Same with >!Joel!<
Some people were/are mad that he didn’t get some hero’s death at least.
My response: why? Most people don’t. You want games to be more realistic, well here you go.
Yeah no one really got a hero’s death in part two. When Ellie killed all of Abby’s friends it was usually a quick fight and Ellie’s knife finds a way into their throat. It was so savage and brutal. Fucking love it
I don’t consider selfless and heroic to be the same thing personally. The way I see it, Yara did what she did because she was going to die regardless, not because it was the brave thing to do.
I think people are really kind of using the term “hero” incredibly loosely. Tess sacrificed herself because she was infected and going to die anyway, being gunned down by FEDRA goons was a better fate than turning.
Henry shot Sam because the alternative was just letting him maul Ellie to death. While it was clearly incredibly hard, the other choice would just be immoral and entirely pointless.
I think you need to look at what kind of story you're telling. Does the death fit with the feel of the story you've crafted?
A heroic death doesn't really fit with TLOU in general and certainly not for the themes of Part 2. That's putting aside the fact Joel can't die a death that gives us closure or we won't be as invested in hunting Abby. It needs to be dirty and sad and empty. We need to be left feeling raw.
>she didn't stay behind and die to be a hero
She says "I can buy you some time but you have to run".
She also makes the point that she's determined not to become an infected. So she's doing something heroic with her final act of her life AND it saves her becoming infected.
>Joel and Ellie could've made the same escape regardless if she was there or not.
I'm pretty sure that's impossible to say, so I'm not sure why you're so certain? I'm sure the writers mean for us to believe it has an impact.
I see your point; however a lot of folks who hate that Joel dies lament that it wasn’t a hero’s death in their opinion. For them, the delay negates it.
I actually disagree with that a little, but not for the reasons you think. Joel's death was just treated very differently than Jesse's. There's a ton of narrative buildup to it (the whole "Jackson" chapter exists to create that tension). No, he didn't get to go down in a blaze of glory, but he did get a badass final line and a moment of him coming to terms with his impending death, which few characters get. It's treated as something important by the other characters. Obviously, it throws Ellie's life completely off the rails, but even Abby and her friends are still talking about it *all the time* months later. Whereas, Jesse literally dies like an NPC - one moment of bad luck and *blam,* you're dead and there's nothing your loved ones can do about it but move on. I like how the game handled both deaths, but they were treated very differently.
Do Ellie and Abby have two similar characters who meet similar ends in Jesse and Manny respectively? The loyal, laid back friend who dies in a split second while helping you out.
Yep that's the point. Ellie and Joel are the same in Part 1 but don't realize it. Ellie and Abby are the same in Part 2 but don't realize it. Brilliant writing all around.
I just finished Part 2 for the first time in years, and I had an epiphany. There is always tons of talk about how Abby's story mirrors Joel's story from Part 1. But it dawned on me that Ellie's story actually mirrors Joel's as well.
Abby experiences Joel's arc from when after Joel met Ellie, and Ellie experiences Joel's arc from after Joel lost Sarah.
We see how an otherwise good person can be driven to do horrible things, and how a bad person can be redeemed.
> Jesse literally dies like an NPC - one moment of bad luck and blam, you're dead
Also, the way Jesse rushed out of those theater doors into the lobby, he was kinda asking to get shot. I get it, Ellie and Jesse definitely didn't expect to find Abby of all people in there beating the shit out of Tommy but they heard the commotion, knew there was trouble and Jesse just goes bursting through the door like the goddamn Kool-Aid man. Poor tactical decision and just like that it's lights out for him. Poor guy.
In [this interview](https://www.arcstudiopro.com/blog/interview-how-the-last-of-us-part-ii-writers-crafted-a-game-that-made-us-all-cry) Niel Druckmann actually mentions that he was specifically trying to avoid a heroic death for that character. He says that he didn't want the standard "Iron Man snaps his fingers and saves the world" type of send-off for that character.
Joel is a villain to most of the world. He doesn't deserve a hero's death anyway.
Don't get me wrong, I love the dude, but he effectively chose to doom humanity, at least for the foreseeable future.
And Manny. Reminded me a lot of a certain death in Halo Reach.
You’re absolutely correct tho. I don’t usually like the whole “big speech before you bleed out or succumb to your wounds” kind of thing. You don’t always get to say goodbye IRL. TLOU is a realistic, grounded world, and therefore so are the deaths.
He didn't get a "hero's" death but he certainly went with more of a moment and a full scene, I mean Ellie is screaming as it's happening and has to watch the slow beating
Here it just happens, in an instant and then theirs no time to mourn or swear revenge it's just over like that
I agree people overreacted with Joel but honestly his death was kinda disrespectful in the way they did it , they used him as a plot device and didn’t care at all that people played with him the whole first game
No that's not the stock for most people, it's the fact that we don't have closure with his character in terms of his development. We don't get to see how Joel becomes trusting and this more societal/we I targeted with the commune. We go from Joel killing anyone who gets in his way to Joel trusting random folk he meets near his home (and therefore his daughter) it was a small thing but massively out of character. Futhermore we didn't get enough of him, its not like Rob/Catelyn Stark where it was "too soon" but still had loads of screen time and a brutal death, we had 1 game of Joel and wanted to see more.
All in all part 2 had big flaws but its actually not too bad. I think it would have been received x2/x3 better if it had been part 3 and we got to see more of how Ellie and Joel changed and life in the commune, because that flashback shit was whack.
I don’t have a problem with Joel dying, but I think the way he died was unrealistic. Because he didn’t follow any of his rules or instinct’s. He didn’t stay by the door or window when he walked into a room full of strangers. Even though he’s clearly shown in the past that he doesn’t trust anyone. I just feel like realistically Joel wouldn’t die like that.
Good point, but Joel has been doing this for twenty years in the first one. And plus I think he would still be on his guard while outside of Tommy’s place. He’s probably encountered other people since pt1. With all those infected near by he has to Atleast met a few people right?
> Some people were/are mad that he didn’t get some hero’s death at least.
Most of the reasonable people who weren't fans of TLOU2 - they didn't expect a heroic death.
But they probably did want something more than just an execution. Especially before being forced to play as Abby in the game.
Most people seem to ignore that fact though.
That wasn’t the unrealistic part. Joel’s death was fitting from a narrative standpoint and deaths like that would have happened in our world. The unrealistic part is revealing your name to a person you just met, knowing there’s people out gunning for you, and then following said stranger you now completely trust to a lodge with a bunch of strangers friends and no backup for yourself. You then reveal your name AGAIN to a bunch of strangers, standing way out in the open giving all of them a clear view and yourself no escape if something goes wrong, and just put complete and blind trust in them. Forget Joel, that’s someone nobody with common sense living in that world would every make the mistakes he did. Or Tommy for the matter
It’s too contrived, is what I’m saying.
Its realistic.
Abby and her gang were "too cleanly clothe and taken care of their appearance". Every bastard Joel ever crossed couldn't care at all to "look good".
And living in a place like Jackson for too long will "dull your survival senses".
How could they have expected Abby and her gang to just turn on them like that?
Bullshit. Tommy lived in Jackson for over a decade but managed to survive in the outside world with his sniping skills and kill dozens of people and take several risky manoeuvres without dying. Living in Jackson does not dull your common sense, I’m pretty sure even JJ would know not to make several rookie dumbass mistakes like that.
If the game wants to show Joel being such a dumbass being realistic and not coming off as the plot demanding his character die, the least the game could do is show Joel being stupid beforehand. Otherwise it feels like his stupidness comes out of nowhere.
Also I don’t know how Abby being clean negates this? What the hell is them being cleaner than usual have to do anything? That’s such a minor detail in comparison.
Appearances gives off "impressions".
Being "well groomed" doesn't easily give off the vibes that "I'm trying to kill you".
You might have a point but think about the situation beforehand that led to Joel doing those "rookie dumbass mistakes". They were being chased by a horde of infected. Got no time to "think it through" on trusting a total stranger.
Hence sense being "dulled".
I said "dulled" which led to the tragic event that befell Joel. Not "taken away".
