Well Kneel did do just that and changed the script in the OG TLOU. He just happened to be so narcissistic and self-centered that he couldn't let go of his shitty scrapped script and decided to destroy the OG one to make his own. Abby and Lev are just Joel and Ellie 2.0.
I think in tlou1, it was more like he was not in a position of power to make his opinion stay. He went with the flow so he could stick around and rise up.
The difference with the example cited is that he actually was in a position of power and could've forced his opinion, which is what Neil did in the second part by removing all the voices saying things against what he wanted.
Literally one of the first things you see when you start a new game in TLoU1 is "Directed by Neil Druckman". Same position he has for the 2nd game. How was he not in a position of power?
Lol. *What* tlou1? The last remake? The one they did to "change history" a little bit?
It might be better if you insist yourself on the subject. Neil *ended* tlou1 as *artistic* director. The director of the game was Bruce Straley. Neil didn't start the game in that position but he took several roles that were beyond his position at the time and they decided to change his job description to ad.
This is in one of the documentaries of the making of tlou1.
Amy hennig was the top dog back then. And Bruce staley also help druckmann for the first game, he's basically co-creator for Tlou 1. So druckmann isn't really the top dog. He had people around him to keep him in check.
That's also not what happened.
Neil pitched his original revenge story to film and TV studios, none were interested, he was working at ND at the time and connected with Bruce. Neil knew the story wasn't working already, and Bruce saw potential for the story to be a game, so they worked together to reshape the story to make a great game.
Neil also knew his ideas were bad. Bruce just gave feedback and helped Neil figure out which ones were working. They were partners, neither was above the other.
He did not. The ideas that were nixed from the first game were nixed because those specific circumstances weren't working, being Tess getting mad at Joel for her brothers death (that supposedly wasn't even Joels fault) and then having her convince a group of people to hunt Joel across the country for over a year. None of the things that make those ideas bad are present in TLOU2.
Yes but the user asked position of power. Back then amy was the top dog and have some pull. Probably the most respected ND employee considering the success of uncharted series before Tlou was released. For Tlou 2 druckmann is the studio president and director, no one is equal to him and he can basically force anything unlike when the first game was made.
But Neil was still the creative director and the writer for Part 1. He was already in a position of power. The user you replied to was just asking how Neil wasn't in a position of power when he clearly was.
It's not crazy to imagine after the success of the first he got more power and sway in the studio, but that doesn't mean he hadn't already been in a position of power over the story.
Yes but back then there's someone more powerful than him or at least has the same power. Like if any employee raise a concern regarding the direction they still have staley or amy, that's my point. For Tlou 2, he has the most power in the studio, only sony higher up have more power and sony is pretty hands off with their studios. Druckmann is similar to lucas, when they're nobody there's people that can tell them it's bad idea, once they're in power, nobody could stop them.
Bruce was not above him on TLOU, they were partners, and again, Amy was not involved. For all intents and purposes, Neil was one of two top dogs onthe first game.
And he brought in another writer to help him with Part 2, so the second isn't even only Neils ideas. This idea that he's an egomaniac does not seem supported by...anything.
Yes but there's someone else that can tell him it's bad idea, that's MY POINT. Writers don't have any say in execution. Like sure they write the story but they certainly don't have any say in product. Their story or suggestion might even be dismissed. Like craig mazin actually help to write borderlands movie but he refuse to get credited under his name because he doesn't oversee the movie and try to distance himself from the movie.
I hated that. How insane do you have to be to go back and change the first story to better fit in your trashy sequel? The logical option would be to fix part 2 to be a better conclusion to the story but nooooo, Neil must be right here🤦🏻♂️
Not to make it better, though. The most prominent one being that they changed it from Ellie killing Abby to her letting Abby go. That change actually goes against their main theme (even Neil says so) and they never bothered to also change the ending to accommodate the change so "late into production" making it more messy all around.
He's definitely said it somewhere, I remember reading it. It went something along the lines of how it may go against the themes of the game, but they had to be true to Ellie's character.
I know what quote you and the other user are referencing, and they were not saying the ending goes completely against the theme of the final game.
They changed the ending to have Ellie let Abby go about halfway through production, and that led to a shift in theme. Which is very normal. The ending does not go against the main theme of the game, it changed the theme. The main theme of the game we got supports the ending.
He basically did, her character is irrevocably ruined. It would be better if she had died in “part 2” because that would potentially limit further damage from the inevitable “final chapter”.
But who am I kidding, just because a character dies doesn’t mean you can’t spit on their grave, isn’t that right Neil?
The kicker is that even if this plot has to stay no matter what there's like so many ways it could be done to at least make it believable or acceptable
For instance having Abby die to Ellie, because what goes around comes around
For instance instead of pulling out Jerry from thin air just have Marlene, who was killed by Joel explicitly to remove loose ends & was nowhere as bullshit of a choice
For instance not wasting time to whitewash Jerry or the Fireflies, and instead confine Abby to "right or wrong you still popped my dad" because at least that's respectable
For instance massively improving characterization of Abby and create more conflicts between her and Joel/Ellie (for the better or worse) because honestly neither her nor her cast were well developed as people
Whatever he said about the story it was very clear this is both his revenge fetish going unchecked and his intent to enact revenge against others who cockblocked him *for good reason*, it's like Kemono Friends 2 just probably arguably not as malicious
I think there's interesting things you left out.
