Alanah Pearce - 4 Journalists vs The Last of Us Part 2-spoiler talk

[CloseTalker]

So I'm about 20 minutes into the video and alanah complains about the embargo of the second half that journalists were under.

STRONG disagree there. As someone who successfully avoided all spoilers leading up to the game I am really annoyed as a consumer by this sentiment, which is shared by lots of media. I understand you can't have a full robust review with out the second half but they are all coming from it from the angle of reviewers not fans.

I'm so glad I didn't know anything. Plus what this also fails to understand is the economics and stretching out of the conversation that the media can have about tlou2. Now the embargo is over. Now you can have your feelings vented out in the open and can have more traffic to your platform for more discussion. What did you really lose with keeping the spoilers in place?

Rob zachney on triple click with Maddy says he had to write his review over after Patrick read the embargo fully. That blows and is probably super stressful. The feeling that alanah has is wide spread among games journalists and frankly I think it's fucking selfish. Maybe it's cause I'm 38 and more patience but it's annoying to see the gnashing of teeth about the embargo. If you don't like the game I respect that and will hear you out and we can have dialogue. But stop being so angry that your INITIAL reviews were hamstrung by naughty dog.

Click to shrink...

Their job is to provide as thoughtful a criticism as possible, and if the criticism of the embargo is widespread, clearly some of them felt that they couldn't do that. It's really not very complicated. I'm sure they felt like they could still talk about the game and their thoughts without spoiling major story beats, but if they don't feel like they're able to share their thoughts, especially if their more complicated thoughts are tied directly to the embargoed elements, that's an issue.

For fans like you, the reviews are largely useless anyway. You were always going to buy and play the game, the reviews only exist for you to validate if the game is as good as you'd hoped. If you only want the reviews to be as high level as possible without actually getting into the nitty gritty if the critic's thoughts, you don't really need to read the reviews in the first place, so I don't see why you'd care either way.

 

[krae_man]

lol jess messed up there.

now we know why we didnt hava a choice to kill the doctor.

Click to shrink...

The doctors daughter getting revenge and killing Joel was clearly not thought of while the first game was being written.

If Marlene was so conflicted about killing Ellie without telling her first and getting permission and only reluctantly agreed to it. The second Joel started his rampage she would have either helped or not got in the way.

 

[cantbebothered]

The doctors daughter getting revenge and killing Joel was clearly not thought of while the first game was being written.

If Marlene was so conflicted about killing Ellie without telling her first and getting permission and only reluctantly agreed to it. The second Joel started his rampage she would have either helped or not got in the way.

Click to shrink...

There is a cutscene in the game That shows what happened. And about the doctor scene After all this years that doctor scene felt wierd because why would he be the only doctor we have to kill. I knew the sequel would touch. I think it was deliberate. Like neil said he didnt ecpect people to like joel this much. If you think about joel stop being a protagonist from winter section

 

[Argentil]

The doctors daughter getting revenge and killing Joel was clearly not thought of while the first game was being written.

Click to shrink...

No, it wasn't fully formed. Neil spoke about it in a long spoilercast with Kinda Funny (it was a great listen by the way, highly recommend). Abby was originally going to be a victim of Joel and Tommy's ambushing days. The doctor-daughter angle was eventually worked into the sequel, but none of that matters in relation to the greater picture. Not sure why you even bring it up? What Joel did is still deplorable and his past was always going to catch up with him.

If Marlene was so conflicted about killing Ellie without telling her first and getting permission and only reluctantly agreed to it. The second Joel started his rampage she would have either helped or not got in the way.

Click to shrink...

Disagree. She made her decision and she showed reluctance in the first game, and though we weren't privy to their conversation as it played out in the second game, it was definitely inferred. She didn't want to sacrifice Ellie, but she had to for the greater good. Joel breaking Ellie out didn't change that, why would it? Yes, Marlene was very conflicted about sacrificing Ellie, but she begs Joel to reconsider in the end before trying to stop him. These things aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[Argentil]

There is a cutscene in the game That shows what happened. And about the doctor scene After all this years that doctor scene felt wierd because why would he be the only doctor we have to kill. I knew the sequel would touch. I think it was deliberate. Like neil said he didnt ecpect people to like joel this much. If you think about joel stop being a protagonist from winter section

Click to shrink...

I don't think he meant that he didn't expect people to like Joel, he just didn't expect people to think he was a straight good guy. That was kind of the point of the first game (and the second game). Joel did so many overtly bad things, he killed a lot of people, and they made it clear that he and Tommy had ambushed and killed innocent people like those bandit groups you encounter. They had always wanted Ellie to be the lead from the very beginning, so the sequel was a natural progression of Ellie's story. Now with that said, no one is saying Joel deserved to die in such a horrible way, but who does? Joel would have done worse in the past without blinking.

