point in making it.

If a game is made that doesn't sell well enough, not meeting expectations, maybe due to it's story, was it worth making?

My point is people have expectations in many different ways, and if they aren't met, typically there is some sort of backlash and at times someone or something pays the price. I'm not saying this is the case for TLOU2 either because it's way to early to compare expectations of overall sales vs units sold so far.



padib said:

@Hiku, @the -pi-guy, what do you think about this review video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5bw4CmLZcY
(heads up: there are spoilers for other people clicking)

And this one which is about everything (gameplay, graphics)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTDJJ5VlZ0A

Spoiler!

The bit about Ellie being the only playable character being a huge lie, is honestly stupid.  

Naughty Dog made the same kinds of comments with the first game.

2013 on the original Last of Us:

https://venturebeat.com/2013/08/05/the-last-of-us-female-characters/

We did dozens of interviews where we outright lied about it. “No. Joel is the only person you play.” We also decided we would never talk about the prologue where you play as Sarah.

They lied to not spoil the story. 

I don't get it at all.  Why are people upset that they didn't spoil Joel's death?  

People took the same issue with the first game.  That the first game didn't let you make choices.  Because it's not our story.  We don't get to make choices.  The only thing we do is play as Ellie as she makes her choices. 

Literally every part of his deception criticism was true of the first game.   

gameplay

Spoiler!

And no he's wrong about the subtext.  The subtext isn't Ellie is bad, and Abby is good.  

The subtext is that Abby and Ellie are both complicated humans.  Neither are good, neither are bad.  The subtext is they are humans.  (The bizarre bit to me is how the reviewer then goes on about how evil the game makes Abby.  So which is it?)

They both have friends.  They both have made mistakes.  They are both killing for people they loved.  

Honestly the biggest reason why Abby's section drags on, is because you don't expect to play as her for so long.  You expect a 20 minute gameplay piece with her like there was at the beginning.  The game isn't perfect, there are bits I'd shorten.  (And I'd absolutely change how the ending went down.  The game felt like there were a few places where it could have just ended.)  

And I'd easily argue the first game was more emotionally than this one.  

And now he's arguing that Abby was without consequences.  Despite losing all her friends.  Despite being so out of life at the end of the game, that she was practically prepared to let Ellie just kill her.  

The game isn't perfect, but it's pretty close to a 10.  But that's all subjective.  It is likely my 3rd favorite Naughty Dog game, or close to it.  Many ND games are in my top 10.  

Honestly, I found Uncharted 3 to be a much more miserable experience than this game.  It's more lighthearted, but it was a chore to play.  TLOU 2, even at it's worst didn't feel like a chore to me.  



EricHiggin said:
DonFerrari said:

If we could guess the whole game before it is even made there would be little point in making it.

If a game is made that doesn't sell well enough, not meeting expectations, maybe due to it's story, was it worth making?

My point is people have expectations in many different ways, and if they aren't met, typically there is some sort of backlash and at times someone or something pays the price. I'm not saying this is the case for TLOU2 either because it's way to early to compare expectations of overall sales vs units sold so far.

When it sold over 4M on the first weekend, but let's wait to see if it meets the spectations. And perhaps people expectation was in the wrong place if they wanted Joel alive. But as you said, only time will tell. For me is enough that I had a blast with the game.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

EricHiggin said:

The game would end up somewhat different, correct. The question, as Neil likes to ask, is how much would that change things overall? If the story get's to the same point eventually, what does a slightly shorter story or more useful filler story in between really matter?

Let's just say the Joel outcome could have remained the same but happened closer to the end, or could take place in the beginning portion of the third game. That doesn't mean it would be impossible for a similar Joel beating scene to take place, where Abby's group are forced to retreat and finish things later. It could easily be done in a manner that has Ellie go after them anyway. Joel eventually tries to catch up, etc. I'm not going to lay out every possible scenario they could have taken, but I don't think the one they chose was the best by far for the franchise overall. Depends what their ultimate goals are really.

A shorter story could have worked, but they can't make the changes you're suggesting without making an entirely different game.  And at that point, you're more asking for a game between TLOU and TLOU 2, not asking for a fix for TLOU 2. 



the-pi-guy said:
EricHiggin said:

The game would end up somewhat different, correct. The question, as Neil likes to ask, is how much would that change things overall? If the story get's to the same point eventually, what does a slightly shorter story or more useful filler story in between really matter?

Let's just say the Joel outcome could have remained the same but happened closer to the end, or could take place in the beginning portion of the third game. That doesn't mean it would be impossible for a similar Joel beating scene to take place, where Abby's group are forced to retreat and finish things later. It could easily be done in a manner that has Ellie go after them anyway. Joel eventually tries to catch up, etc. I'm not going to lay out every possible scenario they could have taken, but I don't think the one they chose was the best by far for the franchise overall. Depends what their ultimate goals are really.

A shorter story could have worked, but they can't make the changes you're suggesting without making an entirely different game.  And at that point, you're more asking for a game between TLOU and TLOU 2, not asking for a fix for TLOU 2. 

Would be great to get a standalone that can be done in 6-12 months using the same assets and good duration and price.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994