Game vs. Show

[Dobian]

On 3/2/2023 at 12:44 PM, Danny Franks said:

I think Naughty Dog are only too aware that some sections of the game's fanbase would be vocally unhappy about having to play the Left Behind DLC within the main game. Mainly because it's about Ellie and not Joel, but partly because of the "woke" content that those fragile snowflakes can't handle.

This is a hot take.  Naughty Dog released Left Behind separately because it's a back story and DLCs are how game publishers make more money from additional sales as well as promoting more sales of the base game.

[Danny Franks]

2 hours ago, Dobian said:

This is a hot take.  Naughty Dog released Left Behind separately because it's a back story and DLCs are how game publishers make more money from additional sales as well as promoting more sales of the base game.

Yeah, I'm talking about them not integrating that DLC into the Part 1 remake, as the previous poster suggested they should.

It is absolutely not a hot take to point out the toxic misogyny and homophobia of some of the fanbase, considering there's an entire subreddit devoted to it, and almost everyone involved in making the second game has received death threats from supposed fans.

[Dobian]

22 minutes ago, Danny Franks said:

Yeah, I'm talking about them not integrating that DLC into the Part 1 remake, as the previous poster suggested they should.

It is absolutely not a hot take to point out the toxic misogyny and homophobia of some of the fanbase, considering there's an entire subreddit devoted to it, and almost everyone involved in making the second game has received death threats from supposed fans.

True, but these are a tiny minority of extremists and not representative of the fan base, just like there were extremists on the other side sending death threats to J.K. Rowling on the release of Hogwarts Legacy.  Publishers like Naughty dog and Warner Brothers (Hogwarts) are wise when they ignore the toxic social media crowd instead of pander to them.

[Peace 47]

6 hours ago, cambridgeguy said:

It's now very clear that the finale will cover the end of the game, which leaves me with the question of whether or not they will (or even should) follow all of the beats of TLOU2.  For those who think HBO is afraid of pissing off "fragile snowflakes", how can you incorporate Lev?  How can they get away with what Abby does without having the fanbase make the GOT pushback look like bemused grumbling?

Given how slavishly faithful this adaptation is to the emotional beats of the first game, and given Druckman’s personal involvement in this project, I don’t see them making any major changes to the events of TLOU2.  There is one very compelling negative review of the second game from Forbes back in 2020 that I just read the other week and that I think makes a good case for its serious story flaws, but overall, the critics liked it, so I think that probably reinforces Druckman’s view that he was correct in his approach, and Maizin really seems to vibe with Druckman’s style.

[Dev F]

5 hours ago, Peace 47 said:

There is one very compelling negative review of the second game from Forbes back in 2020 that I just read the other week and that I think makes a good case for its serious story flaws, but overall, the critics liked it, so I think that probably reinforces Druckman’s view that he was correct in his approach, and Maizin really seems to vibe with Druckman’s style.

That Forbes review's criticisms of the second game were clearly made in good faith—unlike, say, the incessant mouth-foaming drivel on what is known disdainfully in my circles of the internet as "the other subreddit." But the entire Forbes critique springs from a presumption about TLOU1 that I've never agreed with, even before there was a TLOU2 for it to color. So I've never really thought anything in the second game warranted major retooling.

I will say this, though: While I've never agreed with the Forbes critic's reading of part 1, and in fact I think it diminishes the game quite significantly, I also understand why some fans read the game that way, and why they disliked part 2 as a result. But I also think it's interesting how much the TV series has worked to preclude that reading by emphasizing certain elements of the story that were less clear in the game. I'm curious whether that'll impact how people end up reading season 1 as a whole and respond to season 2.

[opus]

Have these been posted around here?

[Danny Franks]

Very different to David from the game, but still so unnerving and creepy. Of course he was a teacher. Gross.

I always absolutely hated the bit where you have to fight David in the game.

Nice to see Troy Baker, of course. He's been such a passionate advocate for this franchise.

 

 

Edited March 7, 2023 by Danny Franks

[Cosmo Weems]

To those who never played the game, the movie might seem exciting. I have played the game through several times, and I can tell you, the movie sucks. It is a reflection of how poor TV series are in general when a loser like this is a huge hit.

Take a great classic video game like "The Last of Us", strip out all the action and adventure, waste two entire episodes with extraneous side stories, and you have "the movie".

The last thing I need to see in an action/adventure movie is a gay love story. The second thing I don't need to see is two teens romping around in a mall for almost an hour.

Mazin and Druckman should have stuck to the script and not invented a new drama that is about 20 percent reflective of the video game. The 80 percent of the game that was re-written for TV is lame and boring. All in all, "The Last of Us" movie is almost a complete failure. If you think that this was hot stuff, you need to take up video gaming.