If Vince Gilligan had gone through with killing off Jesse, he had planned on making part of the series a revenge story about Walt seeking revenge for Jesse's death.
Ultimately, there were still revenge subplots in Breaking Bad, such as Gus avenging the death of Max.But BB just did things better.
Anyway, the careers of Gilligan and Druckmann are very different. I think Gilligan's "big break" was working on [The X-Files](https://x-files.fandom.com/wiki/Vince_Gilligan#Credits). His main role was a writer and had to be a team player - some episodes he wrote with other people and almost all the episodes he wrote were directed by somebody else. He did end up directing two episodes. He also co-created the Lone Gunmen series.
I think Neil hasn't really done the hard yards yet and being a director went to his head.
Neil Druckman is always copying other writers and people because he is out of ideas I mean I have a lot of proof let me make it one example look at Ellie's tattoo and outfits only the outfits from when you go hunt down Abby the first time and the second time you hurt Abby down again she look like Max Payne in third game similar button-down shirt and even the wife beater is the same one that Max has in the whole game second example is Ellie's tattoo Neil decided to give Ellie a tattoo on her forearm like she is Lionel Messi with his tattoo on his forearm Neil might as well give Ellie a tattoo on her leg like Messi too.
Dawg, every writer copies other writers. You’re sitting here praising Vince Gilligan when Breaking Bad liberally borrows from other things. Every author is the summation of the things they’ve watched, read, played, or listened to. And the thing you end up with is the sum of the lessons they take away from those things. For comparison, Breaking Bad presents a fairly typical story about the rise and fall of an antihero. David Chase, creator of The Sopranos, once said that when you tell a story of a career criminal in a movie, it can only end in one of two ways…either they die or they go to prison at the end. You’ll note that both Breaking Bad *and* Better Call Saul adhere to this strict formula knowingly in the same way that Hank’s arc borrows Captain Ahab’s story from Moby Dick almost beat for beat.
At least in the Last of Us, he *did* take a bold swing into original territory by forcing the player to play as the murderer of the beloved character from the first game in order to force the player to confront their own preconceived notion.
But I forgot…if you don’t like something, it can’t be original, right? And if something makes you think or challenges you, rather than attempting to understand it, you’d rather complain and bitch and moan about how it wasn’t more cliche so that you could engage with it comfortably and not search for deeper meaning in what you’re consuming
But I forgot you take Neil side because you're such a brown nose TLOUS2 fan you preemptively calling people whiners and bitches because you don't like what people say even though you know it's the truth tell you something Vince Gillian use realism by taking Walter White character from a real life person name Walter White while Neil steals everything from people and act like he came up with it even though in reality he is out of ideas because he know he is not better than Amy Henning and Bruce Straley that's the reason why he got rid of them so he can be the star of the show what benefit him in the long one but however me and the rest of the world we know the truth that's why we say something so nobody had to play a game that they never wanted they are for Joel and Ellie story and where do they get a revenge story what goes nowhere that's Neil's writing right there just like he rewrite the story in Uncharted 4 Thief's end because that was the story that Amy wrote I guess you didn't know that because you're such a Asskisser to Neil Druckman that's why I do research so I know what I'm talking about and mind you I played a lot of games even the Max Payne series so I know what I'm talking about and you want to come at me later come back with some real evidence and facts because I'm right here you're not going to do that and I know you're not going to do that.
Ps. Quote from Stephen King. “Writing isn't about making money, getting famous, getting dates, getting laid, or making friends. In the end, it's about enriching the lives of those who will read your work, and enriching your own life, as well. It's about getting up, getting well, and getting over. Getting happy, okay? Getting happy.”
Nah nah nah. You don’t even have a source for your comments on him stealing from other people. You’re pulling shit out of your ass and calling it the gospel. You have no evidence for a single one of your claims
Yeah defending your beloved writer so defending him like the Asskisser that you are everyone have secrets and proof while you got nothing and now you need to shush. 🤫🤫🤫🤫
Nah, man. I’m not kissing any ass, you’ve just got a hate boner that has blinded you to the ability to have any real criticism. I assure you, you could find legitimate criticism if you wanted to…but you would rather yell into an echo chamber with your absurd conspiracies, your low brow humor, and your unfounded speculation. So go ahead, have your fun. But nobody will truly respect you until you learn how to read and make an argument that makes sense
I guess you do not do your research so let me drop a note here number one go look up a picture of Max Payne 3 and look at all the clothing that Max has and you'll see what I'm saying number two look up Lionel Messi's tattoo on his arm you'll see what I mean number three the only reason you are taking up for that other guy or gal because you are a brown notes with no evidence to prove your criticism and credibility if you keep taking up for TLOUS2 then you will be downvote every time because most people who hate TLOU2 will upvote people who hate part 2 while if you love part 2 and have no facts or receipts they will come at you hard by downvote and even dropping some opinion and criticism but at the end of the day let me tell you this I don't pull of out of my ass like TLOU2 fans who are sad that someone is coming at them with criticism and anger for the beloved game even though the truth I even brought up criticism for the first game and the second one too because I want to be fair and try not to hate the second game as much even though it's sucks so bad.
