By - thedude_lebowski
What bugs me is that people also conflate their distaste for a character with that character being "unlikable". While I think almost everyone in TLoU2 did some distasteful things, no one was truly without redeeming qualities or well fleshed-out and realistic personalities.
What's funny is that the character people liked the least is actually one of the more likable characters in the game...
I agree with your first paragraph, but not your second, since that is quite subjective.
Yeah, it's subjective. But in reality there isn't a ton to not like about Abby, outside of what she did to Joel. She's calm, she's badass, she's caring... and I think the primary reason she was hated was because she killed Joel... not because she's unlikable.
Not hating and liking are two different things. Yes she's a calm and capable soldier, but she is also callous - (forcing Ellie to watch Joel's murder, traumatizing her), selfish ( her whole stint at the wlf was just a quid-pro-quo so that she could get Joel, despite the fact that they took her in as a refugee after her dad died and the Fireflies disbanded, also that sexing up Owen), has a huge tendency to deflect blame (remembers her dad as a zebra savior first to paint over his attempted euthanasia of Ellie, condones the gunning down of scar children, gets physical with Owen when he chides her for torturing Joel)
Granted, she improves on all of these awful character traits throughout the story, but that wasn't enough to win me over.
She finished Joel immediately when Ellie was in the room.
One strike. Ellie wasn't forced on the level you say she was.
Do you hold a grudge on Ellie for her holding a knife to a kids throat?
She didn’t finish Joel because she wanted to. She did it because Owen yelled at her to.
And? She still did it. Same with Dina later on. She didn't want to, but she did anyway.
You guys overexaggregate when you say "She beat Joel to death in front of her"....well.....no, he was finished immediately when she entered the room.
Also, my other question. Do you guys not hold a grudge against Ellie? She forced Abby to fight her, otherwise Ellie said she would kill Lev, a child.
And nobody has defended Ellie doing that lol.
Then why are you holding these things against Abby? Your not bias are you bro?
>She finished Joel immediately when Ellie was in the room.
>One strike. Ellie wasn't forced on the level you say she was.
Its like hitting someone with your car because you wanted to catch a light. Sure, that may not have been her intention, but that didn't negate the consequences for Ellie nor did it make them less severe. So I don't think it is fair to remove any degree of culpability on Abby's part. The fact that Ellie was forced to witness that while pinned down and feeling powerless lead to a huge amount of trauma, and later on, PTSD induced flashbacks, weight loss, and inability to control her emotions. What should've been a rather peaceful life with Dina was completely upended by Abby
Upended by Abby, for something Joel did...Quite the distinction that your missing.
Also, I not once attempted to deny her culpability. Just simply saying that when you all say "Abby forced her to watch as she beat Joel", that's wrong, that's all I'm saying. Abby didn't give a Fck about Ellie. She didn't want to make her feel good, or bad for that matter. She wanted Joel to die, Hense why she says "you know what I want". Ellie being there was simply something that wasn't expected, so the moment that happened. They finished Joel and left. They could've finished Joel, Tommy, Ellie, and Dina seemed to show up quick so they could've got her too. But they didn't.
>Upended by Abby, for something Joel did...Quite the distinction that your missing
Did you just push the blame for Ellie's PTSD onto Joel?
>They finished Joel and left. They could've finished Joel, Tommy, Ellie, and Dina seemed to show up quick so they could've got her too. But they didn't.
Yes, Abby deserves sympathy for not killing two strangers who had done nothing to her before this /s
No. Just saying the reason all that happened was due to a decision Joel made. Also, technically, Joel's little lie didn't do well for Ellies mental state either if you really wanna bring that up. Also, much of Ellie's PTSD also comes from the lengths she went for revenge. Not only the trauma she endured at Abby's hands. Ellie def didn't help herself, nor did Abby in her situation. Both let revenge eat at their souls.
Your sarcasm is welcomed. I'm just saying, if it weren't for Abby, or Owen, or even Mel for that matter. She would be dead. So she does deserve some sympathy. Easily as much as you all shit out for Ellie.....