[Danny Franks]

On 3/6/2023 at 10:28 PM, Peace 47 said:

Given how slavishly faithful this adaptation is to the emotional beats of the first game, and given Druckman’s personal involvement in this project, I don’t see them making any major changes to the events of TLOU2.  There is one very compelling negative review of the second game from Forbes back in 2020 that I just read the other week and that I think makes a good case for its serious story flaws, but overall, the critics liked it, so I think that probably reinforces Druckman’s view that he was correct in his approach, and Maizin really seems to vibe with Druckman’s style.

I'd expect them to change the structure of Part II, especially if it's going to be over two seasons, as Mazin has hinted at. It works in the game because you get to experience and share Ellie's grief and rage, and you get to exact the revenge that you both want, without thinking much beyond the usual, simplistic videogame logic of, 'kill the bad guys.'

The switch is when the game really becomes something special, because you have to experience Abby's side of things, and you're forced to see her as more than an antagonist to be tracked down and killed. You then experience all the things that Ellie has done from the opposite perspective, and it's incredibly powerful.

That Forbes review completely misses this point, and focuses on the "nihilistic path of despair." It's clear that the reviewer was too attached to Joel and the Joel/Ellie relationship to view the sequel impartially.  Not surprising. I've seen so many people who had the same reaction, who completely disengaged with the game emotionally. It was pretty clear that some of those people never really valued Ellie at all, they just loved the power fantasy of 'grumpy old man destroys everything in his path,' and they wanted the sequel to be more of the same. 

The longer the review goes, the more it sounds like a raging YouTuber who is deliberately picking out bits they think they can ridicule while ignoring everything else.

The game isn't telling us whether Joel was right or wrong, whether Abby was right or wrong or whether Ellie was right or wrong. It's telling us that our actions have consequences, and we can't just wreak havoc and sow violence without it coming back to hurt us and the people we love. We don't get to have another power fantasy where we kill everyone in our path and celebrate at the end. Hell, if people were celebrating at the end of the first game, they didn't really get the point of that either.

[cambridgeguy]

I hope whomever they cast as Abby is prepared for the vitriol she's going to get.

[Peace 47]

13 hours ago, Danny Franks said:

That Forbes review completely misses this point, and focuses on the "nihilistic path of despair." It's clear that the reviewer was too attached to Joel and the Joel/Ellie relationship to view the sequel impartially. 

I could probably argue that a valid point (although I agree it was not “the” point the creators intended) to take from the first game/ first season (up until Joel’s final lie) is the beauty of a relationship based on salvation and hope in an otherwise very ugly world. I get your point about actions having consequences, but I think that is part of what the Forbes article was saying:  the doctor’s actions had consequences so he suffered, so Joel must eventually suffer consequences from that, so Abby and Ellie must suffer consequences from Joel’s actions:  it’s a depressing cycle that you have to watch loop until Ellie sort of breaks it/ gives it up at the end (unless Abby or someone on her behalf later comes for Ellie), with literally nothing to show for it other than the lesson (not even the guitar she shared with Joel).  It is nihilistic, but it is the tragedy that the game creators wanted to tell, so I can’t fault them for implementing their vision.

In light of the finale, I thought that the show’s most brilliant point of transformation of source material (and I know that is saying a lot in light of Bill and Frank), was explaining Joel’s scar that they discussed earlier this season.  I loved Joel sharing with Ellie that he tried to kill himself and openly admitting that it wasn’t the healing power of time that saved him. I was wondering why Joel in the game and Joel in the show bothered to go on at all after Sarah died, but I wasn’t looking for the show to take that on.  I assumed that he went on in a semi-autopilot mode to look out for Tommy.  To hear him say that there was a point where he didn’t actually go on, to share that in light of what he sensed Ellie was feeling, and to tell her in that way that he he loved her was absolutely beautiful.  He didn’t need to explain the flinch:  it might have been for Tommy; it might have been instinct.  And Ellie’s response:  my heart.

I didn’t respond as well to all the extra talk about Sarah at the end.  It came off in flashes as Joel using Ellie as a Sarah replacement (Ellie’s unsure facial expression about the comparisons, Joel going on about direct comparisons between them.)  The more muted dialogue in the game where Joel just mentions that he used to do something with Sarah that he was now doing with Ellie and noting that he thought they would like each other was perfect the way that it was.

[mledawn]

1 hour ago, Peace 47 said:

I didn’t respond as well to all the extra talk about Sarah at the end.  It came off in flashes as Joel using Ellie as a Sarah replacement (Ellie’s unsure facial expression about the comparisons, Joel going on about direct comparisons between them.)  The more muted dialogue in the game where Joel just mentions that he used to do something with Sarah that he was now doing with Ellie and noting that he thought they would like each other was perfect the way that it was.

This bothered me as well. Joel’s mannerisms and animated speech were off-putting in that sense. It came on so strong and I didn’t like that change.

 I am one of the (many) people who was very attached to Joel and the Joel/Ellie relationship and am wary of how S2 will go. I kept on with the game when it came out but I was very upset. I found the ending frustrating also, but still thought it was well done overall. Playing as Abby was a twist, too.