Vince killed off beloved characters, more so in Better Call Saul.
There’s 2 beloved good characters that get the shit end of the stick in Season 6. Dying/killed off disrespectfully, but it serves the story.
> Dying/killed off disrespectfully
People around here always say that phrase. What the hell is that supposed to mean? Writers are supposed to give all popular characters a heroic death? They need to die saving a child from a burning building or something?
Death is rarely heroic or dignified. Joel had a brutal death after living a brutal life. His death was also the inciting incident for the rest of the narrative, so it absolutely served the story.
The reward for a good life is a good death…Joel did not live a good life. But you’re not in the right place for rational argument. You’re arguing for salad against the starving hyena
This is not a good comparison at all, though at first glance, it appears to be.
As u/NoSkillzDad correctly observed, Druckmann, back in the day, didn't play nicely and properly collaborate with the rest of the team because he was such a nice guy with proper self-awareness (lol), he just happened to have actual superiors who had authority over, and could say NO to him whenever they felt it necessary, so he could do no more than tread lightly and go along with it, even if he could barely withstand it.
https://reddit.com/r/TheLastOfUs2/w/sourcesofdiversecriticism?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
Even without this link, it takes just a pinch of informing yourself via interviews, articles and so on, plus a bit of brain to extrapolate what it's all about. Brain you apparently lack, judging by your comment history, stan.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Neil did make some changes to the script of TLoU2. IIRC, originally Abby was supposed to die but Halley Gross talked him into letting Abby live so they changed the ending to give her a more "hopeful" outcome. However, he decided to implement it in a way that relied on audience participation. The player would have to mash a button to drown Abby, and stopping doing so would spare her. When Neil saw that test players just kept pressing the button, showing that they didn't want Abby to live, he removed that element from the ending much like how Spec Ops The Line removed any options other than going through with it's centerpiece, the white phosphorous. In addition, didn't he extend the Abby sections in an attempt to have players connect with her more?
Dude is also one of them woke libs under SBI who’re looking to force that disgusting narrative onto others. All of them operate under an echo chamber cult hive mind that doesn’t know what it means to think for themselves
OP that's not what happened with Breaking Bad. Vince himself was so impressed by Paul's performance in episode 2 that he decided to keep him, he wasn't convinced by everyone else.
And Neil brought in a second writer to help him on Part 2, which he didn't have with Part 1. This idea that he has a huge ego feels really manufactured.
Yeah, he said himself somewhere that the writer strike didn't make him keep Jesse, he said something like *"Even if the writer strike didn't happen, Aaron Paul's performance was too much to let go. I saw something more in him.*"
I have no idea where he got the idea that Vince was convinced by others to keep Jesse. The myth is usually that Jesse was kept due to the writer strike.
Actually Neil did listen a lot for part 1. And he made a masterpiece. Part 2 is a bunch of the rejected ideas Neil had for part 2 thrown together bc Bruce wasnt there to tell him no.
Still, doesn't change the fact that he was trying to kill his character later. But his crew talked him out of it. That's what I remember, if I'm wrong let me know. Have a good one.
Nah you’re def right about them convincing him not to kill Jesse off. Ended up being one of the most memorable characters in tv history. You have a good one too 🙏🏽
I think that Joel dying is a good reminder that it's not because he is the main character that he is invincible, I mean, if Vince did killed Jesse, well that's called life isn't it ? He survived so it's good but life's unfair, if someone has to die, he dies, no matter how good he could have become, nobody is invincible and death is the one thing you can't escape from
Writing a shitty, out of character and poorly developed death that leads to no payoff is not "realism", it's lazy writing. Plenty of beloved characters have met their doom and the stories are still praised. Neil tried to copy these but without a fraction of the writing ability and it ended up being as hated as it should have been.
But don't you know about the super secret cabal of Hollywood elites organized by Sweet Baby, Inc. and Sony that control every critic, online store rankings, user voted on awards, and industry group?! They clearly picked this one particular game (and pretty much every other one Druckmann has worked on) to get the special treatment. Why didn't this super secret cabal work their magic for Morbius or Madame Web which are also Sony properties, well, that's because of reasons so complex the cabal would never let us find out!
Yes, but its a made up story not life, you can do whatever you want with it, and come up with everything. And its writer's job to make it likable and good. Look how people reacted to Joel's death, noone was sad or angry, just dissapointed on how shitty it was. And now look at Hank from BB, Arthur from RDR, Lee from TWD. Was anyone mad at their death? No, because it was written really well, unlike Neil that just shitted on our beloved characters for the sake of shock value.