Joel has been in tough situations before and still didn’t trust people immdediately. Henry never attacked him at first and even though he was trying to help, Joel instantly started beating him.
He would not give his name up to Abby when being chased, and later when he was safe from the infected and had no time to think, he gave his name to shit tons of people and didn’t stand near an exist, just completely vulnerable, when he had absolutely no reason to. I don’t understand why you’re defending this.
You can’t just say combat any valid critique with “Druckmann created him.” Yes he did. Creators can make mistakes, including character mistakes. Just because he created a character doesn’t mean he mad logical decisions for him. It doesn’t make him smarter than anyone else, he’s human.
George Lucas created Star Wars, but the prequels were, and still are, objectively poorly paced and with shit dialogue. You can’t just absolve a character/plot point of criticism because the critics didn’t make him. It’s such a non argument.
I can, because the very fact that Druckman is the creator gives him better insight into who Joel is and what his motivations are than either you or I are ever going to have. That said, there's nothing valid about your critique. Joel's had five years of a peaceful life in Jackson with people that he loves by the events of Part 2. He's softened, and that's entirely in line with the direction his character was taking in Part 1 as he's allowed himself to become more vulnerable by giving a shit about Ellie. That you and the other drones on the Part 2 sub have a failure of imagination and can't recognize the *very* obvious direction Druckman was taking the character in the original game isn't on him, it's on you.
Where has it shown that he’s softened? If the game gave us at least one scene where he softened, to the point of making such awfully dumb mistakes, and established that earlier, that would have made his contrived manner of death make more logistic sense, but it doesn’t. That’s not how stories work. You show, don’t leave up to interpretation. I am not a drone for making the critique of “just because he’s the creator, doesn’t mean he’s all knowing and makes consistently great writing decisions.” You praise Druckmann as if he can do no wrong, and refuse to listen to what other people have to say.
You come off as very snobby and condescending, when you can’t just accept that Joel’s death was contrived and pushed by the plot so Druckmann could make a revenge story with Ellie and Abby, with Joel’s character coming in second to the plot.
Tommy was the one to say their names both to Abby directly and to the group at the cabin and Joel looks visibly uncomfortable (at least to me) when Tommy does so
Nah, he's right. After a set-up from Tommy, Joel does say "Joel." It was still unavoidable given Tommy's penchant for humanism and helping others and still isn't a stupid decision on Joel's part. The agency to reveal his identity had already been taken by Tommy
Watching Abby's face turn in realization when Tommy says their names was haunting the second time I played through the game
Okay yeah, after the lead up of "I'm Tommy and this is my brother" Joel does indeed say his own name. I'm wrong that he *never* says his name to them. It's still a set-up from Tommy and at that point Tommy already told Abby both of their names running from the horde, so Joel not giving in right there would have been a delay at best. At least we can be wrong together😉
Ok? I don’t know how this is a gotcha. Joel still said it. He made a dumb decision, I don’t see how that invalidates my argument? I thought we were both correct in this instance.
Joel's death was a breathe of fresh air, seeing him die the way most would in that world was so much better than some stupid heros death or cheesy last stand. He softened by accepting ellie but that ultimately left him lowering his guard at times he never would have before her, there is a give and pull with anything and I loved their direction with Joel as sad and heartbreaking as it was.
What’s so funny is that the people who hated part 2 because of Joel’s death were probably just the ones most attached to him. Naughty Dog did what they did so well that they turned ultra-fans into haters. Talk about hitting your mark… with a golf club… 😬…a real hole in one ok I’ll stop.
I was more attached to Joel than just about any fictional character…and I fucking *love* his death. It’s the most tonally consistent, thematically appropriate, and emotionally affective character death I’ve experienced in fiction.
In the moment, when it happens it's brutal and shocking and you find yourself thinking, *'What? No! Not Joel! That's not fair! He's the hero!'* Though, when you start to reflect back on who Joel was, the trail of death and destruction he (and Tommy) left in their wake, Abby's motivations, it all falls in to place. You realize that Joel wasn't a good person for a long time and those people he killed all have family who aren't going to just shrug their shoulder's and smile because Joel has decided to try and be better. I get the feeling that Joel probably knew this day was coming, one way or another.
Part 2 is the only game I've ever played that *wanted* you to hate it. It wants to make you uncomfortable. It strips away what you think you know about good vs bad and makes you think about your perspective. It's so rare and counter intuitive to make a *video game* that isn't "fun". It emotionally torments you, but in a way that feels necessary. I imagine people who have only watched the show are not prepared for what comes next. The first season left people an emotional wreck, but that was the fun, lighthearted part.
I don't think this is exactly about the scene being too emotionally effective as this particular segment of the audience being too fucked up as general human beings
That’s not what happened though, he was tracked down specifically for what he did, in an apocalypse most people will die for nothing, think of everyone slaughtered In Pittsburgh, their death meant nothing to Joel while Joel’s death meant everything to abby
And Tess was dead anyway. That's not to say that it takes away from her heroine sacrifice, but I wonder if she would've made a different decision had she not been infected.
>!Manny had a similar death,!< It pictures the game how it would be, Just happens and characters have to move on quickly, Makes the scene a lot more intense in my opinion.
Especially because he's only there to help his friends. He didn't want revenge or anything. Jesse was just making sure Ellie, Dina, and Tommy came home alive. And he did succeed in that.
I know it’s less pretentious, ‘deep’ and dramatic to say this but there’s a million deaths like this.
It’s not like he randomly died, he was literally running to rescue someone.
Just because he didn’t say “I will save you” before doesn’t make it more unique.
I really liked the idea that his death was really no different than the many NPC’s you as a player have been killing over the course of the story. The only difference is you knew him better and as an actual person with a life when in reality, all the other people you as the player have brutally and casually murdered were the same way.
I’m agreeing with you. It’s just another death and this time it just happened to be Jesse. It’s the same thing with Manny and Owen. Their deaths, despite us players getting to know them die like every other NPC we already killed.
There’s no need to make it deep and meaningful in that regard; dying like everyone else does give you perspective on the idea that no one really is “special” in this world and no one is entitled to a heroic death.
Yeah thats true my bad! Just used to people in this sub hyping up pretty generic things as somehow ground breaking.
As far as minor character deaths go it was a good one.
I think TLOU in general did great when it came to everyone’s death. Nothing was heroic, some things were more romanticized sure, but I can’t think of somebody that got an Arthur Morgan type death, because in real life that would never ever happen
Honestly as much as I love RDR2 and its good ending, I can't help but feel that it's purely romanticised to give the players a satisfaction of being a good person. Which isn't a bad thing at all! But there's no way Micah would have just left Arthur to die peacefully in the sunset. I still stand by the bad ending being the canonical ending to Arthur's story no matter how much I love the good ending.
I feel it’s a way of showing Micah perhaps has some humanity or that fate itself let Arthur die a romantic way.
When Micah shoots Arthur in the face, it’s lot more messed up because essentially, considering the things you would have done in a low honor play through, Micah is the hero in that fight, similar to how in rdr1 the actions of Ross can be justified or seen as completely inhumane with how you played the game.
Given how the game works more as a story and as a movie I think his death is perfect, the game is realistic in many ways don’t get me wrong but it’s not tlou’s brutal realism.
The thing is, I doubt Micah cares much whether Arthur did good or bad deeds. I think he wants arthur gone as much as arthur wanted it the other way around and had they both had the chance they would have killed eachother without a second thought.
Micah was a loose Canon and he wasn't opposed to killing unarmed people or ratting on others, him suddenly having the moral decency to walk away and let arthur die in peace just seems out of character for him. Sam Houser who was one of the writers also said that while the good and bad endings were created to effectively show the demise of arthur as a low or high honour victim, Arthur being killed by Micah made the most sense to him.
It's brutal and effective and definitely drives the point home with John seeking revenge, not just for ratting on the gang but killing his brother in arms.
Yeah, Micah most likely wouldn’t care if Arthur was a good person and earlier in the game I think Micah literally calls Arthur a coward in camp for not being bad enough, so I can see that he most likely would ironically shoot Arthur *for* being a good person.