[cambridgeguy]

1 hour ago, mledawn said:

I am one of the (many) people who was very attached to Joel and the Joel/Ellie relationship and am wary of how S2 will go. I kept on with the game when it came out but I was very upset. I found the ending frustrating also, but still thought it was well done overall. Playing as Abby was a twist, too.

This is why I wonder how season 2 will go.  Playing a video game with the player character being someone you loathe is one thing - it's easier to just forget it and move on since ultimately you're shooting your way through the infected and even worse human beings.  Plus the money for the game has already been spent (although that doesn't stop people from burning jerseys and shoes when they get pissed at an athlete).  Watching a TV show humanize a character you hate is very different, and it's easier to just change the channel.

[CooperTV]

1 hour ago, cambridgeguy said:

Watching a TV show humanize a character you hate is very different, and it's easier to just change the channel.

Yeah, I'm not convinced I personally even want to get invested in that particular storyline.

[Hanahope]

i agree that it doesn't look like S2 is something i'm all that interested in watching, at least if it follows the game plot.  we'll see how i feel in 2 years.

[Peace 47]

I don’t think that I personally could handle S2 for the depictions of the horrific violence to all of the key characters (no matter whose side the characters are on).  I’m ultra-sensitive to that stuff.

What I do want to see is Ellie’s museum birthday visit.  It’s so beautiful and poignant.  I can’t imagine being able to see another take on it in a different medium.

[Danny Franks]

6 hours ago, Peace 47 said:

I could probably argue that a valid point (although I agree it was not “the” point the creators intended) to take from the first game/ first season (up until Joel’s final lie) is the beauty of a relationship based on salvation and hope in an otherwise very ugly world. I get your point about actions having consequences, but I think that is part of what the Forbes article was saying:  the doctor’s actions had consequences so he suffered, so Joel must eventually suffer consequences from that, so Abby and Ellie must suffer consequences from Joel’s actions:  it’s a depressing cycle that you have to watch loop until Ellie sort of breaks it/ gives it up at the end (unless Abby or someone on her behalf later comes for Ellie), with literally nothing to show for it other than the lesson (not even the guitar she shared with Joel).  It is nihilistic, but it is the tragedy that the game creators wanted to tell, so I can’t fault them for implementing their vision.

I agree that their relationship is beautiful, but even by the end of the first game there's a shadow over it - Joel has found family in Ellie, but he had to kill and lie and destroy humanity's hope of salvation to do it. Ellie has found family in Joel, but she's been lied to and the purpose she thought her life would have has been unwittingly stolen from her.

There was really only one direction they could go for the sequel - Ellie finds out the truth. The addition of Abby was about perpetuating the cycle of violence, but I thought the game did a great job of showing that Abby almost instantly realised she was wrong - it didn't make her feel any better. It didn't fix anything. Did she regret doing what she did? No, but she realised that revenge was empty before Ellie had the chance to. In the end, she recognised in Ellie what she'd been feeling for years.

I hated Abby. Of course I did. Until I played fifteen hours through her eyes and then it was impossible to hate her. I still didn't like her very much, but I enjoyed what the writers did - they forced the player to see the point of view of the "bad guy" in a very close-up, personal way.

6 hours ago, Peace 47 said:

I didn’t respond as well to all the extra talk about Sarah at the end.  It came off in flashes as Joel using Ellie as a Sarah replacement (Ellie’s unsure facial expression about the comparisons, Joel going on about direct comparisons between them.)  The more muted dialogue in the game where Joel just mentions that he used to do something with Sarah that he was now doing with Ellie and noting that he thought they would like each other was perfect the way that it was.

I thought it was a bit much as well. I preferred the game's approach, but the game had more time to do it - more cutscenes and incidental dialogue that let us see how much Joel had opened himself up. In the game, he's like a giddy young father, talking about how he'll teach Ellie the guitar and filling the silences that she's leaving. I think the writers on the show tried to replicate that feeling, but didn't quite nail it.

I prefer Joel being laconic and very reserved when talking about what Sarah was like. In hindsight, the gamers knew almost nothing about her and that worked well. It was Joel's secret and, while we play as Joel, the game never asks us to be Joel. We're observing the story rather than being able to make choices and determine character beats.

3 hours ago, cambridgeguy said:

This is why I wonder how season 2 will go.  Playing a video game with the player character being someone you loathe is one thing - it's easier to just forget it and move on since ultimately you're shooting your way through the infected and even worse human beings.  Plus the money for the game has already been spent (although that doesn't stop people from burning jerseys and shoes when they get pissed at an athlete).  Watching a TV show humanize a character you hate is very different, and it's easier to just change the channel.

That's why I say they'll need to restructure the second and third seasons. You can't have a whole season of Ellie hunting Abby and then a season of Abby and Lev. It doesn't work for a TV show where the third season will come a year or more after the second.