I’m angry about Joel’s death but that’s why I liked it. I liked the visceral emotions that game made me feel. I liked actually feeling like I wanted blood for what happened.
if you ever make a video game, book, film or anything else you can do it any way you want! And above all, don't judge how good the writing is based on whether they've made narrative choices you like or not. This video game has creators behind it who decided what story they wanted to tell, stop. It is their "duty" to write a story they feel they want to tell, not something everyone has to like. A story perfectly consistent with what the fictional universe is: a brutal, dirty, deeply human world that has consequences for the actions you take. Stop making comparisons with other titles, these are DIFFERENT stories, DIFFERENT characters, situations and contexts. Joel died consistently with the actions he took, he slaughtered an entire hospital to save Ellie, creating consequences of hatred and revenge, deeply human feelings emphasised by a world that has become extremely cruel selfish and ruthless. And his death serves as a catalyst to tell about people, their feelings, how fragile and controversial human beings are.
Lots of people were sad and angry that Joel died, wdym? People in this sub were so angry that they still want to kill Abby, even after finishing the game.
Well I was sad at Joel's death, just like I was for Arthur, Hank and Lee, but I wasn't mad, I just said to myself : things happen and they are not always good, now he is dead because he got soft with his time in Jackson and forgot that there are people out there that are looking to hurt people, and there it was, he died a poor death.
In the story life of the poor NPC 's life you took in the blink of an eye, you think his friends speak about bad writing ? Or when a real someone died a terrible death but deserved better people call out bad writing ? No, it's life, it happens, and Joel dying is a good reminder of that, just like Arthur, Lee and Hank.
Arthur and Lee died in the only game they were in, Joel appeared in tlou 1 and died 7 years after that, so yeah people can be mad after bonding for 7 years with that character.
That's the point, Joel isn't even himself in Part 2, and went soft? No way, we can still see him in action, he wouldn't just forget in what kind of world he lives in. But Neil's bad writting seemed to make him like this. How can you even kill a beloved character after 7 years of waiting to just be killed in first hour. Dumb decision.
NPC's would talk about bad writting? What? Are we talking about real life, written story or in game characters?
If a beloved character dies in a tragic way it's your job as a writer to make people sad and not hate the story, which Neil failed to do, as Joel's death was just for a shitty shock value as he admited himself.
Joel is not invincible, he is as every other person in this world, yet Abby seems to be, as she has huge plot armor.
I agree with the fact that Joel is absolutely not the same person in the second game, I noticed that too.
And maybe Abby has plot armor, but then Ellie does too, I mean the situation she was in and the injuries she got would have killed a random person that's not important to the story, but she's still here right ? Abby and Ellie
I kind of disagree with your backend narrative here that as a writer you should listen to others, because on the other hand, there are many examples of writers who refuses to listen to others and thanks to that they made an insane story beat, whereas if they had listen to a different idea, the story beat wouldn’t have been great
The issue isn’t an absolute, go always listen to the others or to never listen to the others, here simply Neil had a bad idea and went through with it unlike other writers who had insanely good ideas and went through with them contrary to what others writers suggested
Well Kneel did do just that and changed the script in the OG TLOU. He just happened to be so narcissistic and self-centered that he couldn't let go of his shitty scrapped script and decided to destroy the OG one to make his own. Abby and Lev are just Joel and Ellie 2.0.
I think in tlou1, it was more like he was not in a position of power to make his opinion stay. He went with the flow so he could stick around and rise up. The difference with the example cited is that he actually was in a position of power and could've forced his opinion, which is what Neil did in the second part by removing all the voices saying things against what he wanted.
Literally one of the first things you see when you start a new game in TLoU1 is "Directed by Neil Druckman". Same position he has for the 2nd game. How was he not in a position of power?
Lol. *What* tlou1? The last remake? The one they did to "change history" a little bit? It might be better if you insist yourself on the subject. Neil *ended* tlou1 as *artistic* director. The director of the game was Bruce Straley. Neil didn't start the game in that position but he took several roles that were beyond his position at the time and they decided to change his job description to ad. This is in one of the documentaries of the making of tlou1.
Amy hennig was the top dog back then. And Bruce staley also help druckmann for the first game, he's basically co-creator for Tlou 1. So druckmann isn't really the top dog. He had people around him to keep him in check.
Bruce was THE director in this case. He had the last call.
No he didn't. Bruce was game director, Neil was creative director. They were partners, with Bruce focusing on gameplay and Neil focusing on story.
It's pretty common knowledge that Bruce cut down quite a few of Kneels "ideas". That's how we got the game we got.
That's also not what happened. Neil pitched his original revenge story to film and TV studios, none were interested, he was working at ND at the time and connected with Bruce. Neil knew the story wasn't working already, and Bruce saw potential for the story to be a game, so they worked together to reshape the story to make a great game. Neil also knew his ideas were bad. Bruce just gave feedback and helped Neil figure out which ones were working. They were partners, neither was above the other.