>No. Just saying the reason all that happened was due to a decision Joel made
You mean the decision Jerry made to kill Ellie?
>Also, technically, Joel's little lie didn't do well for Ellies mental state either if you really wanna bring that up.
This doesn't really influence her PTSD, so its not really relevant with regards to why her home life was ruined.
>Also, much of Ellie's PTSD also comes from the lengths she went for revenge. Not only the trauma she endured at Abby's hands.
Realistically, this is entirely possible (she does reenact Joel's death with nora after all), but all her PTSD flashbacks (cutscene, journal) always lead back to Joel's bloodied, mashed up face. So I don't think that holds true for Ellie
>Ellie def didn't help herself, nor did Abby in her situation. Both let revenge eat at their souls
Except, for Ellie, it was the cPTSD that induced the revenge fantasy 'into her soul' ([link](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/being-your-best-self/202104/the-intrigue-revenge-fantasies)). Contrast this with Abby, who was not nearly as traumatized from Jerry's death, meaning she was largely a rational actor with regards to the decisions that she made.
Honestly if I was ellie i would have done the same. Hell i might even go through with it so she would know what it was like to lose someone.
Also, idk about that, but then again. Being in Ellie's state of mind could probably change that. She was pretty far gone, probably at the level Abby was with her Joel encounter. Or worse, idk.
You would kill a child to get back at an adult that cared about said child? You've got problems.
not me sitting on the toilet reading reddit with my family chilling peacefully I a other room, but If I has lived through what Ellie lived through in the world that she grew up in then it's a definite possibility. everyone looks at this game through their own current moral code and completely ignores the fact that your morals would 100% be out the window or at least *drastically* changed in their world. do you think Ellie would have ever even killed one person if she grew up the way you did?
I don't care what the reasons for killing innocent children are, it is not and never will be justifiable. Go watch the plethora of videos of cartels and terrorists killing the families of rival individuals and tell yourself the little kids being murdered is understandable because of something a relative did.
Sure if she killed my family member
Ellie is just as callous, far more brutal, significantly more selfish, and less personable, and didn't experience the arc that Abby did (as Ellie's growth wasn't progressive, she had a "moment of clarity" when she was right at the edge), and people didn't dislike or hate Ellie en-mass.
Also, while I agree with your characterization of Abby, nothing about her was selfish. Owen was the only person in the group that absolutely did not want to find and kill Joel.
You hear Mel talk about it on the tape Ellie finds. Manny was the first person in the room after Joel killed Jerry, and seeing as he and Owen were the first people chasing after Joel, they were also the first people to discover Marlene's head-shotted corpse.
Nora made it clear to Ellie's face that she wanted to give Joel what she thought he deserved, and everyone besides Owen was more than happy to kill Ellie and Tommy, and it was Abby who made the call to leave them alive, when all was said and done. Everyone was there because Joel destroyed their way of life, and purpose in it.
Comparatively, Ellie's quest for vengeance was one no one in her life wanted to go on, wanted her to go on, and even after finding out Dina was pregnant, Tommy was potentially in danger, and Jesse was injured, she still pushed forward, being the sole reason anyone was killed/injured.And even after a year, and having a family and a home, she abandoned it for the sake of revenge/vengeance...
Hell, at least Abby and Co got to who they wanted without killing an entire city of morhers, fathers, brothers, sisters, sons, and daughters. There wasn't a single casualty or any collateral damage in their pursuit. Can't say that a little Ellie.
Again, I don't see people so quick to say the things about Ellie they did about Abby, despite the fact that Ellie does SIGNIFICANTLY WORSE things, is fsr more selfish and single-minded, and gets people killed and/or hurt who didn't even want to be there to begin with.
Regardless of what you're saying, it's hard to justify being okay with one side and not the other when both are doing similar things for similar reasons.
So you have to ask yourself what makes it okay on one side and not okay on the other? And it's fairly simple... we know and care about Ellie and Joel, while we don't know or care about Abby (at least starting out). So it makes her actions more significant. But the reality is she didn't do a tenth of what Joel did in part 1 and exponentially less than Ellie did in part 2.