Will they try to weave the two stories together? Still a hard sell for TV watchers who won't have that hands-on connection to Abby that the game forces you to have. And, as you say, people might just switch off an Abby episode. Hell, some people refused to even play the game after reading spoilers (and some of those people became incredibly toxic and hateful, as a result).

Even as I came to understand and empathise with Abby, I still loved Ellie while she was doing ugly, violent things. She's the avatar for the gamer's anger, even though you can see how much it's costing her. In the game, I didn't feel bad for Abby's friends, even after seeing them from her POV. Except for Owen. I felt terrible for Ellie as I saw her going into shock after killing Nora or Mel, But I felt absolutely crushed when I saw Abby's dog, Alice, in Abby's Day One, and realised that I'd killed her as Ellie. Then you get to play goddamned fetch with her!

I don't know how they're going to execute the adaptation of the second game, but I'm glad they'll have at least twice as many episodes to do it. I think season one needed at least one more episode.

[Anela]

I skimmed a wiki on the game. Someone posted on twitter, that the second season wouldn't be exactly like the game, and I've just seen that it will be more than one season. 

[mledawn]

Pedro Pascal is also super hot right now, so I'm sure some adjustments will be made

[magdalene]

Well, I am out. I just got told that Joel gets killed by the daughter of Dr. Mengele aka the doctor who was going to murder Ellie. And that the future seasons are from her POV?  Hells no! I only started watching the show because Pedro Pascal was starring in it and I am not watching a show from the POV of his characters killer.  That bitch could be played by Mother Theresa, I'd still be wishing a nasty death on that character.

For me this show ends with season 1.

[Anela]

25 minutes ago, magdalene said:

Well, I am out. I just got told that Joel gets killed by the daughter of Dr. Mengele aka the doctor who was going to murder Ellie. And that the future seasons are from her POV?  Hells no! I only started watching the show because Pedro Pascal was starring in it and I am not watching a show from the POV of his characters killer.  That bitch could be played by Mother Theresa, I'd still be wishing a nasty death on that character.

For me this show ends with season 1.

I've just checked out the reddit, because it seems most people are there, and someone said he would still be in it, via flashbacks/Ellie's memories. 

As I said above, someone also said on twitter, that it would be altered from the game. I don't know how different it would be. I wonder if they would jump between this Abby, and Ellie and Joel in Wyoming. If they did kill off Joel, that might be the end of season two. 

[magdalene]

2 minutes ago, Anela said:

f they did kill off Joel, that might be the end of season two. 

According to my nephew who is a gamer and has played both games Joel death sets off the narrative for the second game. It doesn't really matter how exactly they do it knowing all this kind of ruins the whole thing for me. I don't want to watch Joel's killer or Ellie without Joel.

It's good I am finding this out now and not after the second season starts.

[Anela]

2 minutes ago, magdalene said:

According to my nephew who is a gamer and has played both games Joel death sets off the narrative for the second game. It doesn't really matter how exactly they do it knowing all this kind of ruins the whole thing for me. I don't want to watch Joel's killer or Ellie without Joel.

It's good I am finding this out now and not after the second season starts.

I can understand that. I was surprised when I read the wiki about the second game. 

[opus]

15 hours ago, cambridgeguy said:

I hope whomever they cast as Abby is prepared for the vitriol she's going to get.

The voice actress in the game for Abby was one of the nurses in the finale, so the seeds have been planted if they want to use her in season two.

[opus]

Here’s the side by side comparison for episode 9

 

[mcree]

2 hours ago, magdalene said:

I just got told that Joel

Sad it's been ruined for you. Part of the value of experiencing Part 2 is to have the story unfold the way it is told. It's specifically structured in an interesting and sometimes exasperating way. You really have to play the game twice.

How will they adapt that for TV? And POV matters a lot more in the game than it would on the show.

More importantly, Joel is in Part 2 a fair amount. In the game, he's in the first scene, all the way to the penultimate. His relationship with Ellie is the overarching question over the entire game. Given the show's penchant for removing "all the killing" -- the hours and hours where you kill dozens and dozens -- his ratio might even go up in the show

[Danny Franks]

14 hours ago, magdalene said:

Well, I am out. I just got told that Joel gets killed by the daughter of Dr. Mengele aka the doctor who was going to murder Ellie. And that the future seasons are from her POV?  Hells no! I only started watching the show because Pedro Pascal was starring in it and I am not watching a show from the POV of his characters killer.  That bitch could be played by Mother Theresa, I'd still be wishing a nasty death on that character.

For me this show ends with season 1.

Wait... where have I heard this before? Oh yeah, loads of people when they read spoilers for the Part 2 game. There's a whole subreddit set up purely to hate the narrative decisions made in the second game.

It's up to you, of course, but the story in Part 2 is incredibly powerful, and a continuation of Ellie's journey in light of what Joel did at the end of the first game/season story. I guess people who only watch for Pedro Pascal will be unhappy, like those who only cared about Joel when they played the game will be unhappy. 