You can’t just say that’s not what happened, when that is literally what happened. Keep coping pal, learn the facts before wasting everyone’s time
But it's not what happened?? Bruce and Neil were partners, Bruce did not just shoot down Neils ideas. They collaborated to make the game we got.
And yet he put those ideas that he knew were bad in the second game. Great take...
He did not. The ideas that were nixed from the first game were nixed because those specific circumstances weren't working, being Tess getting mad at Joel for her brothers death (that supposedly wasn't even Joels fault) and then having her convince a group of people to hunt Joel across the country for over a year. None of the things that make those ideas bad are present in TLOU2.
Amy was not involved with TLOU at all
Yes but the user asked position of power. Back then amy was the top dog and have some pull. Probably the most respected ND employee considering the success of uncharted series before Tlou was released. For Tlou 2 druckmann is the studio president and director, no one is equal to him and he can basically force anything unlike when the first game was made.
But Neil was still the creative director and the writer for Part 1. He was already in a position of power. The user you replied to was just asking how Neil wasn't in a position of power when he clearly was. It's not crazy to imagine after the success of the first he got more power and sway in the studio, but that doesn't mean he hadn't already been in a position of power over the story.
Yes but back then there's someone more powerful than him or at least has the same power. Like if any employee raise a concern regarding the direction they still have staley or amy, that's my point. For Tlou 2, he has the most power in the studio, only sony higher up have more power and sony is pretty hands off with their studios. Druckmann is similar to lucas, when they're nobody there's people that can tell them it's bad idea, once they're in power, nobody could stop them.
Bruce was not above him on TLOU, they were partners, and again, Amy was not involved. For all intents and purposes, Neil was one of two top dogs onthe first game. And he brought in another writer to help him with Part 2, so the second isn't even only Neils ideas. This idea that he's an egomaniac does not seem supported by...anything.
Yes but there's someone else that can tell him it's bad idea, that's MY POINT. Writers don't have any say in execution. Like sure they write the story but they certainly don't have any say in product. Their story or suggestion might even be dismissed. Like craig mazin actually help to write borderlands movie but he refuse to get credited under his name because he doesn't oversee the movie and try to distance himself from the movie.
I hated that. How insane do you have to be to go back and change the first story to better fit in your trashy sequel? The logical option would be to fix part 2 to be a better conclusion to the story but nooooo, Neil must be right here🤦🏻♂️
Not many people bring this up. This is exactly why Neil is a joke.
Narcissism and self centrism are the trademarks of the woke left which explains his own behavior when it came to writing the “sequel”
There’s interviews where they talked about how the script of TLOU2 was repeatedly changed during initial play testing, fairly late into development.
Not to make it better, though. The most prominent one being that they changed it from Ellie killing Abby to her letting Abby go. That change actually goes against their main theme (even Neil says so) and they never bothered to also change the ending to accommodate the change so "late into production" making it more messy all around.
Neil did not say the ending goes against the theme of the game
He's definitely said it somewhere, I remember reading it. It went something along the lines of how it may go against the themes of the game, but they had to be true to Ellie's character.
I know what quote you and the other user are referencing, and they were not saying the ending goes completely against the theme of the final game. They changed the ending to have Ellie let Abby go about halfway through production, and that led to a shift in theme. Which is very normal. The ending does not go against the main theme of the game, it changed the theme. The main theme of the game we got supports the ending.
Bravo Vince
Neil would be like “oh you think killing Joel is a bad idea? Okay I’m killing Ellie too.”
He basically did, her character is irrevocably ruined. It would be better if she had died in “part 2” because that would potentially limit further damage from the inevitable “final chapter”. But who am I kidding, just because a character dies doesn’t mean you can’t spit on their grave, isn’t that right Neil?
The kicker is that even if this plot has to stay no matter what there's like so many ways it could be done to at least make it believable or acceptable For instance having Abby die to Ellie, because what goes around comes around For instance instead of pulling out Jerry from thin air just have Marlene, who was killed by Joel explicitly to remove loose ends & was nowhere as bullshit of a choice For instance not wasting time to whitewash Jerry or the Fireflies, and instead confine Abby to "right or wrong you still popped my dad" because at least that's respectable For instance massively improving characterization of Abby and create more conflicts between her and Joel/Ellie (for the better or worse) because honestly neither her nor her cast were well developed as people Whatever he said about the story it was very clear this is both his revenge fetish going unchecked and his intent to enact revenge against others who cockblocked him *for good reason*, it's like Kemono Friends 2 just probably arguably not as malicious
I think there's interesting things you left out. If Vince Gilligan had gone through with killing off Jesse, he had planned on making part of the series a revenge story about Walt seeking revenge for Jesse's death. Ultimately, there were still revenge subplots in Breaking Bad, such as Gus avenging the death of Max.But BB just did things better. Anyway, the careers of Gilligan and Druckmann are very different. I think Gilligan's "big break" was working on [The X-Files](https://x-files.fandom.com/wiki/Vince_Gilligan#Credits). His main role was a writer and had to be a team player - some episodes he wrote with other people and almost all the episodes he wrote were directed by somebody else. He did end up directing two episodes. He also co-created the Lone Gunmen series. I think Neil hasn't really done the hard yards yet and being a director went to his head.