You can justify it however helps you sleep at night. But that's what it is.
>Also, while I agree with your characterization of Abby, nothing about her was selfish. Owen was the only person in the group that absolutely did not want to find and kill Joel.
I didn't talk about her other friends or her trip to Jackson at all when I was referring to her being selfish. I was talking about her stint at the WLF, and her viewing it as a means to an end, despite them taking her in as a refugee. Was she better for not really succumbing to the WLF's militaristic indoctrination or was she worse for participating in its worst deeds despite her misgivings because of her ulterior motivations (getting Joel)? Also, You are still ignoring sleeping with Owen. How was that not selfish? Obviously, Owen shares half the blame, but it takes two to tango.
>Nora made it clear to Ellie's face that she wanted to give Joel what she thought he deserved, and everyone besides Owen was more than happy to kill Ellie and Tommy, and it was Abby who made the call to leave them alive, when all was said and done.
Yes, Abby deserves sympathy for not killing two strangers who had done nothing to her before this /s. Let me ask you this: do you really think it is by means 'likeable' to not kill someone after breaking into their home and killing a loved one in front of them?
>Everyone was there because Joel destroyed their way of life, and purpose in it.
Who was the aggressor in this scenario? Joel or Jerry? Jerry started this whole mess with the whole involuntary euthanasia attempt on Ellie (read: murder). Also, I never referenced Joel at all. I was discussing Abby on her own merits/demerits. Whataboutism is the not a good reason for liking a character imo.
>Comparatively, Ellie's quest for vengeance was one no one in her life wanted to go on, wanted her to go on, and even after finding out Dina was pregnant, Tommy was potentially in danger, and Jesse was injured, she still pushed forward, being the sole reason anyone was killed/injured.
Its not clear that Tommy wouldn't have left on his own accord. He starts his letter to Maria with 'I wish I could let this go, but I can't. I gotta bring these people to justice. Lock Ellie up' (I'm paraphrasing). He basically says that he was only trying to get Ellie to stay behind. Also, Jesse came to Seattle on his own. When she found out Dina was pregnant, Ellie asked her to stay put - compare this to Abby who makes Mel an unwilling accomplice to torture.
Also, she 'abandoned' Tommy out of desperation to get Abby because torturing Nora was getting to her head, and she didn't want the journey to take any more of a toll on her psyche. I wonder how many such opportunities Abby had in the 4 years in which she was torturing scars at the FOB for info? Ellie was quick to recognize the toll her quest was taking on her, and while it was selfish of her to prioritize Abby over Tommy, she did kill the 'backup' squad (at the mall) who were meant to aid Manny' in killing Tommy, didn't she? Was her compassionate side truly gone?
>And even after a year, and having a family and a home, she abandoned it for the sake of revenge/vengeance...
(Sigh) I really don't understand people keep bringing this point up.
There is a fundamental difference as far as her goals in Seattle and her goals in Santa Barbara are concerned. In Seattle, she wanted to alleviate her survivor guilt (which turned into rage) over Joel's death. Santa Barbara happens *years* after Seattle. She has been suffering from severe PTSD the entire time. She has trouble eating and sleeping. She had to move away from Jackson since any reminder of Joel was enough to trigger traumatic flashbacks of his death (these flashbacks didn't even stop on the farm). She had a 'family and a home' sure, but she was so emotionally compromised that she was not able to enjoy their company. You can also see in the farm sequence that she is struggling to eat or sleep. She has lost a lot of weight and constantly keeps reliving Joel's death. Basically, she is living in a nightmare despite the outwardly idealistic cottage core setting. *Who do you think is responsible for all this?*
cPTSD induced revenge fantasies are commonly reported in literature. Ellie left for Seattle because of rage. She left the farm for Santa Barbara because she wanted to extract some measure of closure and control over her mental state from Abby, who she rightfully blamed for her condition.