Managing to make viewers like Abby will be a huge task, more difficult than it was in the game because of the difference in mediums. But I appreciated that the scene of Joel saving Ellie was shot as survivors at the hospital will tell it - 'He was merciless, he slaughtered everyone including people who were surrendering. He shot the doctor in the face without even looking at him.'

To everyone there that day, and everyone who hears the story, Joel was a fucking monster. A murderous psychopath. The second game forces people to come to terms with that. The hero of Ellie's story (though that's arguable, given his lie at the end) is the demon of Abby's.

[magdalene]

That doctor, who is a modern day Mengele, deserved to die for intending to cold-bloodedly murder a young girl, and so did everyone involved in it.

Shrugs. People can feel or think what they want. And so can I.

This is not the first show I walked away from when the reason for watching it went away. And they are making it easy because the show will be on hiatus for such a long time.

I feel sucker punched right now but that will fade. I could have accepted Joel's death and continued to watch for Ellie because I always expected Joel to die somehow just from the set-up - the father figure very often dies in stories.  But to be forced and manipulated to follow and root for his killer? I detest that and I won't.

[Dac22]

3 hours ago, Danny Franks said:

To everyone there that day, and everyone who hears the story, Joel was a fucking monster. A murderous psychopath. The second game forces people to come to terms with that. The hero of Ellie's story (though that's arguable, given his lie at the end) is the demon of Abby's.

Honestly, that's part of why I am one of the few that prefer the second game. Both are fantastic, of course, but the dueling perspectives and the complexity of the dynamics gives the second one the edge for me.

Though I get that's generally an unpopular view as a result of people's attachment to Joel, Ellie, and and their relationship. That's not a criticism, as the series really pushes you in that direction, but it also pushes you to acknowledge their flaws and actions as well. 

The former simply makes the latter more difficult and the new characters don't have that protection. That naturally, and understandably, leads to the known characters actions/flaws getting mostly excused and the narrative twisted in their favor. 

But I personally never had an issue with seeing things from Abby's perspective. Yes, some of her actions were horrific, and I didn't necessarily root for her, but I get her side of things the same way I did with Joel/Ellie's less than heroic moments. The rest of Abby's crew was pretty meh as they really weren't fleshed out aside from Owen, who I think gets a bad rap from a portion of the fandom, but I enjoyed seeing the other side's perspective on things.

The show is certainly going to have a difficult time juggling things going forward. Unlike the game, I think we might get a little more focus on Abby and her group so people could get to know them before things come to a head, but even that would alienate a lot of viewers who only want to see Joel and Ellie. 

[Danny Franks]

3 hours ago, magdalene said:

That doctor, who is a modern day Mengele, deserved to die for intending to cold-bloodedly murder a young girl, and so did everyone involved in it.

Shrugs. People can feel or think what they want. And so can I.

This is not the first show I walked away from when the reason for watching it went away. And they are making it easy because the show will be on hiatus for such a long time.

I feel sucker punched right now but that will fade. I could have accepted Joel's death and continued to watch for Ellie because I always expected Joel to die somehow just from the set-up - the father figure very often dies in stories.  But to be forced and manipulated to follow and root for his killer? I detest that and I won't.

It works the other way around as well - Joel, who is a mass murderer, deserves to die for cold-bloodedly slaughtering a dozen people, including the doctor who was going to save humanity, who also happened to be a father. 

Is Abby right? No more or less right than Joel was to do what he did, or than Ellie is to do what she does in the second game. And they all pay for it.

It's uncomfortable for people to accept perspectives that undermine their view of a character, but the game was determined to make people uncomfortable. From what Neil Druckmann has said about the TV adaptation of it, he fully plans to do the same again. 

Edited March 14, 2023 by Danny Franks

[magdalene]

6 hours ago, Danny Franks said:

To everyone there that day, and everyone who hears the story, Joel was a fucking monster. A murderous psychopath. The second game forces people to come to terms with that. The hero of Ellie's story (though that's arguable, given his lie at the end) is the demon of Abby's.

Smiles. It won't force me or manipulate me any further. As I am not going to be watching any further seasons or ever going to play that second game. None of your preaching can change that.

[Danny Franks]

3 minutes ago, magdalene said:

Smiles. It won't force me or manipulate me any further. As I am not going to be watching any further seasons or ever going to play that second game. None of your preaching can change that.

Remarkably similar to the hateful subreddit. You might want to take it less personally, considering you aren't even going to watch it.

[magdalene]

2 minutes ago, magdalene said:

1 minute ago, Danny Franks said:

Remarkably similar to the hateful subreddit. You might want to take it less personally, considering you aren't even going to watch it.

 

Calling someone "hateful" for having a different  opinion from yours is just a tad  ....."hateful".  Have a nice day.

