Support NeoGAF

[psorcerer]

1. Not really, not anything that explains what you mean by coincidence or in what way her "chances" are improved, whatever that even means.

2. "righting" it would mean killing his killer, if that's just then what Abby did was also just. That said the emotional reasonings for it are made clear in the game, this isn't about inequality of justice for Ellie, this is revenge.

3. A surgeon who was going to operate on Ellie's brain... a brain surgeon...

4. No remorse is proven bs by the game not to mention the "always succeeds" idea.

5. Is it ad hominem to try and figure out if you know what a coincidence is?

6. Right, because grandstanding means... what to you?

7. Okay, so it's not misfortune for her to lose everyone she cares about?

8. How does she have nothing to lose? She loses everyone but Lev, someone she only just got to know. She loses more people she cares about than Ellie does. Improves her chances AT WHAT. The way you view the world is apparently ridiculously narrow and not really the sort of view of events I need to keep engaging with. You don't explain your weird ideas at all involving things like winning or "improving chances" like there's no breaching your thought process because you make no attempt to explain it and pretending it's a normal thought process is a bridge too far for me, if you're willing to actually expand on what your ideas even mean I might consider engaging with that.

1. Too bad.

2. Ellie did not kill her in the end. Justice means that Ellie need to talk to her not in a helpless position. And maybe kill her.

3. They were going to kill her, not operate. You don;t need a "brain surgeon" to extract the "specimen".

4. Examples, please.

5. Coincidence is a turn of events that does not directly stems from the actions of the participants.

6. I'm explaining it in the same sentence. "But author could not grandstand then: I made you abandon Ellie! "

7. That's a direct consequence of her actions. Law Abiding Citizen again.

8. It doesn't happen because of Abbie's actions, it happens because of Ellie, you cannot have the cake and eat it. If it's Ellie who kills her friends, then Abbie has no agency there.
Nowhere in the game there is a flashback of Abbie killing Joel and making a connection to how her friends are killed. There is no hint that she has any remorse. Not even a hint.
About her chances, again, I've already said that. But you chose not to listen. Abbie would die on the pillar.

 

[Explosive Zombie]

1. Too bad.

2. Ellie did not kill her in the end. Justice means that Ellie need to talk to her not in a helpless position. And maybe kill her.

3. They were going to kill her, not operate. You don;t need a "brain surgeon" to extract the "specimen".

4. Examples, please.

5. Coincidence is a turn of events that does not directly stems from the actions of the participants.

6. I'm explaining it in the same sentence. "But author could not grandstand then: I made you abandon Ellie! "

7. That's a direct consequence of her actions. Law Abiding Citizen again.

8. It doesn't happen because of Abbie's actions, it happens because of Ellie, you cannot have the cake and eat it. If it's Ellie who kills her friends, then Abbie has no agency there.
Nowhere in the game there is a flashback of Abbie killing Joel and making a connection to how her friends are killed. There is no hint that she has any remorse. Not even a hint.
About her chances, again, I've already said that. But you chose not to listen. Abbie would die on the pillar.

1. lol

2. weird view of justice

3. The operation was going to kill her, the idea that anyone could perform it is nuts.

4. oh right because you've provided so many "examples" lol

5. coincidence
[kōˈinsədəns]

NOUN

1. a remarkable concurrence of events or circumstances without apparent causal connection.

6. What does made you abandon Ellie even mean?

7. Why are you using a bad movie to prop up your ideas? Also if what happens to her is a consequence of her actions and somehow not misfortune how can the same not be said of Ellie?

8. Ah yes, the famous phrase you cannot have the cake and eat it. Right... Abby should have killed her own friends, true agency. What? There isn't? Would Abby have ever been caught in that situation without Ellie doing the things she did, though? You have a fragile grasp on cause and effect. Abby's remorse is painted clearly, she even contemplates if she did the right thing going after Joel, nevermind letting Ellie go more than once.

 

[psorcerer]

1. lol

2. weird view of justice

3. The operation was going to kill her, the idea that anyone could perform it is nuts.

4. oh right because you've provided so many "examples" lol

5. coincidence
[kōˈinsədəns]

NOUN

1. a remarkable concurrence of events or circumstances without apparent causal connection.

6. What does made you abandon Ellie even mean?

7. Why are you using a bad movie to prop up your ideas? Also if what happens to her is a consequence of her actions and somehow not misfortune how can the same not be said of Ellie?

8. Ah yes, the famous phrase you cannot have the cake and eat it. Right... Abby should have killed her own friends, true agency. What? There isn't? Would Abby have ever been caught in that situation without Ellie doing the things she did, though? You have a fragile grasp on cause and effect. Abby's remorse is painted clearly, she even contemplates if she did the right thing going after Joel, nevermind letting Ellie go more than once.

