I'm tired of debating this thing. If people are really fine with the contrived story telling in this game, then more power to them. However if you are going to be make an argument that the writing in this story is on par with TLOU1, you need to approach it objectively and say why it is so.
But it seems to me that people are taking my criticism of this game as me telling to stop enjoying the thing. You be you. My point still stands. We were forced to accept the changes on some characters without having anything to show how and why it changed from where TLOU1 left off.
And if you are going to ask me why I think the credibility of the reviewers are shot, it's simply that a lot of them seem to have failed to reflect what a lot of people are complaining about. I get that these people have their own opinions, but do understand that they are not just a random reviewer. These people are paid to do this thing and are used as a metric for marketing the game. Whatever they publish here can affect purchasing decisions of the consumer. If they failed to resonate with what the people(fans) may have issues with about this game then what is the point of having them considered as "top critic"? They're writing for a different audience that would potentially be on the minority.
Like I said, if I didn't read the spoilers, I wouldn't know I will be playing Abby for a long period of time. Given the circumstance of what has happened, the whole game is taken as a hostage. To a lot of people, it can be a drag.
So drop from the debate.
There really isn't anything contrived about the story, if you didn't understand it from reading leaks or watching YT that doesn't mean it is hard or contrived.
And you already show your hand and agreed that you are only giving credibility to the ones that agree with your opinion. Considering 4M sales on first week, 95 on MC and 4 to 4.5 star on PSN even with some fans being despised show that you are going for minority opinion being the only one that is valid while putting everyone else as wrong "because they don't agree with the ones that don't like the game".
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
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"