[Anela]

So, people made their own reddit page, to talk about how much they hate it, so it wouldn't be clogging up the main page. That doesn't sound bad to me. Especially if the creator wanted people to be uncomfortable. If he wanted them to be upset. 

I don't know if I'll watch, it depends on how I feel when it actually shows up on service. If I still have it, since HBO has been messing around with their shows, after a merge with another company. I remember sitting outside, listening to someone play the game on twitch, in 2020 (part two), and then hearing about how many people hated it. They have every right to their feelings. 

I skimmed the wiki, and saw that Abby said she would give her life to save humanity, but she was safe in that she would never have to really make that choice. She wasn't the little girl, helpless on the table, about to be killed for a possible cure. I don't think her father would have been willing to sacrifice his daughter, either. 

 

Also, I'm not convinced that Marlene hadn't realized that her mother didn't cut the cord before she was bitten. She wasn't some miracle child, who just appeared to save the world. She was born to a woman who was just bitten, who would lie to protect her newborn. To give her a chance to live. I doubt she would have told Marlene, "sure, sacrifice my baby." 

[magdalene]

7 minutes ago, Anela said:

So, people made their own reddit page, to talk about how much they hate it, so it wouldn't be clogging up the main page. That doesn't sound bad to me. Especially if the creator wanted people to be uncomfortable. If he wanted them to be upset. 

Nods. And what is so wrong about having a place to vent your negative feelings? I felt sucker punched and blindsided when I learned about Joel's fate. Unlike a lot of people familiar with the games I haven't had 10 years or however long it's been to get used to Joel's death and the way it comes about. Why should I be expected to  just embrace his killer?  Why shouldn't I be able to digest and get my feelings out?

[mcree]

2 hours ago, magdalene said:

And what is so wrong about having a place to vent your negative feelings? I felt sucker punched and blindsided when I learned about Joel's fate.

That is entirely what the game expects and wants you to feel. And given your agency in the game, fuel your desire for revenge.

 

2 hours ago, Anela said:

They have every right to their feelings. 

Then when you act upon those feelings with extreme but "justifiable" violence, you get some measure of "justice". But also even more loss and misery. This need to make things right eventually compels violence against your better judgement. To make it more interesting, you might start to empathize with the "villain", or even change your mind about them entirely.

Will they be able to replicate (or improve upon) this in the show? I have no idea.

Sadly, some portion of the audience does not get this, and/or does not want this. And if it has been spoiled, you never get the true experience.

Edited March 15, 2023 by mcree
not get, not want

[Anela]

6 minutes ago, mcree said:

That is entirely what the game expects and wants you to feel. And given your agency in the game, fuel your desire for revenge.

 

Then when you act upon those feelings with extreme but "justifiable" violence, you get some measure of "justice". But also even more loss and misery. This need to make things right eventually compels violence against your better judgement. To make it more interesting, you might start to empathize with the "villain", or even change your mind about them entirely.

Will they be able to replicate (or improve upon) this in the show? I have no idea.

Sadly, some portion of the audience does get this, and/or does not want this. And if it has been spoiled, you never get the true experience.

I was just talking about the people on the reddit site. I was into the show to a point, but I've had yet another loss in my real life, so I don't feel like getting into it much more than I have. 

[Danny Franks]

10 hours ago, Anela said:

So, people made their own reddit page, to talk about how much they hate it, so it wouldn't be clogging up the main page. That doesn't sound bad to me. Especially if the creator wanted people to be uncomfortable. If he wanted them to be upset. 

They didn't create so much as co-opt an existing sub. Then proceed to be sexist, misogynist, homophobic and transphobic (hey, throw a bit of antisemitism in there too, as Neil Druckmann is Jewish). Then they started to send death threats to Neil Druckmann, Laura Bailey (who voiced Abby) and others involved in the game, on both the production and acting side. Then they started to send death threats to YouTubers who covered the game positively, and lie about YouTubers supposedly threatening them.

These were people who refused to even play the game, yet proclaimed their hatred for everything it did, based on the spoilers they read, and acted on that hate in incredibly toxic, damaging ways. That's why they're hateful.

 

Edited March 15, 2023 by Danny Franks

[bethy]

Out of curiosity, is the cure question settled in the second game? I skimmed through the wiki but I don’t remember seeing it mentioned. Thanks!

[cambridgeguy]

40 minutes ago, bethy said:

Out of curiosity, is the cure question settled in the second game? I skimmed through the wiki but I don’t remember seeing it mentioned. Thanks!

The characters all act as if the procedure would have worked, and that the doctor was the one and only person able to develop the cure, so it really was Joel dooming humanity because he couldn't bear to lose Ellie.  No one ever points out the many, many reasons why the whole plan was idiotic.

[Danny Franks]

37 minutes ago, bethy said:

Out of curiosity, is the cure question settled in the second game? I skimmed through the wiki but I don’t remember seeing it mentioned. Thanks!