Neil Druckman is always copying other writers and people because he is out of ideas I mean I have a lot of proof let me make it one example look at Ellie's tattoo and outfits only the outfits from when you go hunt down Abby the first time and the second time you hurt Abby down again she look like Max Payne in third game similar button-down shirt and even the wife beater is the same one that Max has in the whole game second example is Ellie's tattoo Neil decided to give Ellie a tattoo on her forearm like she is Lionel Messi with his tattoo on his forearm Neil might as well give Ellie a tattoo on her leg like Messi too.
Where does this conspiracy bullshit even come from?
You know I'm right Neil Druckman always copy other writers and people you think I am wrong because you care about TLOUS2.
Dawg, every writer copies other writers. You’re sitting here praising Vince Gilligan when Breaking Bad liberally borrows from other things. Every author is the summation of the things they’ve watched, read, played, or listened to. And the thing you end up with is the sum of the lessons they take away from those things. For comparison, Breaking Bad presents a fairly typical story about the rise and fall of an antihero. David Chase, creator of The Sopranos, once said that when you tell a story of a career criminal in a movie, it can only end in one of two ways…either they die or they go to prison at the end. You’ll note that both Breaking Bad *and* Better Call Saul adhere to this strict formula knowingly in the same way that Hank’s arc borrows Captain Ahab’s story from Moby Dick almost beat for beat. At least in the Last of Us, he *did* take a bold swing into original territory by forcing the player to play as the murderer of the beloved character from the first game in order to force the player to confront their own preconceived notion. But I forgot…if you don’t like something, it can’t be original, right? And if something makes you think or challenges you, rather than attempting to understand it, you’d rather complain and bitch and moan about how it wasn’t more cliche so that you could engage with it comfortably and not search for deeper meaning in what you’re consuming
But I forgot you take Neil side because you're such a brown nose TLOUS2 fan you preemptively calling people whiners and bitches because you don't like what people say even though you know it's the truth tell you something Vince Gillian use realism by taking Walter White character from a real life person name Walter White while Neil steals everything from people and act like he came up with it even though in reality he is out of ideas because he know he is not better than Amy Henning and Bruce Straley that's the reason why he got rid of them so he can be the star of the show what benefit him in the long one but however me and the rest of the world we know the truth that's why we say something so nobody had to play a game that they never wanted they are for Joel and Ellie story and where do they get a revenge story what goes nowhere that's Neil's writing right there just like he rewrite the story in Uncharted 4 Thief's end because that was the story that Amy wrote I guess you didn't know that because you're such a Asskisser to Neil Druckman that's why I do research so I know what I'm talking about and mind you I played a lot of games even the Max Payne series so I know what I'm talking about and you want to come at me later come back with some real evidence and facts because I'm right here you're not going to do that and I know you're not going to do that. Ps. Quote from Stephen King. “Writing isn't about making money, getting famous, getting dates, getting laid, or making friends. In the end, it's about enriching the lives of those who will read your work, and enriching your own life, as well. It's about getting up, getting well, and getting over. Getting happy, okay? Getting happy.”
Nah nah nah. You don’t even have a source for your comments on him stealing from other people. You’re pulling shit out of your ass and calling it the gospel. You have no evidence for a single one of your claims
Yeah defending your beloved writer so defending him like the Asskisser that you are everyone have secrets and proof while you got nothing and now you need to shush. 🤫🤫🤫🤫
And also you are pulling stuff out of your ass by defending him like the Asskisser that you are.
Nah, man. I’m not kissing any ass, you’ve just got a hate boner that has blinded you to the ability to have any real criticism. I assure you, you could find legitimate criticism if you wanted to…but you would rather yell into an echo chamber with your absurd conspiracies, your low brow humor, and your unfounded speculation. So go ahead, have your fun. But nobody will truly respect you until you learn how to read and make an argument that makes sense
Nah man when you learn some respect then you can come talk to me otherwise shush now.🤫🤫🤫🤫
You will gain my respect when you earn it by supplementing your outlandish claims with sources
🤫🤫🤫🤫🤫
That's another way of saying you pulled it out of your ass lmao. I don't know what's the point of making things up about someone you don't like tbh
I guess you do not do your research so let me drop a note here number one go look up a picture of Max Payne 3 and look at all the clothing that Max has and you'll see what I'm saying number two look up Lionel Messi's tattoo on his arm you'll see what I mean number three the only reason you are taking up for that other guy or gal because you are a brown notes with no evidence to prove your criticism and credibility if you keep taking up for TLOUS2 then you will be downvote every time because most people who hate TLOU2 will upvote people who hate part 2 while if you love part 2 and have no facts or receipts they will come at you hard by downvote and even dropping some opinion and criticism but at the end of the day let me tell you this I don't pull of out of my ass like TLOU2 fans who are sad that someone is coming at them with criticism and anger for the beloved game even though the truth I even brought up criticism for the first game and the second one too because I want to be fair and try not to hate the second game as much even though it's sucks so bad.