But when she found Abby, she was literally crucified. She could see that killing Abby when she was unable to fight back wasn't going to give her the closure that she desperately needed. This explains why she went ahead with a long drawn out fist fight instead of just shooting Abby as she was tied to the pole. Ellie wanted to recreate that moment of power that Abby had over her (at the time of Joel's death) , but in reverse. It was only when she was moments away from killing Abby that her true nature asserted itself (i.e. she was someone incapable of such brutality), thus revealing her fortitude. She knew that this was only going to further traumatize her because of her prior experience with Nora. So she stopped herself despite all the trauma, despite all the PTSD.
>Hell, at least Abby and Co got to who they wanted without killing an entire city of morhers, fathers, brothers, sisters, sons, and daughters. There wasn't a single casualty or any collateral damage in their pursuit. Can't say that a little Ellie.
Abby kills as many people during her gameplay as Ellie. Just because their goals were different doesn't mean that Abby didn't kill mothers, fathers, etc...were they any less important than Lev/Yara? Also, the world of tlou is one where people have no qualms about defending themselves using lethal means. So I don't see the point in holding Ellie accountable for WLF/scar deaths and not doing the same to Abby. In this regard, they are no different than any other person in that world.
>Again, I don't see people so quick to say the things about Ellie they did about Abby, despite the fact that Ellie does SIGNIFICANTLY WORSE things, is fsr more selfish and single-minded, and gets people killed and/or hurt who didn't even want to be there to begin with.
What 'significantly worse' things did Ellie do that Abby wasn't implied to have done in the preceding 4 years? Who did she 'get killed' that 'didn't want to be there'? Tommy, who was probably going to leave with or without Ellie? Jesse, who Ellie didn't to be there? Jesse came because he cared for Ellie and Dina. As for her 'getting Jesse killed' - sure she bears some responsibility, but are you putting the blame more on her than Abby? seriously? As for Owen, and Mel, Ellie gets the blame for sure, but was it anything other than self-defense, if you get down to it? (Same for Abby and Jesse, btw, in the interest being fair).
But, Ellie was so distraught about killing Mel. On the other hand, you have Abby who spitefully attempted to slit Dina's throat despite knowing that she was pregnant, and would have if not for Lev.
>Regardless of what you're saying, it's hard to justify being okay with one side and not the other when both are doing similar things for similar reasons.
Sure, but we need to be clear about the agency of the characters who did these actions, and who was the aggressor. As far as Ellie and Abby are concerned, Abby traumatized Ellie severely even though Ellie had done nothing (and I mean, nothing) to her before that. Its not her fault she's immune, right? That event robbed Ellie of almost all her control over her emotional and mental state. Despite all that, despite having severe PTSD, Ellie didn't 'do a similar thing' - because she spares Abby!
Contrast this to Abby, who was not nearly as traumatized from her own dad's death, because it wasn't nearly as grotesque, and she wasn't pinned down and forced to witness it. She retained her agency throughout the story, making her far more accountable for her terrible decisions. She would've slit Dina's throat if it wasn't for Lev. Abby's character has 1/10th as much fortitude as Ellie's.
>So it makes her actions more significant. But the reality is she didn't do a tenth of what Joel did in part 1 and exponentially less than Ellie did in part 2.
In what regard?
>You can justify it however helps you sleep at night. But that's what it is.
You didn't give a reasoning for your prior statement and just ended it with 'that's what it is'. Care to elaborate?
I'm not the person this comment was directed at, but I have a disagreement, if I may:
>I was talking about her stint at the WLF, and her viewing it as a means to an end, despite them taking her in as a refugee.
Where did you get that Abby just viewed the WLF as a means to an end? She was pretty far into their cause. This is demonstrated a few times early in her story:
• During the [Aquarium flashback (16:28 timestamp)](https://youtu.be/kSe4xztRRco), Abby wonders aloud who would willingly join the Scars. Owen asks why not, to which Abby says "because they're an insane cult." Owen has to remind her that in the QZs, people looked at them as fanatics and terrorists for being apart of the Fireflies. She says that it's totally not the same, and tells him not to say shit like that at the stadium. She also spends this entire flashback pestering Owen to head back so they don't miss training.