2. It's the only view. Any society, even "lawless" ones operate on ethic principles. A society where anybody can kill anybody else on a whim is not working and never worked in human history. You need some cause and you need to state that cause.
Otherwise your actions can be seen as mayhem. And people who cause mayhem are killed. No matter what. Because mayhem cannot be tolerated at all.
That's why WLF are bad guys, they never ask, they shoot first. Every other faction should destroy WLF. It's not negotiable. There's no difference between WLF and zombies, both just attack on sight.
And the funny thing: authors don't understand that. They think that WLF are pretty fine, until Isaac tries to wipe Seraphites.

3. Why it's nuts? If it's going to kill her it means everybody can cut it out. Every surgeon knows about anatomy and where brain parts are.

4. Yup. I did.

5. It's coincidence in books/scripts. Books are written by somebody and all "coincidences" there are pre-determined. I.e. glossary definition is irrelevant.

6. Author grandstands that he can make you love Abbie and feel for her even after she kills Joel and humiliates Ellie.
Author can go and fuck himself. That's what I say. And if you don't see how author intentionally does that, you just do not understand the script enough. Sorry.

7. Total misfortune is bad writing, like Korean doramas that use "terminal illness" and other cheapest of the cheap tropes.
Author needs to hide his intentions to make sure a well equipped audience cannot see through the smoke and mirrors.
You cannot say that Ellie's misfortune that Abbie's friends stupidly die is a misfortune for Abbie too.
Because you're trying to have Abbie look better at the expense of Ellie's grief.

8. You miss the main point: Abbie is painted by the author better than she is while she's actually doing nothing for that.
The only thing that she does is to save Seraphites, but then another coincidence: it turns out that WLF are indeed power hungry maniacs and Seraphites are really not that bad and even were at peace with other factions until WLF started killing them.

 

[Explosive Zombie]

2. It's the only view. Any society, even "lawless" ones operate on ethic principles. A society where anybody can kill anybody else on a whim is not working and never worked in human history. You need some cause and you need to state that cause.
Otherwise your actions can be seen as mayhem. And people who cause mayhem are killed. No matter what. Because mayhem cannot be tolerated at all.
That's why WLF are bad guys, they never ask, they shoot first. Every other faction should destroy WLF. It's not negotiable. There's no difference between WLF and zombies, both just attack on sight.
And the funny thing: authors don't understand that. They think that WLF are pretty fine, until Isaac tries to wipe Seraphites.

3. Why it's nuts? If it's going to kill her it means everybody can cut it out. Every surgeon knows about anatomy and where brain parts are.

4. Yup. I did.

5. It's coincidence in books/scripts. Books are written by somebody and all "coincidences" there are pre-determined. I.e. glossary definition is irrelevant.

6. Author grandstands that he can make you love Abbie and feel for her even after she kills Joel and humiliates Ellie.
Author can go and fuck himself. That's what I say. And if you don't see how author intentionally does that, you just do not understand the script enough. Sorry.

7. Total misfortune is bad writing, like Korean doramas that use "terminal illness" and other cheapest of the cheap tropes.
Author needs to hide his intentions to make sure a well equipped audience cannot see through the smoke and mirrors.
You cannot say that Ellie's misfortune that Abbie's friends stupidly die is a misfortune for Abbie too.
Because you're trying to have Abbie look better at the expense of Ellie's grief.

8. You miss the main point: Abbie is painted by the author better than she is while she's actually doing nothing for that.
The only thing that she does is to save Seraphites, but then another coincidence: it turns out that WLF are indeed power hungry maniacs and Seraphites are really not that bad and even were at peace with other factions until WLF started killing them.

2. Ellie is getting revenge, she is not operating on ethical principles of society.

3. This is the worst argument I've literally ever seen.

4. give me a break, dude

5. are you literally arguing the definition of coincidence doesn't matter?

6. Why is that grandstanding? It's an anti-revenge tale, adding nuance to everyone involved helps sell that point, if he's grandstanding it's on the idea of revenge is bad, didn't realize you had committed so much cold-blooded revenge in your life to be so upset.

7. Tell that to Shakespeare, Aristotle... like WTF lol, wait Abby's friends dying is MORE of a misfortune for ELLIE, the person KILLING them, than Abby? WTF dude, how disconnected from any sort of reality are you?

8. "better than she is" you talk like she's a real person and the game is simply a portayal of that person or something like wtf are you on about, also you're calling things coincidences again that aren't coincidences.

 

[Kerotan]

Can't wait to complete it so I can watch all this sort of stuff. 23 hours in no end in sight. Serious bang for my buck this has been.

 

[Sub_Level]

Can't wait to complete it so I can watch all this sort of stuff. 23 hours in no end in sight. Serious bang for my buck this has been.

Its without question the biggest game Naughty Dog has done. There is very little repetition.

 

[Kerotan]

Its without question the biggest game Naughty Dog has done. There is very little repetition.

If this game was 10 hours shorter it would still be an acceptable length. Incredible.

 

[psorcerer]

2. Ellie is getting revenge, she is not operating on ethical principles of society.

3. This is the worst argument I've literally ever seen.

4. give me a break, dude

5. are you literally arguing the definition of coincidence doesn't matter?

6. Why is that grandstanding? It's an anti-revenge tale, adding nuance to everyone involved helps sell that point, if he's grandstanding it's on the idea of revenge is bad, didn't realize you had committed so much cold-blooded revenge in your life to be so upset.