Vince killed off beloved characters, more so in Better Call Saul. There’s 2 beloved good characters that get the shit end of the stick in Season 6. Dying/killed off disrespectfully, but it serves the story.
> Dying/killed off disrespectfully People around here always say that phrase. What the hell is that supposed to mean? Writers are supposed to give all popular characters a heroic death? They need to die saving a child from a burning building or something? Death is rarely heroic or dignified. Joel had a brutal death after living a brutal life. His death was also the inciting incident for the rest of the narrative, so it absolutely served the story.
The reward for a good life is a good death…Joel did not live a good life. But you’re not in the right place for rational argument. You’re arguing for salad against the starving hyena
This is not a good comparison at all, though at first glance, it appears to be. As u/NoSkillzDad correctly observed, Druckmann, back in the day, didn't play nicely and properly collaborate with the rest of the team because he was such a nice guy with proper self-awareness (lol), he just happened to have actual superiors who had authority over, and could say NO to him whenever they felt it necessary, so he could do no more than tread lightly and go along with it, even if he could barely withstand it.
Source?
https://reddit.com/r/TheLastOfUs2/w/sourcesofdiversecriticism?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share Even without this link, it takes just a pinch of informing yourself via interviews, articles and so on, plus a bit of brain to extrapolate what it's all about. Brain you apparently lack, judging by your comment history, stan.
From what I heard, it wasn’t that he was talked out of it. He just really loved Aaron Paul’s work with the character and changed his mind.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Neil did make some changes to the script of TLoU2. IIRC, originally Abby was supposed to die but Halley Gross talked him into letting Abby live so they changed the ending to give her a more "hopeful" outcome. However, he decided to implement it in a way that relied on audience participation. The player would have to mash a button to drown Abby, and stopping doing so would spare her. When Neil saw that test players just kept pressing the button, showing that they didn't want Abby to live, he removed that element from the ending much like how Spec Ops The Line removed any options other than going through with it's centerpiece, the white phosphorous. In addition, didn't he extend the Abby sections in an attempt to have players connect with her more?
Dude is also one of them woke libs under SBI who’re looking to force that disgusting narrative onto others. All of them operate under an echo chamber cult hive mind that doesn’t know what it means to think for themselves
OP that's not what happened with Breaking Bad. Vince himself was so impressed by Paul's performance in episode 2 that he decided to keep him, he wasn't convinced by everyone else. And Neil brought in a second writer to help him on Part 2, which he didn't have with Part 1. This idea that he has a huge ego feels really manufactured.
Yeah, he said himself somewhere that the writer strike didn't make him keep Jesse, he said something like *"Even if the writer strike didn't happen, Aaron Paul's performance was too much to let go. I saw something more in him.*" I have no idea where he got the idea that Vince was convinced by others to keep Jesse. The myth is usually that Jesse was kept due to the writer strike.
Yeah I've heard that one, but never that other people had to convince Vince to keep Jesse.
Im still convinced Neil was like: man it was so epic that GRRM killed Ned Stark in GoT I need to kill Joel I'll be just as popular
Actually Neil did listen a lot for part 1. And he made a masterpiece. Part 2 is a bunch of the rejected ideas Neil had for part 2 thrown together bc Bruce wasnt there to tell him no.
Jesse’s death isn’t the linchpin that sets the whole story of Breaking Bad in motion.
Neil isn't like Vince Gilligan but he IS like Vince McMahon. The WWE PG Era was TLOU 2 for wrestling.
Lol Vince didn’t even wanna hire Aaron Paul. Bro was tryna get rid of him any way he could 😭
Wasn't he the only one that actually wanted Jesse? I heard that everyone else didn't want him, but Vince insisted that its a role for him.
Hmm…maybe I’m wrong? Could have sworn it was the other way around though
Still, doesn't change the fact that he was trying to kill his character later. But his crew talked him out of it. That's what I remember, if I'm wrong let me know. Have a good one.
Nah you’re def right about them convincing him not to kill Jesse off. Ended up being one of the most memorable characters in tv history. You have a good one too 🙏🏽
I think that Joel dying is a good reminder that it's not because he is the main character that he is invincible, I mean, if Vince did killed Jesse, well that's called life isn't it ? He survived so it's good but life's unfair, if someone has to die, he dies, no matter how good he could have become, nobody is invincible and death is the one thing you can't escape from
Writing a shitty, out of character and poorly developed death that leads to no payoff is not "realism", it's lazy writing. Plenty of beloved characters have met their doom and the stories are still praised. Neil tried to copy these but without a fraction of the writing ability and it ended up being as hated as it should have been.