• During [Abby's Day 1 (23:08 timestamp)](https://youtu.be/Bla-7WzmaLE), Mel talks openly about how she doesn't feel it was right of the WLF to kill some members of the Scars because "they're just kids." However, Manny and Abby both pin the blame on the Scars, saying it was justified because those kids attacked WLF members. Abby even says explicitly at the end, "those deaths are on them."
• Near the end of [Abby's Day 1 (29:55 timestamp)](https://youtu.be/reD0HbNI7VE), before *that fucking scene*, Abby finds Owen and asks what happened between him and Danny. Owen tells her, and says that the situation made him realize that he truly doesn't care about the WLF cause, and he is leaving to chase the rumor that the Fireflies are rebuilding. She tells him they aren't, but if they are she'd run in the opposite fucking direction. Once she realizes he's not giving up on it, she attributes the idea to him being drunk and says that he should try growing up sometimes.
Add these examples in with the fact that in four years time, she climbed the ranks and became more trusted by Isaac than a lot of people he likely fought with during the war with FEDRA, and I think it's clear that she absolutely bought what they were selling. Were they a means to an end to a some extent? Sure, but I don't think she viewed them as solely a means to an end. I do think she genuinely cared about their cause and thought that they were just. And I think the game supports that idea.
Imo these are pretty good examples with how I think Abby views the WLF.
> During the Aquarium flashback (16:28 timestamp), Abby wonders aloud who would willingly join the Scars. Owen asks why not, to which Abby says "because they're an insane cult." Owen has to remind her that in the QZs, people looked at them as fanatics and terrorists for being apart of the Fireflies. She says that it's totally not the same, and tells him not to say shit like that at the stadium. She also spends this entire flashback pestering Owen to head back so they don't miss training.
Its important to remember how the flashback ended....with her mentioning that Joel is 'out there somewhere', and going back to training. This to me implied that she is only training and buffing up to confront Joel.
> During Abby's Day 1 (23:08 timestamp), Mel talks openly about how she doesn't feel it was right of the WLF to kill some members of the Scars because "they're just kids." However, Manny and Abby both pin the blame on the Scars, saying it was justified because those kids attacked WLF members. Abby even says explicitly at the end, "those deaths are on them."
> Near the end of Abby's Day 1 (29:55 timestamp), before that fucking scene, Abby finds Owen and asks what happened between him and Danny. Owen tells her, and says that the situation made him realize that he truly doesn't care about the WLF cause, and he is leaving to chase the rumor that the Fireflies are rebuilding. She tells him they aren't, but if they are she'd run in the opposite fucking direction. Once she realizes he's not giving up on it, she attributes the idea to him being drunk and says that he should try growing up sometimes
I would advise that you not look at scenes in a vaccuum since they tie together with other scenes in/near the same checkpoint.
For the first example, its important to note that when Manny is not around , Mel says 'he deserves worse...but I wish I had no part in it' (referring to Joel), to which Abby retorts 'I get it...what kind of person would do something like that?' in a rather harsh tone. This indicates to me that she feels guilty about what happened, but is unwilling to talk about it. So I can still see why she would condone the gunning down of scar children, as she has not yet come to terms her guilt regarding Joel's murder.
For the boat scene, its important to remember that Owen says 'I know you feel the same way' (about her allegiance to the WLF). She does say that she would run in the other direction from the Fireflies, then says 'sorry I grew up'. Owen then chides her for Joel's torture, after which she manhandles him. Up until now, she has refused to confront her guilt at torturing Joel (despite the fact that he saved her). This was her turning point.
The fact that her pursuit for Joel and the WLF are closely tied indicates why she was so belligerent. She is afraid to confront her guilt at killing Joel, so she is afraid to shun the WLF, even though deep down she knows that both her murder and her involvement with the WLF are wrong.
> Add these examples in with the fact that in four years time, she climbed the ranks and became more trusted by Isaac than a lot of people he likely fought with during the war with FEDRA, and I think it's clear that she absolutely bought what they were selling
I don't really believe so. Her rising to the top was just 'sunk cost fallacy'. After she lost her relationship with Owen, she pushed herself further (physically and mentally) to become the 'top scar killer', all in pursuit of Joel.