So because this will be a bit detailed on Part 2, I'll put it in spoilers:

Spoiler

The cure is considered dead. No one is trying to find it any more. It died with Marlene and the doctor. The Fireflies are finished and those who survived Joel's assault on the hospital have joined another group that's a more militarised version of Kathleen's rebels.

The cure is an issue for Ellie, and she has a few moments where she sees the cost of not having a cure - graffiti calling the Fireflies liars, two kids who ran away and got bitten, a close call she and Joel have in an abandoned hotel full of Infected. She believes that she could have given her life to save humanity.

There's no progress on the cure, but the end of the game reveals there are still Fireflies on Catalina Island, so they may still have plans to find a cure.

 

[bethy]

Thanks, y’all!

[Anela]

15 hours ago, Danny Franks said:

They didn't create so much as co-opt an existing sub. Then proceed to be sexist, misogynist, homophobic and transphobic (hey, throw a bit of antisemitism in there too, as Neil Druckmann is Jewish). Then they started to send death threats to Neil Druckmann, Laura Bailey (who voiced Abby) and others involved in the game, on both the production and acting side. Then they started to send death threats to YouTubers who covered the game positively, and lie about YouTubers supposedly threatening them.

These were people who refused to even play the game, yet proclaimed their hatred for everything it did, based on the spoilers they read, and acted on that hate in incredibly toxic, damaging ways. That's why they're hateful.

 

JFC, what is it with people on the internet, and death threats?! I hear about people getting them for all sorts of reasons, from politicians, to people who post on twitter. 

[Hanahope]

The problem with "the cure" is that after 20 years, humanity is so decimated and the infected so numerous that it would be virtually impossible to eliminate the infected before they killed the remaining non-infected.  the infected don't just infect new hosts they can actually kill them by tearing them apart (i.e. KC).  so sure, you can't be infected, that is not necessarily going to save your life (and there's many other ways to die besides the infected).  and the remaining non-infected just don't have the firepower to take down the infected (if they did, they would have already done so).  and even if by some miracle the infected are eradicated, there are so few people left, that is why there are raiders and other despots who are just different monsters.  

so its a ridiculous premise that Ellie, one doctor, and a handful of fireflies, could suddenly "save the world."  

[mrspidey]

On 3/15/2023 at 12:58 AM, magdalene said:

Nods. And what is so wrong about having a place to vent your negative feelings? I felt sucker punched and blindsided when I learned about Joel's fate. Unlike a lot of people familiar with the games I haven't had 10 years or however long it's been to get used to Joel's death and the way it comes about. Why should I be expected to  just embrace his killer?  Why shouldn't I be able to digest and get my feelings out?

It's an option you have but you don't have to take it. I didn't. I don't care for Abby but i do understand her motives.

Do i think  Part II has an amazing story despite this? Yes, absolutely.

Edited March 17, 2023 by mrspidey

[magdalene]

3 hours ago, mrspidey said:

It's an option you have but you don't have to take it. I didn't. I don't care for Abby but i do understand her motives.

Do i think  Part II has an amazing story despite this? Yes, absolutely.

So you find out something you really don't like and you cannot express that here because it offends people who love the second game? That's sad because this is the place I frequent to post my thoughts and feelings about shows I watch.

As for that infamous reddit thread, I am not a reddit user and I hardly ever read anything there, I have never seen that thread. So I have no idea whether it's really offensive or people are just hating it because it hates on something they love.

[KieroF]

I think, for me, the things that made the game so great (like the storyline) very much translated over and made the TV show really great too! :D

[PurpleTentacle]

On 3/2/2023 at 9:44 PM, Danny Franks said:

I think Naughty Dog are only too aware that some sections of the game's fanbase would be vocally unhappy about having to play the Left Behind DLC within the main game. Mainly because it's about Ellie and not Joel, but partly because of the "woke" content that those fragile snowflakes can't handle.

I mean first of all, you could make it an option. Second of all, fuck these people.

On 3/6/2023 at 8:33 PM, Dobian said:

True, but these are a tiny minority of extremists and not representative of the fan base, just like there were extremists on the other side sending death threats to J.K. Rowling on the release of Hogwarts Legacy.  Publishers like Naughty dog and Warner Brothers (Hogwarts) are wise when they ignore the toxic social media crowd instead of pander to them.

While death threats are never okay, it's pretty cringe to compare creators putting a few lgbt characters into their game to a billionair who spends most of her free time fighting against actual living trans people and their rights.

On 3/7/2023 at 5:36 AM, Dev F said:

That Forbes review's criticisms of the second game were clearly made in good faith—unlike, say, the incessant mouth-foaming drivel on what is known disdainfully in my circles of the internet as "the other subreddit." But the entire Forbes critique springs from a presumption about TLOU1 that I've never agreed with, even before there was a TLOU2 for it to color. So I've never really thought anything in the second game warranted major retooling.

Agreed. It seems to presuppose and hinge on "the fact" that TLOU1 ending was actually good, which it most certainly was not.