7. Tell that to Shakespeare, Aristotle... like WTF lol, wait Abby's friends dying is MORE of a misfortune for ELLIE, the person KILLING them, than Abby? WTF dude, how disconnected from any sort of reality are you?

8. "better than she is" you talk like she's a real person and the game is simply a portayal of that person or something like wtf are you on about, also you're calling things coincidences again that aren't coincidences.

2. That's your interpretation. I have mine.

3. lol

5. I'm not sure what you trying to tell me actually.
I'm presenting my point of view on the events in the game. You can either argue on facts of what author makes their characters do or just stop dragging it.

6. Because the author first shows us the scene of Joel murder, then shows how Abbie still wins over Ellie despite all her efforts and then tries to make Abbie likable.
The whole point of which is to grandstand: I'm such a great writer that you will love my Abbie even after all of that.

7. The cake. If it's a misfortune for Abbie, it's not a misfortune for Ellie. And vice versa. And your arguments from authority are weak...

8. Irrelevant. Not an argument.

 

[Keihart]

I suppose you're genuine so let's do it.
There's a thing called "arbitrarity and tyranny" of the writer.
It means that the writer is a sole God in his books, he can do anything arbitrary to the characters and can rationalize it in any way.
He can put the characters in situations where their only choice is what author wants them to do.
Arbitrarity is considered a not comme il faut, i.e. it's a bad writing. Although it's true - the author is a God.
If author plays God too much the audience feels as if he is condescending, speaking from a high horse.
So, good writers play a game: they make sure that audience can never suspect that author is playing God and not telling a genuine, true story.
It's like dating, you don't say on the first date: undress we gonna have sex.
You play a game, where the ultimate goal of both parties is to make a relationship that lasts. Although in reality the writer is just fucks you in the mind in the end.

In case of TLOU2 it's an immediate tyranny. As if author says to the audience: I'm almighty in my books and can inject a new character in my book and you will like it, because you're my bitch!
But how do I know that it's a God's play?
Simple: too much coincidence.
Abbie meets Joel and Tommy in a way that they cannot refuse to be taken.
Ellie kills each and every of "Abbie's friends" while not really wanting that.
Ellie conveniently leaves the map in the Aquarium.
Abbie father is the only real surgeon alive, the only one that can make a vaccine.
Etc. etc.
In short the odds are always, like really always on Abbie's side.
Even in the end Ellie finds her in a pretty destroyed state where killing her will not make it better.

So, it's like author is deliberately toying with the audience: you see I can write it in such a way that you cannot win, now listen to the condescending monologue on "revenge is bad" from me!
The best course of action for a smart audience is go for the "last argument", which is pretty simple: "Author, you're shit and your book is shit". That's it. Liking something is subjective.
Audience is in their right to call any book or author "pure shit". An nobody can blame them.

TL;DR when author is going for the direct "I'm going to gang-bang your mind", the audience can say: "your dick is too small for that, get lost".

This doesn't hold up, Tommy and Joel help Abbie because of how their characters have been shaped until that point, we don't know much what to expect from Abby(besides that's she is being reckless) but we know that Joel and Tommy are going to help. The only coincidence is both parties being in the same shitty moment at the same time which by any measure it's as far as every day coincidences go. The whole "this it's too much coincidence" thing only works if you look at it in hindsight, which it's also being made deliberately so the spectator get's a deserved reaction. Joel's didn't deserve this( even if he did) and Joel didn't lose against Abby in a fair fight (because is already has established as this killing machine in the first game).

The only problem here it's people expecting Joel to be a super hero and searching for something to hate after Druckman clowning on social media.
Joel died like the best characters die, just like a death written by Tomino, he didn't get to choose how, he just got unlucky.

 

[psorcerer]

This doesn't hold up, Tommy and Joel help Abbie because of how their characters have been shaped until that point, we don't know much what to expect from Abby(besides that's she is being reckless) but we know that Joel and Tommy are going to help. The only coincidence is both parties being in the same shitty moment at the same time which by any measure it's as far as every day coincidences go. The whole "this it's too much coincidence" thing only works if you look at it in hindsight, which it's also being made deliberately so the spectator get's a deserved reaction. Joel's didn't deserve this( even if he did) and Joel didn't lose against Abby in a fair fight (because is already has established as this killing machine in the first game).

I have no problem with coincidence per se, because that's how scripts work.
But I do have problem with the amount of ass pull that's going on.
I have no problem with the first "Abbie and Joel suddenly meet in the most unfortunate circumstances" but then it goes on and on.
All circumstances are somehow unfortunate. And in all of them Abbie is closer to her goal and Ellie is farther.

 

[Bladed Thesis]

These list wars are getting nuts.

People copying and pasting each others lists with passive aggressive shit and whatnot.

Damn, guys. Just fuck already.

 

[Kerotan]

Massive spoilers but yeah pretty good review. He liked it very much.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

Damn, guys. Just fuck already.

Lead by example.