 

[krae_man]

Like neil said he didnt ecpect people to like joel this much. If you think about joel stop being a protagonist from winter section.

Click to shrink...

Hard disagree there.

1)They never got Ellies permission to kill her. She told Joel "It can't be for nothing". That's not consent to die. Plus the Fireflies didn't know about that anyway. From the point Ellie falls in the water, until the point she's in the back seat of the car with Joel she was unconscious. The fireflies never asked her "this will 100% kill you. Do you still want to do this?" That makes Abby's dad a bad person, not a fun loving zebra saver.

2)He's way too young to possess the knowledge they claim he has. He'd have to have graduated medical school and have 10-15 years experience pre outbreak day to have it. Based on the flashback saving the zebra, he looks like he was in high school during outbreak day at best. That type of knowledge isn't coming post outbreak day.

3) Manufacturing and distributing a cure is clearly beyond human capability in this world. The infected don't procreate so Tommy has the right idea, create a walled town and try to live as normal of a life as you can until they all die out.

Joel did the right thing. Naughty Dog thinks they are better storytellers and writers than they think they are. They think "Joel was selfish and doomed humanity to save Ellie" was just so perfectly written. But it just wasn't.

 

[FullNelson]

There is a cutscene in the game That shows what happened. And about the doctor scene After all this years that doctor scene felt wierd because why would he be the only doctor we have to kill. I knew the sequel would touch. I think it was deliberate. Like neil said he didnt ecpect people to like joel this much. If you think about joel stop being a protagonist from winter section

Click to shrink...

It was not deliberate for the sequel. The first iteration, according to Neil, didn't have Abby as the doctor's daughter.

 

[cantbebothered]

Hard disagree there.

1)They never got Ellies permission to kill her. She told Joel "It can't be for nothing". That's not consent to die. Plus the Fireflies didn't know about that anyway. From the point Ellie falls in the water, until the point she's in the back seat of the car with Joel she was unconscious. The fireflies never asked her "this will 100% kill you. Do you still want to do this?" That makes Abby's dad a bad person, not a fun loving zebra saver.

A: yeah like i said before they all are villains, maybe violence just got normalized in their community(see Issac torturing people). so way they would care what ellie wants,

2)He's way too young to possess the knowledge they claim he has. He'd have to have graduated medical school and have 10-15 years experience pre outbreak day to have it. Based on the flashback saving the zebra, he looks like he was in high school during outbreak day at best. That type of knowledge isn't coming post outbreak day.
A: that could be easilly expalneid, either he was a genious or someone else apprentice like Mel was to him

3) Manufacturing and distributing a cure is clearly beyond human capability in this world. The infected don't procreate so Tommy has the right idea, create a walled town and try to live as normal of a life as you can until they all die out.

A: yeah thats through.. but making a cure will keep their soldiers safe from the infected bytes or spores. i think is a huge win

Joel did the right thing. Naughty Dog thinks they are better storytellers and writers than they think they are. They think "Joel was selfish and doomed humanity to save Ellie" was just so perfectly written. But it just wasn't.
A: i disagree with you here.
he was selfish, he had a job delivering a package(ellie) he didnt for selfish reason. i would do the same to be honest. it is what it is i guess lol

Click to shrink...

It was not deliberate for the sequel. The first iteration, according to Neil, didn't have Abby as the doctor's daughter.

Click to shrink...

im just glad they did anyway. that sequence was one of the scenes i was like. thats it? you force to kill this guy for a reason right?(even tho i killed him without hesitation) im just glad they touch on that. the other thing was all the bad things tommy and joel did to innocent people

thats why i love this game so much.

 

[Argentil]

Joel did the right thing. Naughty Dog thinks they are better storytellers and writers than they think they are. They think "Joel was selfish and doomed humanity to save Ellie" was just so perfectly written. But it just wasn't.

Click to shrink...

Even if I agreed with your assumption that the Fireflies couldn't have used a sample to create a cure, Joel didn't know this. As far as he was concerned, they could have had the vaccine ready to go, just needed a sample, and he wouldn't have cared. This is the central issue. Joel was selfish because he had found a new purpose in Ellie, he needed her. This is perfectly fine, many people would make the same choice, but it is a morally contentious scenario. You feel for Joel and Ellie, and want them to live a good life together, but it came at a cost. You could bolster the argument by saying he could have not killed the doctor, it was his choice to off him. Choices have consequences. Additionally, I could think of many counter-points to your arguments about them lying about a cure, but it doesn't matter. The authors' intent is what matters, they just didn't feel the need to convey anything further than what was told.