On 3/10/2023 at 10:43 PM, Cosmo Weems said:

The last thing I need to see in an action/adventure movie is a gay love story.

Very telling that you specifically called it "a gay love story". Let's see what Nick Offerman has to say about that.

On 3/14/2023 at 12:40 AM, magdalene said:

Well, I am out. I just got told that Joel gets killed by the daughter of Dr. Mengele aka the doctor who was going to murder Ellie.

Aka the doctor who had a snowball's chance in hell of finding an actual cure, which is why Joel's actions were the only correct ones to take, both for saving his surrogate daughter and for keeping humanity's hope for a cure alive.

On 3/14/2023 at 3:42 PM, Danny Franks said:

To everyone there that day, and everyone who hears the story, Joel was a fucking monster. A murderous psychopath. The second game forces people to come to terms with that. The hero of Ellie's story (though that's arguable, given his lie at the end) is the demon of Abby's.

Well maybe they shouldn't have tried to murder somebody who also happens to be the only hope for a cure, for no good reason.

There are always people who deluded themselves into thinking that other people are the monsters, while in fact they themselves are the monsters.  That's certainly real. But it doesn't mean that I'm going to sympathise with them.

On 3/14/2023 at 8:10 PM, Danny Franks said:

It works the other way around as well - Joel, who is a mass murderer, deserves to die for cold-bloodedly slaughtering a dozen people, including the doctor who was going to save humanity, who also happened to be a father. 

But he wasn't going to save humanity. That's (part of) the point.

Also it's not murder if you are defending somebody's life and the killing of agressors is the only way to do so. Pretty much every country has exceptions for this case in their criminal statutes.

From what we know about Joel he is a murderer and maybe he deserved death. But he didn't deserve death for his actions in the hospital. He did the right thing.

On 3/14/2023 at 8:10 PM, Danny Franks said:

It's uncomfortable for people to accept perspectives that undermine their view of a character, but the game was determined to make people uncomfortable. From what Neil Druckmann has said about the TV adaptation of it, he fully plans to do the same again. 

What is uncomfortable for me is that so many people just accept this shitty writing. The writers even had a chance to fix it with the show and keep the overall story the same, even make it true to their original attempt, where Joel's actions are either morally ambiguous or even completely in the wrong. But they didn't. Instead they doubled down on their crappy writing.

On 3/16/2023 at 5:17 PM, Hanahope said:

The problem with "the cure" is that after 20 years, humanity is so decimated and the infected so numerous that it would be virtually impossible to eliminate the infected before they killed the remaining non-infected.  the infected don't just infect new hosts they can actually kill them by tearing them apart (i.e. KC).  so sure, you can't be infected, that is not necessarily going to save your life (and there's many other ways to die besides the infected).  and the remaining non-infected just don't have the firepower to take down the infected (if they did, they would have already done so).  and even if by some miracle the infected are eradicated, there are so few people left, that is why there are raiders and other despots who are just different monsters.  

so its a ridiculous premise that Ellie, one doctor, and a handful of fireflies, could suddenly "save the world."  

That's one problem, sure. At least in the game you have spores as big threat, which a cure would solve. You don't have those in the show, so a cure seems mostly superfluous.

The other problem is that this "doctor" was going to kill his only test subject the day they met. Any real scientist, even one without morals or concience would see that as an absolute last resort and would only even consider it after years of testing. He really was like Dr. Mengele, doing "science" on helpless people, without any actual science being done (everything Mengele did was famously useless, which is good for ethical questions now, since we don't have to consider if we should use his data or not, but in some ways makes it even more horrific).

My theory is that the dude was a janitor before the world ended and then conned himself into a cushy position with the fireflies, pretending to be a doctor.

Edited March 11 by PurpleTentacle

[Dobian]

On 3/11/2024 at 3:04 AM, PurpleTentacle said:

While death threats are never okay, it's pretty cringe to compare creators putting a few lgbt characters into their game to a billionair who spends most of her free time fighting against actual living trans people and their rights.

Wow, I wrote that a whole year ago.  But no, nothing cringe.  You can agree or disagree with Rowling, but she isn't fighting against people's rights, only stating her opinion.  Most trans activists can't handle it when people don't agree with their whole agenda.  I do agree she spends too much time on that topic when she could be doing something more constructive, though.

[mledawn]

 

11 hours ago, Dobian said:

Wow, I wrote that a whole year ago.  But no, nothing cringe.  You can agree or disagree with Rowling, but she isn't fighting against people's rights, only stating her opinion.  Most trans activists can't handle it when people don't agree with their whole agenda.  I do agree she spends too much time on that topic when she could be doing something more constructive, though.

Defending JKR the day after she posted some Holocaust denialism is certainly a take. She is absolutely fighting/campaigning against trans rights, and based on this post I would wager you don't know a lot of "trans activists" to claim you know how most of them feel.