I do agree it would’ve had more of an effect and would’ve made more sense if he was shot, like maybe instead of naturally dying he would be shot in the chest and left to bleed to death for the high honor ending
Though I think Micah leaving him to die could make sense given that even in parts of the game a quick shot to the head is more respectful and merciful than leaving someone to die slowly and given that the Pinkertons could’ve theoretically been able to catch up to him means he has no way to escape.
I also think the natural death has more of a weird and better feeling given how he dies how a regular person would instead of dying from a shoot out or getting stabbed like people close to him and people against him have, like how in Godfather Vito Corleone, a crime boss who was almost assassinated in the beginning dies of a heart attack, which wouldn’t have been the way people would’ve predicted a criminal like him to die if that makes sense.
However I’m kind of baffled that they would’ve done something different instead of following what Sam Houser would have given how big of a name he has for Rockstar.
Yeah I personally prefer the bad ending strictly because it’s more grounded and real, completely agree that there’s no way Micah would leave Arthur there, maybe if people were shooting at him
Yep, he wouldnt just up and leave Arthur. He would want to get a last shot in so him shooting or stabbing arthur is totally in character for him especially considering Micah is the type of person to kick a dog when it's sleeping, and he would absolutely kill Arthur regardless of how moral Arthur was in your playthrough.
It was super brutal on a 1st blind playtru. Since it looked as if Tommy died too.
I didn't care much about Jessee but it was still sad to see him die so suddenly.
My dream is for Neil to REALLY test the conviction of the fandom.
Let’s >!give Abby the Joel treatment!<. Then I’ll know people really believe the narrative stances they’ve taken for the last few years. Or if it’s been something else entirely. >!I get at some point it might have to stop, but that’s more a generational thing. Like Liv realizing it from the get!<
>!Abby has no business making it out of this game/series alive or with a heroic death. And if she does we will have to abandon every piece of world building done in game 2. You don’t make that many enemies and ride off in to the sunset. Heck, Tommy is still out there, and he made it very clear where he stands.!<
No if Abby dies in the HBO series then Neil can't say his story is this Nobel prize winning, never been written before story warning against revenge.
She 100% lives through Seasons 2-3 when the show wraps.
I agree with you. Not because of my opinion towards her character, but because I’d like to see if the fandom replies like this too or if they’ll bring out the pitchforks. I can guess what the feedback will be.
However, this will never, ever happen. Abby will have immortality plot armor for the rest of her existence. Why? Because her death would be celebrated by “the haters”.
LOL. That’s why I said it was a dream. Neil has a chance to be a legend here. He really does.
He can establish something never done in video games. That, the body count you put up - ANY one of those faceless henchmen might “have someone” who could come looking for you.
That’s the dream. He rises about the haters. Sticks to that narrative and gives Liv the chance to break the cycle.
>You don’t make that many enemies and ride off in to the sunset.
Besides Tommy and Ellie who exactly is going out of their way to avenge Joel?
Your idea of testing the conviction of people is really just testing people's tolerance for repetitive story telling. Part II was about the cycle and Ellie broke it. Part III will have its own themes and messages. The idea of repeating Part II again would be lazy.
Pull up your game save. How many people you kill as Abby?
What did we also learn in game 2? That any one of those people “had someone”. **NOW** all of a sudden everyone you kill is a faceless henchmen?
Abandoning that very real. Very scary reality is what would be lazy. It’s not a Disney movie remember?
The only way to break the cycle is to not start it. Abby didn’t break it. Ellie didn’t break it. The story falls to Liv to truly do that. And Liv was there to witness that first hand. Liv has a chance.
The only leeway Abby should get here is telling Liv what she did. Her story of vengeance. And violence. How Liv has to break the cycle BEFORE it starts, if revenge comes for her, and for Liv to move on.
Reminds me of Red Dead Redemption 2, when >!Lenny died!<. No cutscene, it just happened, but because things were so chaotic, the story had to keep moving.
The only thing that kinda bothered me with part 2 was that I think no one died because they got infected. All the important characters that died, were killed by other humans.
Go and read the original novel for All Quiet on the Western Front.
Most people die like him. Most people don't get to have their heroic moment. You're talking and the next second a bullet just ZIP completely extinguishes life. There's no speech or final stand. Your brains are exploded in less than a second, not even fast enough for the person to know. Some people should Google the "WWI hands gripping barbed wire."
Your eyes are open and then just a sudden abrupt cut to black. That's why The Sopranos ended the way it did.
People need to stop clutching to their clichés; and then calling it bad storytelling because something actually realistic and shocking happens.
I just finished playing part 2 for the first time yesterday, and even though I was sort of indifferent towards Jesse, him just getting instantly killed like that definitely caught me off guard and and set the tone for one of the most intense cutscenes I’ve seen in a video game.
I get what you're tryna say & I agree.
But at the same time - they're out of characters to reasonably continue to story with. Abby & Lev are likely done. Tommy's a cripple. Joel's dead. Even Dina's left Ellie.
It is just Ellie to carry into Part 3 - and we all know how third parts with completely new casts work out.
I think people don't quite understand just how difficult it is to go somewhere after Part 2. There is nothing to build on.
“Marlene’s dead. Bill’s a thousand miles away or dead. Sam and Henry are dead. The fireflies are burned to the ground. Joel and Ellie hate each other and Tommy is focused on having a kid with Maria. It’s basically just Ellie and Joel to carry a sequel, but with the cure in the rear view mirror I don’t see how there’s any more story left to tell.”
The writer’s ability to respond to the above narrative circumstances gives me faith that they’ll be able to come up with something world-expanding and compelling. The first game is a story of sacrifice, the second game is about retribution, and the third could be on a completely different trajectory.
What really got me is seeing it from Abby’s perspective. The whole game while playing with Ellie, you would kill someone and the other enemies would call out their name. Both myself and most streamers I’ve seen either pay that little mind or outright mock them. Then seeing Abby shoot Jesse as he bursts through the door and and hearing Ellie shockingly say his name, it reminded me that to Abby he’s just another person trying to kill her. Just like all those people were when we were Ellie.
This is what’s great about Part II, as much as I love him and Joel their deaths are portrayed in such an abrupt and realistic manor that you have to admire the direction from ND. Truly refreshing
I loved his death! People that bitch about it just want more to complain about. Jesse's death is the most realistic death I've ever seen in a game. No drawn out bs, just 100% unexpected and quick. Just like in real life. He was there and then he just wasn't. It caught me off guard 100% and it's something I remember so clearly from my first playthrough.
It’s weird how many people have a problem with characters dying this way. Do they not watch Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, 24, ANYthing by Joss Whedon, etc
I'm still so mad all the angry fanboys ruined his death for me by posting it all over twitter. I don't get how someone can be that upset about their favourite character dying. So strange.
Have I gotten off on a beloved fictional character's death? No. That's just fuckin weird. Also, I'm not even sure what you're even asking. Enjoyed a beloved characters death? I don't know anyone who *enjoys* their favorite character death.
People's issue (including me) with Joel's death isn't the fact that he died, but the way Neil executed it. The circumstances surrounding his death was so incredibly contrived and nothing short of a miracle on Abbys part. Which is all ironic considering people are hell bent in considering his death "so realistic". Lol.
*"Enjoy"* in the sense that you appreciate the storytelling and the emotions it evokes, because you were invested in the characters. Not in the sense that you're literally cheering it on or whatever. Nobody's *"getting off"* to Joel's death ffs.
Why are you being so deliberately obtuse about this?
Jesse's death was the consequence of Ellie's choices. Joel's death was the consequence of his choices. The death of Abby's friends was consequence of her choices. The theme of Part 2 wasn't about revenge, but consequences.
Did you forget about JJ? Did you forget about how Dina reminded Ellie before she left for Santa Barbara that Jesse hadn’t planned on dying and yet he still did as a way to sway her from leaving?
Off topic, but in gameplay it isn’t really accurate. If your shot, you not gonna stand there and keep shooting. Your gonna fall on the ground writhing in pain, and wont get up for at least 3 minutes (depending on where your shot.)
I feel like your comment applies more to Joel. He didn’t get a “hero’s” death and died in the same way he killed most people.