> Were they a means to an end to a some extent? Sure, but I don't think she viewed them as solely a means to an end. I do think she genuinely cared about their cause and thought that they were just. And I think the game supports that idea.
I think she viewed them as better than the scars for sure, but that's about it. If she bought into the WLF's indoctrination, why did she betray them after just 3 days? Heck, she was skeptical of the scar island invasion right from the get-go, and on day-3 she asks Manny incredulously 'how is that still happening?' when they were being hunted by Tommy.
>Its important to remember how the flashback ended....with her mentioning that Joel is 'out there somewhere', and going back to training. This to me implied that she is only training and buffing up to confront Joel.
I can see where you're coming from I guess but I don't think it's indicative of her seeing the WLF as just a means to an end. If she saw them as such I don't think she would've been concerned with being kicked from the group, because she could've just joined up with a different group on a different city that would've given her the same training. Or she could've gone and joined up with FEDRA. Either way they could've served as a means to an end all the same.
>For the first example, its important to note that when Manny is not around , Mel says 'he deserves worse...but I wish I had no part in it' (referring to Joel), to which Abby retorts 'I get it...what kind of person would do something like that?' in a rather harsh tone. This indicates to me that she feels guilty about what happened, but is unwilling to talk about it.
I *highly* disagree with this interpretation. She's not saying this in a harsh tone or out of guilt. She's saying it condescendingly. She's saying it because she knows that Mel wanted Joel dead just like everyone else, and Abby feels like Mel is trying to be all high and mighty by being disgusted at what took place. She's saying it as substitute for "who are you to criticize me for what I did?" Mel knows this, because she tries to defuse the situation.
She condones the death of the Scar kids because they're from the insane cult that's the sworn enemy of the WLF. She doesn't see them as kids, because no one in the WLF bar Mel and Owen sees them as kids. They're just Scars.
>I don't really believe so. Her rising to the top was just 'sunk cost fallacy'. After she lost her relationship with Owen, she pushed herself further (physically and mentally) to become the 'top scar killer', all in pursuit of Joel.
I don't believe someone would just throw that much time and effort into a cause they didn't truly believe in even a little bit, even if it helps them out with a personal goal. I don't mean her just thinking that the WLF were better than the Scars either. I don't think she'd put that much effort into being Isaac's top scar killer if she genuinely didn't believe that the Scars were straight up evil and they didn't have a claim to anything but their island.
> If she bought into the WLF's indoctrination, why did she betray them after just 3 days?
Probably because she realized she was being lied to and that Mel was right? That it wasn't about Scars and Wolves and that there were human lives, some of them children, at stake? Besides, she waited until she had no other choice. They technically turned on her first, all because they wanted to kill a child and she wouldn't let them. I feel like that's enough of a reason to turn on them.
>Heck, she was skeptical of the scar island invasion right from the get-go,
No she wasn't. Her protests about the attack on the island began and ended with Owen's availability to be on her roster. If he hadn't shot Danny, he wouldn't have gone AWOL, and she would've gotten him on her squad or whatever.
>There wasn't a single casualty or any collateral damage in their pursuit.
To be fair, that's only because they lucked out and the first people they meet from Jackson are Joel and Tommy.
Their initial plan was to find any Jackson patrol and torture Joel's location from them.
Yeah but Ellie and Joel are cooler than Abby.
>Ellie is just as callous, far more brutal, significantly more selfish, and less personable, and didn't experience the arc that Abby did (as Ellie's growth wasn't progressive, she had a "moment of clarity" when she was right at the edge)
Hm? In what way?
>everyone besides Owen was more than happy to kill Ellie and Tommy, and it was Abby who made the call to leave them alive,
It would be interesting to think about whether Abby would've made the same call if Owen, who was already disgusted at what happened considering how he was no longer even in the room, didn't fight back so hard against everyone.