 

[disco_potato]

Even if I agreed with your assumption that the Fireflies couldn't have used a sample to create a cure, Joel didn't know this. As far as he was concerned, they could have had the vaccine ready to go, just needed a sample, and he wouldn't have cared. This is the central issue. Joel was selfish because he had found a new purpose in Ellie, he needed her. This is perfectly fine, many people would make the same choice, but it is a morally contentious scenario. You feel for Joel and Ellie, and want them to live a good life together, but it came at a cost. You could bolster the argument by saying he could have not killed the doctor, it was his choice to off him. Choices have consequences. Additionally, I could think of many counter-points to your arguments about them lying about a cure, but it doesn't matter. The authors' intent is what matters, they just didn't feel the need to convey anything further than what was told.

Click to shrink...

Unless I'm misremembering, didn't he go off because they told him the procedure would kill her?

 

[Argentil]

Unless I'm misremembering, didn't he go off because they told him the procedure would kill her?

Click to shrink...

I said that in response to the poster who said that Joel did the right thing because the fireflies couldn't have actually created a cure. Yes, he was told that she would die, but that's unrelated, I mentioned that in my response. My point was that Joel acted in his own interest choosing to save Ellie, even after the conversation with Marlene where she said Ellie would want this. At that point Joel needed Ellie in his life, so he burned everything down to save her.

 

[K' Dash]

I'm minutes away from finishing the game, saving this for later.

 

[N.47H.4N]

The doctors daughter getting revenge and killing Joel was clearly not thought of while the first game was being written.

If Marlene was so conflicted about killing Ellie without telling her first and getting permission and only reluctantly agreed to it. The second Joel started his rampage she would have either helped or not got in the way.

Click to shrink...

In the first game, there is audio takes by Marlene and you can see that she is reluctant, in conflict, but thinks it is the best thing to do.

 

[Sparks]

I'm sure it was pointed out multiple times by now, but her enthusiastically stating how she "DIDNT KILL THE DOCTOR :)" bugged me, cause you literally have to kill the doctor...

 

[Deleted member 36578]

I completely disagree with those saying the second half of the game wasn't good. It made part 2s narrative so incredibly strong in my mind. It's basically the entire point of this games story , to see the other side, to feel the other people's pain and the writing is so damn good it convinced me to change my allegiances. Sorry Joel and Ellie fans, but I no longer view them the way I used to and that is what I believe the developers were going for. Thank goodness there was an embargo against speaking about this second half too. It wouldn't have been nearly as powerful an experience had I heard that was what the game was all about. Instead I went through the motions of initially hating the characters in the second half, to understanding their own struggles. Had I known the journey the game was supposed to take me on it wouldn't have been as effective as experiencing it naturally. The story is seriously brilliantly crafted. Let alone the game actually being fun to play via its mechanics. I simply cannot agree with anyone saying it's a 5/10 video game. That's crazy to me, even if it's an opinion. Regardless of how much someone likes the story aside, the other merits of the game alone could never cause it to score so low.

 

[AllChan7]

I completely disagree with those saying the second half of the game wasn't good. It made part 2s narrative so incredibly strong in my mind. It's basically the entire point of this games story , to see the other side, to feel the other people's pain,
and the writing is so damn good it convinced me to change my allegiances. Sorry Joel and Ellie fans, but I no longer view them the way I used to. And that is what I believe the developers were going for. Thank goodness there was an embargo against speaking about this second half too. It wouldn't have been nearly as powerful an experience had I heard that was what the game was all about. Instead I went through the motions of initially hating the characters in the second half, to understanding their own struggles. Had I known that journey the game was supposed to take me on it wouldn't have been as effective as experiencing it naturally myself. The story is seriously brilliantly crafted. Let alone the game actually being fun to play via its mechanics. I simply cannot agree with anyone saying it's a 5/10 video game. That's crazy to me, even if it's an opinion. Regardless of how much someone likes the story aside, the other merits of the game alone could never cause it to score so low.

Click to shrink...

I knew what was coming with the 2nd half because idiots online swore to me the 2nd half was garbage. But going in with an open mind made the 2nd half the best part for me. Like I definitely enjoyed the quieter and intense moments in the first half. But Abby and Owen made for great characters

 

[kanuuna]

I'm sure it was pointed out multiple times by now, but her enthusiastically stating how she "DIDNT KILL THE DOCTOR :)" bugged me, cause you literally have to kill the doctor...

Click to shrink...

Along the same lines, I really don't get the clamoring for player choice for the game's climax. These games were never about player agency.

 

[Deleted member 36578]

I knew what was coming with the 2nd half because idiots online swore to me the 2nd half was garbage. But going in with an open mind made the 2nd half the best part for me. Like I definitely enjoyed the quieter and intense moments in the first half. But Abby and Owen made for great characters

Click to shrink...