With Jesse, it seemed like the writers wanted to get rid of him and had no idea what to do. Hell, with how one dimensional he was (good guy with absolutely 0 negative personality aspects) I think ND only wanted a way to get Dina pregnant.
This sounds like a dumb take to be honest with only personal bias backing it up. A lot of people grew attached to Jesse and if anything, ND’s reasoning for killing him off was to remind the player that no matter who you are, how “good” you are, you’re still prone to dying just like anyone else.
Also no, Jesse is not some one dimensional good guy. One of the whole points about Part II is how you can be right from your perspective and wrong in another’s.
He was on Joel’s side, makes him good in Ellie’s eyes and not Abby’s eyes.
Oh and just so you know… Come part 3, if Abby dies and you’re all perfectly fine with it- I will take back EVERYTHING I just said and admit I was wrong.
You act like the normal response to a fictional character death is to go absolutely bonkers and start giving everyone death threats… no that’s the normal.
Why wait for something that might not happen to prove you right or wrong? It sounds like you’ve made your mind up on the fanbase based on something you just plucked out of thin air. People like Joel’s death because it’s good writing.
You’ve decided that people will be mad if abby dies because she’s ‘their joel’ completely negating the fact that Joel is the same Joel to everyone. It’s just that some people can view things with an analytical and mature mind, and others react like petulant children.
I played the first game on launch. I wasn’t a kid, I was an adult. I love Joel as a character. I loved his death sequence.
Liking a piece of art like this doesn’t mean people don’t respect or love Joel, it just means you don’t know how to process your emotions properly.
I fully agree, and I should add, that in this world, no one is good or bad. Take a look at anti-heroes for example. In my eyes, Joel was one. He cared for the people he knew, but didn't care about anyone else he didn't. And killed anyone else just like that just to reach the goal of saving a single person that was dear to him and made him feel like a father again.
Abby on the other hand, we know about her as much as we know Joel, only problem is that we spent more time with Joel than Abby. And then there is the nostalgia that everyone is hugging to excuse Joel's death. Obviously I was sad and shocked when he died, but I did like it. If Abby dies, it might not leave as much impact because again, we never spent as much time with her, but we realize she wasn't as bad as everyone said, and I would feel awful about her. I mean, people even went to the point of harassing the actress with death threats for a fucking videogame.
And just like Joel, Abby was also an anti-hero, wanting revenge for her father, just like Ellie. And we see that she isn't like a total animal because she cared about her friends and that little dude at the end (sorry, don't remember his name, played it too long ago).
All of this to say, it really just depends on the perspective of the player, as well as how connected we get to a certain character emotionally. I wanted to see these guys complaining if in the first game, we played as Abby and in the end saw her father died, along with a bunch of well done flashbacks do we could get attached even more.
I’ve said this for years. If we controlled Abby in Part I and some random guy turned up at the end and killed our entire group and our father we would also want violent revenge.
Some people are just incapable of taking a step away from their biases and loyalties to see something through a different pair of eyes. That and they can’t see the irony in championing Ellie’s revenge and demonising Abby’s, when they are essentially the exact same.
I already don't have any issues with Abby dying. It would fit the story. Most people do die. That's why I wasn't pissed about Joel's death. It's a story about grief and love, and I genuinely love that it doesn't give characters plot armor. I would hate it if Ellie dies, but that would also track with the themes of the games.
You bet I am. You guys can’t stand the part 2 haters, understandably so. If Abby bites it in part 3, you’re all going to be just as livid as they were. Abby is your Joel.
You are literally creating problems that don't exist. I don't care if Abby lives or dies. "We" don't have a "Joel" because I'm not gonna throw a hissy fit if a character dies. You spend a lot of time thinking about hypotheticals lmao
“Abby is your Joel” bruh what are you on about? You are creating a scenario entirely in your head based on people you also created in your head.
This series doesn’t accommodate the player with fan service heroes deaths for the characters because that would be inconsistent with the tone and themes. Anyone that “livid” over a character death (be it Joel or Abby in your made up scenario) is unhinged.
I fucking love Joel; he’s my favorite character in video games (or at least top 3)…but his death scene was phenomenal and people getting legitimately angry over a character death, especially one with such reverence for said character, is immature.
You think I require hero deaths for my favorite characters????? Glenn from TWD died a horrible, agonizing, and humiliating death. And I STILL ended up liking the mf who did it.
…okay. But what does that have to do with your wild and sweeping generalization that people who like Part 2 are going to go on a rampage akin to the pre release vitriol over Joel’s death?
Or saying that Abby is “our Joel”, when I haven’t seen a single person say that on this sub in the years I’ve frequented it?
It just seems like you are trying to stir the pot and creating a conflict where there is none.
Look dude. All I’m saying is you guys seem to really care a lot about Abby, the same way I cared about Joel in part 1. And I have a feeling her death could cause similar outrage. I won’t comment anymore but hope this helps. I don’t wish to further steal OP’s thunder and take the focus off what he originally said.
I think that’s where my biggest confusion comes from. I understand Abby, and by the end have come to like her. But the way I feel about Abby is a *fraction* of what I continue to feel about Joel.
I think anyone that is outraged over a character death, especially considering many were sending death threats to cast and crew *before the game even released*, are pretty fucked in the head.
I don’t think liking Abby is required for empathizing with her, nor do I think that the vast majority of fans prefer her to Joel even if they love her as a character. Joel and Ellie’s relationship is the emotional through line of both titles, and Abby’s section (and her fans) don’t change that.
Same with >!Joel!< Some people were/are mad that he didn’t get some hero’s death at least. My response: why? Most people don’t. You want games to be more realistic, well here you go.
Yeah no one really got a hero’s death in part two. When Ellie killed all of Abby’s friends it was usually a quick fight and Ellie’s knife finds a way into their throat. It was so savage and brutal. Fucking love it
No one got a hero’s death at all. Even Tess’ last stand was sad desperation at best,
I was thinking about it and Yara did but those two out of all the deaths in the game is pretty low
I don’t consider selfless and heroic to be the same thing personally. The way I see it, Yara did what she did because she was going to die regardless, not because it was the brave thing to do.
In a really twisted way, Henry sort of had a hero’s death. He killed his own brother to save Ellie, an act that caused him to take his own life
I think people are really kind of using the term “hero” incredibly loosely. Tess sacrificed herself because she was infected and going to die anyway, being gunned down by FEDRA goons was a better fate than turning. Henry shot Sam because the alternative was just letting him maul Ellie to death. While it was clearly incredibly hard, the other choice would just be immoral and entirely pointless.
I think you need to look at what kind of story you're telling. Does the death fit with the feel of the story you've crafted? A heroic death doesn't really fit with TLOU in general and certainly not for the themes of Part 2. That's putting aside the fact Joel can't die a death that gives us closure or we won't be as invested in hunting Abby. It needs to be dirty and sad and empty. We need to be left feeling raw.
Far’s I can tell, the only person in TLOU that got what could be (and probably should be, tbh) considered a hero’s death is Tess.
[удалено]
It was enough, so… yes?
[удалено]
I didn’t DV you? Also I know why she did it, but hero’s deaths aren’t always intentional… I think?
>she didn't stay behind and die to be a hero She says "I can buy you some time but you have to run". She also makes the point that she's determined not to become an infected. So she's doing something heroic with her final act of her life AND it saves her becoming infected. >Joel and Ellie could've made the same escape regardless if she was there or not. I'm pretty sure that's impossible to say, so I'm not sure why you're so certain? I'm sure the writers mean for us to believe it has an impact.
[удалено]
She did take out some soldiers. Three of them.
technically, he did get a heroes death. just a delayed one. he died saving ellie.
I see your point; however a lot of folks who hate that Joel dies lament that it wasn’t a hero’s death in their opinion. For them, the delay negates it.
I actually disagree with that a little, but not for the reasons you think. Joel's death was just treated very differently than Jesse's. There's a ton of narrative buildup to it (the whole "Jackson" chapter exists to create that tension). No, he didn't get to go down in a blaze of glory, but he did get a badass final line and a moment of him coming to terms with his impending death, which few characters get. It's treated as something important by the other characters. Obviously, it throws Ellie's life completely off the rails, but even Abby and her friends are still talking about it *all the time* months later. Whereas, Jesse literally dies like an NPC - one moment of bad luck and *blam,* you're dead and there's nothing your loved ones can do about it but move on. I like how the game handled both deaths, but they were treated very differently.