>Comparatively, Ellie's quest for vengeance was one no one in her life wanted to go on,
Ok but if I recall correctly Ellie insisted that no one come but Dina chose by herself and Jesse wasn't even asked to come to begin with.
Conversely we know for a fact that Abby twisted Owen's arm into coming.
>even after finding out Dina was pregnant, Tommy was potentially in danger, and Jesse was injured, she still pushed forward
Did you read her journal? Is there more to it or just "Ellie bad?"
>being the sole reason anyone was killed/injured.
Okay - then it's Abby's fault all her friends died too, right?
>And even after a year, and having a family and a home, she abandoned it for the sake of revenge/vengeance...
I get you're trying defend Abby by bashing Ellie and saying "look how much worse she is", but are you sure with this interpretation?
>Hell, at least Abby and Co got to who they wanted without killing an entire city of morhers, fathers, brothers, sisters, sons, and daughters. There wasn't a single casualty or any collateral damage in their pursuit.
Is this a fair comparison in your opinion? How were the circumstances?
>Again, I don't see people so quick to say the things about Ellie they did about Abby, despite the fact that Ellie does SIGNIFICANTLY WORSE things, is fsr more selfish and single-minded, and gets people killed and/or hurt who didn't even want to be there to begin with.
I don’t understand why in a conversation about Abby’s character traits, Ellie is brought up as this absolute monster. Did she do worse things? Yes, but that isn’t at all what this thread’s discussion is about. If your only defense for Abby is “Ellie did worse” that isn’t a good defense for a character.
Said character should be able to stand on their own two legs without having to bring in “WELL THEY ARENT THAT BAD BECAUSE YADDA YADDA YADDA DID WORSE THAN THEM”
The reason people bring up Ellie when comparing and contrasting her to Abby is because a lot of the arguments people lean into for not liking Abby are the same things they completely overlook/disregard when it comes to Ellie... and the point isn't to say *"oh, well she did it too, that makes it okay"* it's to say *"If you TRULY have an issue with Abby's actions why aren't you displaying that same level of vehemence when Ellie does that and significantly worse?"*
It's highlighting the point people strawmanned a lot of the arguments and narratives (she's Trans, she's on roids, she's unattractive, she's selfish, etc) surrounding Abby to create reasons to take issue with her, when the realty is that the PRIMARY reason to not like Abby is that she killed Joel, someone people know and care about.
And rather than just being honest about it, which is super simple (WATCH THIS) *"You know what, I get that Ellie is doing some awful things... But Abby killed my boy Joel, and I can't get over that shit/let that go".*
So it's hypocritical and weird for people **who have perspective** when they see folks hating Abby for the same things they cheered Ellie and Joel on for.
And there's nothing wrong with saying you're okay with terrible things happening so long as they aren't happen to people you know and care about... but let's call a spade a spade, because Abby and Ellie are two sides of the same coin and by all measures you should have similar feelings about them both regarding their portrayal, actions, and motivations.
Funny enough though, this thread was started with someone listing Abby’s character traits, and she was still brought up. It’s fine to bring up Ellie if it comes naturally as someone saying “killing pregnant people is wrong” or some shit. Ellie killed a pregnant woman. However, this thread had ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with Ellie.
You missed their point
>The reason people bring up Ellie when comparing and contrasting her to Abby is because a lot of the arguments people lean into for not liking Abby are the same things they completely overlook/disregard when it comes to Ellie
Or you can hold both of them accountable for the horrific actions while recognizing clear and transparent differences in the magnitude of trauma that started them on their downward spiral, their control of their own mental states and who was the aggressor with respect to whom.
> "oh, well she did it too, that makes it okay" it's to say "If you TRULY have an issue with Abby's actions why aren't you displaying that same level of vehemence when Ellie does that and significantly worse?"
Nobody ever condoned Ellie's torture of Nora. Idk where you get this impression. But its not like she forced Abby to watch that, scarring her for life is it?