The moments in the first half were so good too! Such a strong game throughout.
Whats kinda funny, design wise, is I actually really loved the open map area in the first portion of the game moreso than how linear the rest of the game was. That was actually my favorite part overall and wished more of the game was designed that way. It was a HUGE surprise to me as well to see the game open in such a way as I thought it would just flow the way the first game did. I wish there was at least a similar open area in the second half as well just because I enjoyed that structure so much.

 

[AllChan7]

The moments in the first half were so good too! Such a strong game throughout.
Whats kinda funny, design wise, is I actually really loved the open map area in the first portion of the game moreso than how linear the rest of the game was. That was actually my favorite part overall and wished more of the game was designed that way. It was a HUGE surprise to me as well to see the game open in such a way as I thought it would just flow the way the first game did. I wish there was at least a similar open area in the second half as well just because I enjoyed that structure so much.

Click to shrink...

Yep. That was a great choice by them because it really is a good way to introduce some of lore surrounding the 2 factions and how Seattle handled the Outbreak. And the time spent with Dina is heartwarming. The environmental storytelling is just superb through and through and every building feels different from the last. This was in TLoU but they really went all out with it here. And I love how the combat arenas feel much more natural and varied here.

 

[ClickyCal']

Along the same lines, I really don't get the clamoring for player choice for the game's climax. These games were never about player agency.

Click to shrink...

You don't have agency, but you have to in game do things that are extremely uncomfortable that you don't want to which makes it more powerful. It's almost kind of a reverse bioshock type of thing, where in that case it's always thinking you do have agency.

 

[John Rabbit]

The dismissal of someone having a stronger emotional bond with a pet over a family member in this thread is pretty gross. Lots of people have incredibly toxic/damaging relationships with their family. You'd think fans of this series would understand that.

 

[Vitamin_B_Complex]

Spoiler

Except at the very end this daughter did put aside her revenge

Click to shrink...

Spoiler

The woman she wanted to kill didn't exist anymore, Abby was just a shell of her former self, no hatred in her, just caring for a little boy, just like she was with Joel. She literally had to force her to fight with her. It was pointless and when she remembered Joel (this time not in a bloodied state but the way she should remember him) she realized how futile it was. Even if she killed Abby it wouldn't bring Joel back and it wouldn't erase the guilt she feels for treating him like shit for his decisions, the only thing it would achieve is taking another Joel from another Ellie (Abby and Lev). Her letting Abby live is her only chance to redeem herself and break the cycle of revenge.

 

[Stat]

I never heard of Alanah Pearce until I watched her video about reviews.

Watched her Cyberpunk video and it was really good stuff.

 

[Sparks]

What is with this Jess person's takes? They are pretty odd. She can understand Ellie's love for Dina, but cannot understand Ellie's love for Joel? Because she doesn't care if Joel dies, doesn't mean Ellie doesn't... it's a brutal world, a world where violence is the language. If you have someone you truly care about is brutally murdered in front of you, you would respond with a violent reaction.

And she actually says, "I wouldn't want to avenge Joel, I'd fuck him, but I wouldn't avenge him". Is a fucking weird thing to say...

 

[Gestault]

I think briefly touching on people's reactions to the end of the original game, including the overall impression of Joel as relatable vs. reprehensible gives a lot of insight into where opinions can diverge on TLOU2.

 

[ABIC]

I thought it was great in the sense that it represented most of the important diverse positions on the game.

However, I don't think the discussion really went anywhere meaningful, because no one changed their minds or saw anything different.. there was no "ah hah" moment for anyone. It was just everyone dumping their opinions over an hour plus, which was hard to demonize because these were real people as opposed to just posters on a forum.

I personally sympathize with Alanah the most, and we share similar positions on the topics discussed.

I could not connect with Jess at all, I felt like she had a lot of weird perspectives or inability to empathize.

And Phil had good insights on gameplay and realism, but nothing to do with the actual topics people are struggling with on the game.

 

[ABIC]

What is with this Jess person's takes? They are pretty odd. She can understand Ellie's love for Dina, but cannot understand Ellie's love for Joel? Because she doesn't care if Joel dies, doesn't mean Ellie doesn't... it's a brutal world, a world where violence is the language. If you have someone you truly care about is brutally murdered in front of you, you would respond with a violent reaction.

And she actually says, "I wouldn't want to avenge Joel, I'd fuck him, but I wouldn't avenge him". Is a fucking weird thing to say...

Click to shrink...

Jess actually doesn't seem to sympathize with either Abby or Ellie.

She seems to find it demeaning that TLOU2 is about 2 females putting aside their lives, risking it all, to avenge their fathers. She calls it a game about dads, and not at all about daughters. She goes so far as to say TLOU2 is Joel's game.

I could not connect with almost anything she said.

 

[Melchiah]

A daughter who put the lives of those she loves and care for that are still alive above her own need for revenge.

Click to shrink...

Just like Abby then.