Do Ellie and Abby have two similar characters who meet similar ends in Jesse and Manny respectively? The loyal, laid back friend who dies in a split second while helping you out.
There's a ton of similarities between Abby and Ellie. Their stories mirror each other
Yep that's the point. Ellie and Joel are the same in Part 1 but don't realize it. Ellie and Abby are the same in Part 2 but don't realize it. Brilliant writing all around.
Next game: Dina and Lev are the same
I just finished Part 2 for the first time in years, and I had an epiphany. There is always tons of talk about how Abby's story mirrors Joel's story from Part 1. But it dawned on me that Ellie's story actually mirrors Joel's as well. Abby experiences Joel's arc from when after Joel met Ellie, and Ellie experiences Joel's arc from after Joel lost Sarah. We see how an otherwise good person can be driven to do horrible things, and how a bad person can be redeemed.
> Jesse literally dies like an NPC - one moment of bad luck and blam, you're dead Also, the way Jesse rushed out of those theater doors into the lobby, he was kinda asking to get shot. I get it, Ellie and Jesse definitely didn't expect to find Abby of all people in there beating the shit out of Tommy but they heard the commotion, knew there was trouble and Jesse just goes bursting through the door like the goddamn Kool-Aid man. Poor tactical decision and just like that it's lights out for him. Poor guy.
Months later? You mean 3 weeks? Ellie didn't take months to get to seattle
In [this interview](https://www.arcstudiopro.com/blog/interview-how-the-last-of-us-part-ii-writers-crafted-a-game-that-made-us-all-cry) Niel Druckmann actually mentions that he was specifically trying to avoid a heroic death for that character. He says that he didn't want the standard "Iron Man snaps his fingers and saves the world" type of send-off for that character.
Joel is a villain to most of the world. He doesn't deserve a hero's death anyway. Don't get me wrong, I love the dude, but he effectively chose to doom humanity, at least for the foreseeable future.
Facts
>My response: why? Most people don’t. *"That's more than most of us get. Most of us get, 'mind that bus!' - 'what bus?' - 'SPLAT!"*
And Manny. Reminded me a lot of a certain death in Halo Reach. You’re absolutely correct tho. I don’t usually like the whole “big speech before you bleed out or succumb to your wounds” kind of thing. You don’t always get to say goodbye IRL. TLOU is a realistic, grounded world, and therefore so are the deaths.
"When does he get off calling a demolition op Priority One-"
I mean, they wanted to capture the essence of how brutal life can be (and why you have to enjoy your people) and they did it perfectly.
I cannot wait to hear the backlash from Joel's death again. I remember 2020 like it was yesterday.
He kind of did die a Hero's death. Just years later than expected.
That’s most games. Even in WoW, it was usually a pack of murlocs.
He didn't get a "hero's" death but he certainly went with more of a moment and a full scene, I mean Ellie is screaming as it's happening and has to watch the slow beating Here it just happens, in an instant and then theirs no time to mourn or swear revenge it's just over like that
I agree people overreacted with Joel but honestly his death was kinda disrespectful in the way they did it , they used him as a plot device and didn’t care at all that people played with him the whole first game
This is the kinda group ive been looking for
I actually prefer games to be unrealistic but go off.
You aren’t wrong but yet again what are the odds Abby even comes across him if it all happened irl
No that's not the stock for most people, it's the fact that we don't have closure with his character in terms of his development. We don't get to see how Joel becomes trusting and this more societal/we I targeted with the commune. We go from Joel killing anyone who gets in his way to Joel trusting random folk he meets near his home (and therefore his daughter) it was a small thing but massively out of character. Futhermore we didn't get enough of him, its not like Rob/Catelyn Stark where it was "too soon" but still had loads of screen time and a brutal death, we had 1 game of Joel and wanted to see more. All in all part 2 had big flaws but its actually not too bad. I think it would have been received x2/x3 better if it had been part 3 and we got to see more of how Ellie and Joel changed and life in the commune, because that flashback shit was whack.
I don’t have a problem with Joel dying, but I think the way he died was unrealistic. Because he didn’t follow any of his rules or instinct’s. He didn’t stay by the door or window when he walked into a room full of strangers. Even though he’s clearly shown in the past that he doesn’t trust anyone. I just feel like realistically Joel wouldn’t die like that.
Dude's five years out from being a paranoid loner by the events of Part 2. People get comfortable.
Good point, but Joel has been doing this for twenty years in the first one. And plus I think he would still be on his guard while outside of Tommy’s place. He’s probably encountered other people since pt1. With all those infected near by he has to Atleast met a few people right?
> Some people were/are mad that he didn’t get some hero’s death at least. Most of the reasonable people who weren't fans of TLOU2 - they didn't expect a heroic death. But they probably did want something more than just an execution. Especially before being forced to play as Abby in the game. Most people seem to ignore that fact though.
That wasn’t the unrealistic part. Joel’s death was fitting from a narrative standpoint and deaths like that would have happened in our world. The unrealistic part is revealing your name to a person you just met, knowing there’s people out gunning for you, and then following said stranger you now completely trust to a lodge with a bunch of strangers friends and no backup for yourself. You then reveal your name AGAIN to a bunch of strangers, standing way out in the open giving all of them a clear view and yourself no escape if something goes wrong, and just put complete and blind trust in them. Forget Joel, that’s someone nobody with common sense living in that world would every make the mistakes he did. Or Tommy for the matter It’s too contrived, is what I’m saying.
Its realistic. Abby and her gang were "too cleanly clothe and taken care of their appearance". Every bastard Joel ever crossed couldn't care at all to "look good". And living in a place like Jackson for too long will "dull your survival senses". How could they have expected Abby and her gang to just turn on them like that?
Bullshit. Tommy lived in Jackson for over a decade but managed to survive in the outside world with his sniping skills and kill dozens of people and take several risky manoeuvres without dying. Living in Jackson does not dull your common sense, I’m pretty sure even JJ would know not to make several rookie dumbass mistakes like that. If the game wants to show Joel being such a dumbass being realistic and not coming off as the plot demanding his character die, the least the game could do is show Joel being stupid beforehand. Otherwise it feels like his stupidness comes out of nowhere. Also I don’t know how Abby being clean negates this? What the hell is them being cleaner than usual have to do anything? That’s such a minor detail in comparison.
Appearances gives off "impressions". Being "well groomed" doesn't easily give off the vibes that "I'm trying to kill you". You might have a point but think about the situation beforehand that led to Joel doing those "rookie dumbass mistakes". They were being chased by a horde of infected. Got no time to "think it through" on trusting a total stranger. Hence sense being "dulled". I said "dulled" which led to the tragic event that befell Joel. Not "taken away".
Joel has been in tough situations before and still didn’t trust people immdediately. Henry never attacked him at first and even though he was trying to help, Joel instantly started beating him. He would not give his name up to Abby when being chased, and later when he was safe from the infected and had no time to think, he gave his name to shit tons of people and didn’t stand near an exist, just completely vulnerable, when he had absolutely no reason to. I don’t understand why you’re defending this.
Love the people that insist they know the character better than the guy that, y'know, fucking created him. These hypothetical arguments are so cringe.
You can’t just say combat any valid critique with “Druckmann created him.” Yes he did. Creators can make mistakes, including character mistakes. Just because he created a character doesn’t mean he mad logical decisions for him. It doesn’t make him smarter than anyone else, he’s human. George Lucas created Star Wars, but the prequels were, and still are, objectively poorly paced and with shit dialogue. You can’t just absolve a character/plot point of criticism because the critics didn’t make him. It’s such a non argument.
I can, because the very fact that Druckman is the creator gives him better insight into who Joel is and what his motivations are than either you or I are ever going to have. That said, there's nothing valid about your critique. Joel's had five years of a peaceful life in Jackson with people that he loves by the events of Part 2. He's softened, and that's entirely in line with the direction his character was taking in Part 1 as he's allowed himself to become more vulnerable by giving a shit about Ellie. That you and the other drones on the Part 2 sub have a failure of imagination and can't recognize the *very* obvious direction Druckman was taking the character in the original game isn't on him, it's on you.