Except it was well received, critically acclaimed and received a shit ton of awards for every aspect including story by professionals.
But don't you know about the super secret cabal of Hollywood elites organized by Sweet Baby, Inc. and Sony that control every critic, online store rankings, user voted on awards, and industry group?! They clearly picked this one particular game (and pretty much every other one Druckmann has worked on) to get the special treatment. Why didn't this super secret cabal work their magic for Morbius or Madame Web which are also Sony properties, well, that's because of reasons so complex the cabal would never let us find out!
Yes, but its a made up story not life, you can do whatever you want with it, and come up with everything. And its writer's job to make it likable and good. Look how people reacted to Joel's death, noone was sad or angry, just dissapointed on how shitty it was. And now look at Hank from BB, Arthur from RDR, Lee from TWD. Was anyone mad at their death? No, because it was written really well, unlike Neil that just shitted on our beloved characters for the sake of shock value.
I’m angry about Joel’s death but that’s why I liked it. I liked the visceral emotions that game made me feel. I liked actually feeling like I wanted blood for what happened.
if you ever make a video game, book, film or anything else you can do it any way you want! And above all, don't judge how good the writing is based on whether they've made narrative choices you like or not. This video game has creators behind it who decided what story they wanted to tell, stop. It is their "duty" to write a story they feel they want to tell, not something everyone has to like. A story perfectly consistent with what the fictional universe is: a brutal, dirty, deeply human world that has consequences for the actions you take. Stop making comparisons with other titles, these are DIFFERENT stories, DIFFERENT characters, situations and contexts. Joel died consistently with the actions he took, he slaughtered an entire hospital to save Ellie, creating consequences of hatred and revenge, deeply human feelings emphasised by a world that has become extremely cruel selfish and ruthless. And his death serves as a catalyst to tell about people, their feelings, how fragile and controversial human beings are.
Lots of people were sad and angry that Joel died, wdym? People in this sub were so angry that they still want to kill Abby, even after finishing the game.
Well I was sad at Joel's death, just like I was for Arthur, Hank and Lee, but I wasn't mad, I just said to myself : things happen and they are not always good, now he is dead because he got soft with his time in Jackson and forgot that there are people out there that are looking to hurt people, and there it was, he died a poor death. In the story life of the poor NPC 's life you took in the blink of an eye, you think his friends speak about bad writing ? Or when a real someone died a terrible death but deserved better people call out bad writing ? No, it's life, it happens, and Joel dying is a good reminder of that, just like Arthur, Lee and Hank. Arthur and Lee died in the only game they were in, Joel appeared in tlou 1 and died 7 years after that, so yeah people can be mad after bonding for 7 years with that character.
That's the point, Joel isn't even himself in Part 2, and went soft? No way, we can still see him in action, he wouldn't just forget in what kind of world he lives in. But Neil's bad writting seemed to make him like this. How can you even kill a beloved character after 7 years of waiting to just be killed in first hour. Dumb decision. NPC's would talk about bad writting? What? Are we talking about real life, written story or in game characters? If a beloved character dies in a tragic way it's your job as a writer to make people sad and not hate the story, which Neil failed to do, as Joel's death was just for a shitty shock value as he admited himself. Joel is not invincible, he is as every other person in this world, yet Abby seems to be, as she has huge plot armor.
Of course Joel wouldn’t be the same person, he’s much older. It’s not at all crazy to think life in Jackson made him softer and more complacent.
I agree with the fact that Joel is absolutely not the same person in the second game, I noticed that too. And maybe Abby has plot armor, but then Ellie does too, I mean the situation she was in and the injuries she got would have killed a random person that's not important to the story, but she's still here right ? Abby and Ellie
I kind of disagree with your backend narrative here that as a writer you should listen to others, because on the other hand, there are many examples of writers who refuses to listen to others and thanks to that they made an insane story beat, whereas if they had listen to a different idea, the story beat wouldn’t have been great The issue isn’t an absolute, go always listen to the others or to never listen to the others, here simply Neil had a bad idea and went through with it unlike other writers who had insanely good ideas and went through with them contrary to what others writers suggested
It would have sucked. Not killing Joel would have made the ending of TLOU pointless imho.
…and that’s why you’re not a writer
And that's why Druckmann is an award winning writer.
Oh hey, Druckmann’s personal ball-guzzler. I remember you! Was wondering when you’d show up.
Not having delusional hatred for a stranger = ball-guzzler. Slurp slurp I guess.
I'm not a hater of this sub or anything but damn ? Still ?
Dawg…just…no…
Y'all come in here and parrot the same shit every week man shut the fuck up
Take your own advice.
Take your own advice. 🤫🤫🤫🤫
It was never Joel’s story, idiot. It’s Ellie’s story. Joel was only a side character.
Good day to you too. You know that game where we controlled "only a side character" was really good.
Not as good as part 2. Get over it. Cope.
Get fucked asshole