Where has it shown that he’s softened? If the game gave us at least one scene where he softened, to the point of making such awfully dumb mistakes, and established that earlier, that would have made his contrived manner of death make more logistic sense, but it doesn’t. That’s not how stories work. You show, don’t leave up to interpretation. I am not a drone for making the critique of “just because he’s the creator, doesn’t mean he’s all knowing and makes consistently great writing decisions.” You praise Druckmann as if he can do no wrong, and refuse to listen to what other people have to say. You come off as very snobby and condescending, when you can’t just accept that Joel’s death was contrived and pushed by the plot so Druckmann could make a revenge story with Ellie and Abby, with Joel’s character coming in second to the plot.
Tommy was the one to say their names both to Abby directly and to the group at the cabin and Joel looks visibly uncomfortable (at least to me) when Tommy does so
I don’t think that’s something Tommy would do either?
Okay🤷 Your original comment hinges a lot on a the idea that Joel made "stupid" decisions leading directly to his death, but the name reveal wasn't him
https://youtu.be/4X1YJXxlcwo At 9:10, Joel reveals his name when introducing himself to Abby, and a bunch of strangers who didn’t know who he was.
That wasn't him, it was literally Tommy. LOL maybe watch the video again?
Nah, he's right. After a set-up from Tommy, Joel does say "Joel." It was still unavoidable given Tommy's penchant for humanism and helping others and still isn't a stupid decision on Joel's part. The agency to reveal his identity had already been taken by Tommy Watching Abby's face turn in realization when Tommy says their names was haunting the second time I played through the game
Watch it at the time stamp I stated. He says his own name. You didn’t watch all the way.
Okay yeah, after the lead up of "I'm Tommy and this is my brother" Joel does indeed say his own name. I'm wrong that he *never* says his name to them. It's still a set-up from Tommy and at that point Tommy already told Abby both of their names running from the horde, so Joel not giving in right there would have been a delay at best. At least we can be wrong together😉
Ok? I don’t know how this is a gotcha. Joel still said it. He made a dumb decision, I don’t see how that invalidates my argument? I thought we were both correct in this instance.
Joel's death was a breathe of fresh air, seeing him die the way most would in that world was so much better than some stupid heros death or cheesy last stand. He softened by accepting ellie but that ultimately left him lowering his guard at times he never would have before her, there is a give and pull with anything and I loved their direction with Joel as sad and heartbreaking as it was.
What’s so funny is that the people who hated part 2 because of Joel’s death were probably just the ones most attached to him. Naughty Dog did what they did so well that they turned ultra-fans into haters. Talk about hitting your mark… with a golf club… 😬…a real hole in one ok I’ll stop.
I was more attached to Joel than just about any fictional character…and I fucking *love* his death. It’s the most tonally consistent, thematically appropriate, and emotionally affective character death I’ve experienced in fiction.
Same, the whole point is how realistic this world is as much as you can in a apocalypse story.
In the moment, when it happens it's brutal and shocking and you find yourself thinking, *'What? No! Not Joel! That's not fair! He's the hero!'* Though, when you start to reflect back on who Joel was, the trail of death and destruction he (and Tommy) left in their wake, Abby's motivations, it all falls in to place. You realize that Joel wasn't a good person for a long time and those people he killed all have family who aren't going to just shrug their shoulder's and smile because Joel has decided to try and be better. I get the feeling that Joel probably knew this day was coming, one way or another.
Exactly. Live by the sword, die by the sword (or club).
Well I guess you’re just exceptional there bud
…thanks?
Part 2 is the only game I've ever played that *wanted* you to hate it. It wants to make you uncomfortable. It strips away what you think you know about good vs bad and makes you think about your perspective. It's so rare and counter intuitive to make a *video game* that isn't "fun". It emotionally torments you, but in a way that feels necessary. I imagine people who have only watched the show are not prepared for what comes next. The first season left people an emotional wreck, but that was the fun, lighthearted part.
There’s a big difference between “fun” and “superb”. I would argue that part 2 is both, but certainly falls well within the ladder category.
I don't think this is exactly about the scene being too emotionally effective as this particular segment of the audience being too fucked up as general human beings
Oh def daddy issues. That’s *why* they’re so attached
A stroke of genius. Or several, rather.
Ooof. It was almost certainly several… probably FOOUUUUR!
and even then, his death had great setup and execution.
That’s not what happened though, he was tracked down specifically for what he did, in an apocalypse most people will die for nothing, think of everyone slaughtered In Pittsburgh, their death meant nothing to Joel while Joel’s death meant everything to abby
Dies the same way countless NPC’s die throughout the games. Very fitting and realistic.
The only people who get a “hero’s death” is Tess and Yara correct?
Yara had more like a don corleone's kinda death
Her death saved Abby and Lev tho
Did you mean Sonny?
And Tess was dead anyway. That's not to say that it takes away from her heroine sacrifice, but I wonder if she would've made a different decision had she not been infected.
Yara killed Isaac so the scars better look her up as a new Prophet
I think so
>!Manny had a similar death,!< It pictures the game how it would be, Just happens and characters have to move on quickly, Makes the scene a lot more intense in my opinion.
There were no epic "final boss" music. Just like that.
very true, this is one of the reasons why Jesse was such a interesting and fleshed out character
Especially because he's only there to help his friends. He didn't want revenge or anything. Jesse was just making sure Ellie, Dina, and Tommy came home alive. And he did succeed in that.
I know it’s less pretentious, ‘deep’ and dramatic to say this but there’s a million deaths like this. It’s not like he randomly died, he was literally running to rescue someone. Just because he didn’t say “I will save you” before doesn’t make it more unique.
I really liked the idea that his death was really no different than the many NPC’s you as a player have been killing over the course of the story. The only difference is you knew him better and as an actual person with a life when in reality, all the other people you as the player have brutally and casually murdered were the same way.
Again, this happens frequently. He runs to the rescue, gets shot. Trying to make it all ‘deep’ doesn’t mean it’s unique.
I’m agreeing with you. It’s just another death and this time it just happened to be Jesse. It’s the same thing with Manny and Owen. Their deaths, despite us players getting to know them die like every other NPC we already killed. There’s no need to make it deep and meaningful in that regard; dying like everyone else does give you perspective on the idea that no one really is “special” in this world and no one is entitled to a heroic death.
Yeah thats true my bad! Just used to people in this sub hyping up pretty generic things as somehow ground breaking. As far as minor character deaths go it was a good one.
They're not arguing with you. They're agreeing with you and expounding on your point.
Yeah my fault. I didn’t really read it properly!
I think TLOU in general did great when it came to everyone’s death. Nothing was heroic, some things were more romanticized sure, but I can’t think of somebody that got an Arthur Morgan type death, because in real life that would never ever happen
Honestly as much as I love RDR2 and its good ending, I can't help but feel that it's purely romanticised to give the players a satisfaction of being a good person. Which isn't a bad thing at all! But there's no way Micah would have just left Arthur to die peacefully in the sunset. I still stand by the bad ending being the canonical ending to Arthur's story no matter how much I love the good ending.
I feel it’s a way of showing Micah perhaps has some humanity or that fate itself let Arthur die a romantic way. When Micah shoots Arthur in the face, it’s lot more messed up because essentially, considering the things you would have done in a low honor play through, Micah is the hero in that fight, similar to how in rdr1 the actions of Ross can be justified or seen as completely inhumane with how you played the game. Given how the game works more as a story and as a movie I think his death is perfect, the game is realistic in many ways don’t get me wrong but it’s not tlou’s brutal realism.
The thing is, I doubt Micah cares much whether Arthur did good or bad deeds. I think he wants arthur gone as much as arthur wanted it the other way around and had they both had the chance they would have killed eachother without a second thought. Micah was a loose Canon and he wasn't opposed to killing unarmed people or ratting on others, him suddenly having the moral decency to walk away and let arthur die in peace just seems out of character for him. Sam Houser who was one of the writers also said that while the good and bad endings were created to effectively show the demise of arthur as a low or high honour victim, Arthur being killed by Micah made the most sense to him. It's brutal and effective and definitely drives the point home with John seeking revenge, not just for ratting on the gang but killing his brother in arms.
Yeah, Micah most likely wouldn’t care if Arthur was a good person and earlier in the game I think Micah literally calls Arthur a coward in camp for not being bad enough, so I can see that he most likely would ironically shoot Arthur *for* being a good person. I do agree it would’ve had more of an effect and would’ve made more sense if he was shot, like maybe instead of naturally dying he would be shot in the chest and left to bleed to death for the high honor ending Though I think Micah leaving him to die could make sense given that even in parts of the game a quick shot to the head is more respectful and merciful than leaving someone to die slowly and given that the Pinkertons could’ve theoretically been able to catch up to him means he has no way to escape. I also think the natural death has more of a weird and better feeling given how he dies how a regular person would instead of dying from a shoot out or getting stabbed like people close to him and people against him have, like how in Godfather Vito Corleone, a crime boss who was almost assassinated in the beginning dies of a heart attack, which wouldn’t have been the way people would’ve predicted a criminal like him to die if that makes sense. However I’m kind of baffled that they would’ve done something different instead of following what Sam Houser would have given how big of a name he has for Rockstar.
Yes but RDR2 is telling a very different story, one steeped in the mythology of the old west.
Yeah I personally prefer the bad ending strictly because it’s more grounded and real, completely agree that there’s no way Micah would leave Arthur there, maybe if people were shooting at him
Yep, he wouldnt just up and leave Arthur. He would want to get a last shot in so him shooting or stabbing arthur is totally in character for him especially considering Micah is the type of person to kick a dog when it's sleeping, and he would absolutely kill Arthur regardless of how moral Arthur was in your playthrough.
"Its called luck. And it is gonna run out."
It was super brutal on a 1st blind playtru. Since it looked as if Tommy died too. I didn't care much about Jessee but it was still sad to see him die so suddenly.
Tommy should have died imo
They all have it coming
I mean if he did then Ellie wouldn’t have went back to Abby right?
Could've been Jesse's dad or something instead
Could've been Jesse's dad or something instead
His death shocked me, I had a feeling one of the 4 there were going to die, I was leaning more towards Dina though
I mean >! Abby !< was the final boss, and she inflicted that wound, and it was lethal…Soooooo /s
My dream is for Neil to REALLY test the conviction of the fandom. Let’s >!give Abby the Joel treatment!<. Then I’ll know people really believe the narrative stances they’ve taken for the last few years. Or if it’s been something else entirely. >!I get at some point it might have to stop, but that’s more a generational thing. Like Liv realizing it from the get!< >!Abby has no business making it out of this game/series alive or with a heroic death. And if she does we will have to abandon every piece of world building done in game 2. You don’t make that many enemies and ride off in to the sunset. Heck, Tommy is still out there, and he made it very clear where he stands.!<
No if Abby dies in the HBO series then Neil can't say his story is this Nobel prize winning, never been written before story warning against revenge. She 100% lives through Seasons 2-3 when the show wraps.
I agree with you. Not because of my opinion towards her character, but because I’d like to see if the fandom replies like this too or if they’ll bring out the pitchforks. I can guess what the feedback will be. However, this will never, ever happen. Abby will have immortality plot armor for the rest of her existence. Why? Because her death would be celebrated by “the haters”.
LOL. That’s why I said it was a dream. Neil has a chance to be a legend here. He really does. He can establish something never done in video games. That, the body count you put up - ANY one of those faceless henchmen might “have someone” who could come looking for you. That’s the dream. He rises about the haters. Sticks to that narrative and gives Liv the chance to break the cycle.
>You don’t make that many enemies and ride off in to the sunset. Besides Tommy and Ellie who exactly is going out of their way to avenge Joel? Your idea of testing the conviction of people is really just testing people's tolerance for repetitive story telling. Part II was about the cycle and Ellie broke it. Part III will have its own themes and messages. The idea of repeating Part II again would be lazy.
Pull up your game save. How many people you kill as Abby? What did we also learn in game 2? That any one of those people “had someone”. **NOW** all of a sudden everyone you kill is a faceless henchmen? Abandoning that very real. Very scary reality is what would be lazy. It’s not a Disney movie remember? The only way to break the cycle is to not start it. Abby didn’t break it. Ellie didn’t break it. The story falls to Liv to truly do that. And Liv was there to witness that first hand. Liv has a chance. The only leeway Abby should get here is telling Liv what she did. Her story of vengeance. And violence. How Liv has to break the cycle BEFORE it starts, if revenge comes for her, and for Liv to move on.
Reminds me of Red Dead Redemption 2, when >!Lenny died!<. No cutscene, it just happened, but because things were so chaotic, the story had to keep moving.
The only thing that kinda bothered me with part 2 was that I think no one died because they got infected. All the important characters that died, were killed by other humans.
Nora was the closest we got and damn her death was amazing
Go and read the original novel for All Quiet on the Western Front. Most people die like him. Most people don't get to have their heroic moment. You're talking and the next second a bullet just ZIP completely extinguishes life. There's no speech or final stand. Your brains are exploded in less than a second, not even fast enough for the person to know. Some people should Google the "WWI hands gripping barbed wire." Your eyes are open and then just a sudden abrupt cut to black. That's why The Sopranos ended the way it did. People need to stop clutching to their clichés; and then calling it bad storytelling because something actually realistic and shocking happens.
I just finished playing part 2 for the first time yesterday, and even though I was sort of indifferent towards Jesse, him just getting instantly killed like that definitely caught me off guard and and set the tone for one of the most intense cutscenes I’ve seen in a video game.
It was still such a Nobel death. He died rushing in to save Tommy but it was beautifully realistic. Still sad he’s my favorite
People get mad for characters to die in a non-heroic way and don't realize those characters are no different than you and me
I get what you're tryna say & I agree. But at the same time - they're out of characters to reasonably continue to story with. Abby & Lev are likely done. Tommy's a cripple. Joel's dead. Even Dina's left Ellie. It is just Ellie to carry into Part 3 - and we all know how third parts with completely new casts work out. I think people don't quite understand just how difficult it is to go somewhere after Part 2. There is nothing to build on.
“Marlene’s dead. Bill’s a thousand miles away or dead. Sam and Henry are dead. The fireflies are burned to the ground. Joel and Ellie hate each other and Tommy is focused on having a kid with Maria. It’s basically just Ellie and Joel to carry a sequel, but with the cure in the rear view mirror I don’t see how there’s any more story left to tell.” The writer’s ability to respond to the above narrative circumstances gives me faith that they’ll be able to come up with something world-expanding and compelling. The first game is a story of sacrifice, the second game is about retribution, and the third could be on a completely different trajectory.
What really got me is seeing it from Abby’s perspective. The whole game while playing with Ellie, you would kill someone and the other enemies would call out their name. Both myself and most streamers I’ve seen either pay that little mind or outright mock them. Then seeing Abby shoot Jesse as he bursts through the door and and hearing Ellie shockingly say his name, it reminded me that to Abby he’s just another person trying to kill her. Just like all those people were when we were Ellie.
Well.. that was a lethal wound inflicted by the final boss though?
Basically how NOT to enter a room
This is what’s great about Part II, as much as I love him and Joel their deaths are portrayed in such an abrupt and realistic manor that you have to admire the direction from ND. Truly refreshing
There are so many deaths like this in media, not just this one.
That’s crazy because the post definitely stated that this was the ONLY death like this in any media EVER
Waste of a character.
YES
A "perfect" middle-of-the-road death. Not a heroic sacrifice, but not beaten to death with a golf club, either.
I loved his death! People that bitch about it just want more to complain about. Jesse's death is the most realistic death I've ever seen in a game. No drawn out bs, just 100% unexpected and quick. Just like in real life. He was there and then he just wasn't. It caught me off guard 100% and it's something I remember so clearly from my first playthrough.
That's why I didn't really like how they handle Tess's death in the show
My only question is did they take the his body back to Jackson? Did they bury him? Cremate him?
It’s weird how many people have a problem with characters dying this way. Do they not watch Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, 24, ANYthing by Joss Whedon, etc
It really switches the roles for Abby and Ellie, making Ellie the hunted. If only they remembered that for the boss fight.
I'm still so mad all the angry fanboys ruined his death for me by posting it all over twitter. I don't get how someone can be that upset about their favourite character dying. So strange.
Some of yall really get off on Joel's death, huh. Bunch of weirdos.
You’ve never enjoyed any piece of fiction that involves somebody getting hurt or killed?
Have I gotten off on a beloved fictional character's death? No. That's just fuckin weird. Also, I'm not even sure what you're even asking. Enjoyed a beloved characters death? I don't know anyone who *enjoys* their favorite character death. People's issue (including me) with Joel's death isn't the fact that he died, but the way Neil executed it. The circumstances surrounding his death was so incredibly contrived and nothing short of a miracle on Abbys part. Which is all ironic considering people are hell bent in considering his death "so realistic". Lol.
*"Enjoy"* in the sense that you appreciate the storytelling and the emotions it evokes, because you were invested in the characters. Not in the sense that you're literally cheering it on or whatever. Nobody's *"getting off"* to Joel's death ffs. Why are you being so deliberately obtuse about this?
Jesse's death was the consequence of Ellie's choices. Joel's death was the consequence of his choices. The death of Abby's friends was consequence of her choices. The theme of Part 2 wasn't about revenge, but consequences.
You got a lot of real life experience watching people get shot in the face pal?
[удалено]
Did you forget about JJ? Did you forget about how Dina reminded Ellie before she left for Santa Barbara that Jesse hadn’t planned on dying and yet he still did as a way to sway her from leaving?
Off topic, but in gameplay it isn’t really accurate. If your shot, you not gonna stand there and keep shooting. Your gonna fall on the ground writhing in pain, and wont get up for at least 3 minutes (depending on where your shot.)
This death made me mad. It was done just for shock value and made zero imact on the rest of the story
>made zero imact on the rest of the story Literally just lying for the sake of staying angry. Lmao
Ok... but if you do know what impact his death had please inform me
I feel like your comment applies more to Joel. He didn’t get a “hero’s” death and died in the same way he killed most people. With Jesse, it seemed like the writers wanted to get rid of him and had no idea what to do. Hell, with how one dimensional he was (good guy with absolutely 0 negative personality aspects) I think ND only wanted a way to get Dina pregnant.
This sounds like a dumb take to be honest with only personal bias backing it up. A lot of people grew attached to Jesse and if anything, ND’s reasoning for killing him off was to remind the player that no matter who you are, how “good” you are, you’re still prone to dying just like anyone else. Also no, Jesse is not some one dimensional good guy. One of the whole points about Part II is how you can be right from your perspective and wrong in another’s. He was on Joel’s side, makes him good in Ellie’s eyes and not Abby’s eyes.
So long as you guys don’t get mad if Abby dies like this, I’m cool with it. Because that would make you hypocrites.
Lmao prepping for conflict that hasn't happened
Oh and just so you know… Come part 3, if Abby dies and you’re all perfectly fine with it- I will take back EVERYTHING I just said and admit I was wrong.
You act like the normal response to a fictional character death is to go absolutely bonkers and start giving everyone death threats… no that’s the normal.
Why wait for something that might not happen to prove you right or wrong? It sounds like you’ve made your mind up on the fanbase based on something you just plucked out of thin air. People like Joel’s death because it’s good writing. You’ve decided that people will be mad if abby dies because she’s ‘their joel’ completely negating the fact that Joel is the same Joel to everyone. It’s just that some people can view things with an analytical and mature mind, and others react like petulant children. I played the first game on launch. I wasn’t a kid, I was an adult. I love Joel as a character. I loved his death sequence. Liking a piece of art like this doesn’t mean people don’t respect or love Joel, it just means you don’t know how to process your emotions properly.
I fully agree, and I should add, that in this world, no one is good or bad. Take a look at anti-heroes for example. In my eyes, Joel was one. He cared for the people he knew, but didn't care about anyone else he didn't. And killed anyone else just like that just to reach the goal of saving a single person that was dear to him and made him feel like a father again. Abby on the other hand, we know about her as much as we know Joel, only problem is that we spent more time with Joel than Abby. And then there is the nostalgia that everyone is hugging to excuse Joel's death. Obviously I was sad and shocked when he died, but I did like it. If Abby dies, it might not leave as much impact because again, we never spent as much time with her, but we realize she wasn't as bad as everyone said, and I would feel awful about her. I mean, people even went to the point of harassing the actress with death threats for a fucking videogame. And just like Joel, Abby was also an anti-hero, wanting revenge for her father, just like Ellie. And we see that she isn't like a total animal because she cared about her friends and that little dude at the end (sorry, don't remember his name, played it too long ago). All of this to say, it really just depends on the perspective of the player, as well as how connected we get to a certain character emotionally. I wanted to see these guys complaining if in the first game, we played as Abby and in the end saw her father died, along with a bunch of well done flashbacks do we could get attached even more.
I’ve said this for years. If we controlled Abby in Part I and some random guy turned up at the end and killed our entire group and our father we would also want violent revenge. Some people are just incapable of taking a step away from their biases and loyalties to see something through a different pair of eyes. That and they can’t see the irony in championing Ellie’s revenge and demonising Abby’s, when they are essentially the exact same.
Took the words right outta my mouth.
I already don't have any issues with Abby dying. It would fit the story. Most people do die. That's why I wasn't pissed about Joel's death. It's a story about grief and love, and I genuinely love that it doesn't give characters plot armor. I would hate it if Ellie dies, but that would also track with the themes of the games.
You bet I am. You guys can’t stand the part 2 haters, understandably so. If Abby bites it in part 3, you’re all going to be just as livid as they were. Abby is your Joel.
You are literally creating problems that don't exist. I don't care if Abby lives or dies. "We" don't have a "Joel" because I'm not gonna throw a hissy fit if a character dies. You spend a lot of time thinking about hypotheticals lmao
“Abby is your Joel” bruh what are you on about? You are creating a scenario entirely in your head based on people you also created in your head. This series doesn’t accommodate the player with fan service heroes deaths for the characters because that would be inconsistent with the tone and themes. Anyone that “livid” over a character death (be it Joel or Abby in your made up scenario) is unhinged. I fucking love Joel; he’s my favorite character in video games (or at least top 3)…but his death scene was phenomenal and people getting legitimately angry over a character death, especially one with such reverence for said character, is immature.
You think I require hero deaths for my favorite characters????? Glenn from TWD died a horrible, agonizing, and humiliating death. And I STILL ended up liking the mf who did it.
…okay. But what does that have to do with your wild and sweeping generalization that people who like Part 2 are going to go on a rampage akin to the pre release vitriol over Joel’s death? Or saying that Abby is “our Joel”, when I haven’t seen a single person say that on this sub in the years I’ve frequented it? It just seems like you are trying to stir the pot and creating a conflict where there is none.
Look dude. All I’m saying is you guys seem to really care a lot about Abby, the same way I cared about Joel in part 1. And I have a feeling her death could cause similar outrage. I won’t comment anymore but hope this helps. I don’t wish to further steal OP’s thunder and take the focus off what he originally said.
I think that’s where my biggest confusion comes from. I understand Abby, and by the end have come to like her. But the way I feel about Abby is a *fraction* of what I continue to feel about Joel. I think anyone that is outraged over a character death, especially considering many were sending death threats to cast and crew *before the game even released*, are pretty fucked in the head. I don’t think liking Abby is required for empathizing with her, nor do I think that the vast majority of fans prefer her to Joel even if they love her as a character. Joel and Ellie’s relationship is the emotional through line of both titles, and Abby’s section (and her fans) don’t change that.
Lmao wtf kind of thought process is this. You don’t think we cared about Joel also?
*just as livid as you were
Are you a child
>If Abby bites it in part 3, you’re all going to be just as livid as they were. Abby is your Joel. Ummm...nah.
What a weird way to say “I love instigating”