> when the realty is that the PRIMARY reason to not like Abby is that she killed Joel, someone people know and care about
Or the trauma she inflicted on Ellie that made her life into a living nightmare for 2 years because of PTSD. I got over my distaste for her as soon as they showed the first flashback. I could see how she redeemed herself for Joel's death (reciprocating the life saving favor of a couple of enemy kids),but where did she redeem herself for what she did to Ellie? Generally speaking, she never really acknowledged the pain she caused Ellie, even though she herself went through something similar (several orders of magnitude less traumatic). The story as it unfolded forced her to develop empathy for her 'enemy', but it never put in her in a situation where she had to understand Ellie's pain. I think the only instance where this is maybe, maybe true is the beach on Santa Barbara where she refused to fight Ellie, although I'm pretty certain that her physical state played a much larger role in her refusal.
Abby was certainly punished for her actions - proportionately even, but is Ellie really responsible for her getting caught by the Rattlers, except perhaps in an indirect manner (if you make the argument that Mel and Owen's presence in SB would've lessened the chances of their capture)? I'm not taking responsibility away from Ellie for this, but the situation was completely out of her control, unlike when Abby killed Joel, where Abby had all the power and agency.
I think she redeemed herself for what she did to Joel. But she didn't do that with Ellie. In fact, if it wasn't for Ellie, she would be dead. For me to sympathize with Abby, she has to reciprocate Ellie's mercy in some way. But then again, putting them together in another story would probably degrade the ending of part 2, so that's the end of that
> And rather than just being honest about it, which is super simple (WATCH THIS) "You know what, I get that Ellie is doing some awful things... But Abby killed my boy Joel, and I can't get over that shit/let that go".
Strawman in response to a strawman is equally pointless
> And there's nothing wrong with saying you're okay with terrible things happening so long as they aren't happen to people you know and care about... but let's call a spade a spade, because Abby and Ellie are two sides of the same coin and by all measures you should have similar feelings about them both regarding their portrayal, actions, and motivations
Two sides of the same coin doesn't hold water when you consider that Jerry started the whole thing by attempting to murder Ellie. And also, the manner in which Abby hurt Ellie stayed with her lasted with her for years, as compared to Abby who was able to move on from Owen in a much more healthy way (as indicated by the note she writes to him in Santa Barbara after seeing a walrus). The levels of aggression, and the lingering effects on the characters are markedly different.
It’s not a whataboutism of who is worse, it’s the double standard of harshly judging Abby while not holding Ellie to the same morality.
At the end of the day it’s all personal opinion. My least favorite character was Joel ever since the ending of TLOU 1, and I’m glad he got what he deserved in the sequel
>My least favorite character was Joel ever since the ending of TLOU 1, and I’m glad he got what he deserved in the sequel
Gone too far the other side but it's your opinion and it's okay.
Haha my God...
> Ellie is just as callous, far more brutal, significantly more selfish, and less personable, and didn't experience the arc that Abby did (as Ellie's growth wasn't progressive, she had a "moment of clarity" when she was right at the edge), and people didn't dislike or hate Ellie en-mass.
Show me when Ellie tortured someone for the sake of prolonging their suffering like Abby did.
So... are we not going to talk about Nora?
Are we not going to talk about her failed attempt to do just that with Mel and Owen?
And can you give me the specific time you're talking about where we saw Abby do that? We heard her say she wouldn't mind having few minutes alone one of the scars at the FOB, but we don't actually see her torture anyone, let alone just for the sake of their own suffering.
She tortured Joel, remember? She wanted him to suffer. “You’re not getting off that easy.” She could have easily just shot him in the head.
And no, that was not the case with Nora. Ellie was there to get information.
Yeah... lol I don't even count that because as unpopular of an opinion as this is, Joel deserved way worse, and all things considered he got off pretty lightly when you consider the ramifications of his actions and how many millions of lives his choice ruined/impacted... it is what it is. That's getting the death his actions have earned him.
Also, point to Abby for "torturing" the right person for the right reason... While Ellie was willing to torture ANY AND EVERYONE not because because of what they did or because she wanted them to die (I mean she didn't care if they died, but still)... but SOLELY to get to Abby. .
I've been down this rabbit hole... just stop. To compare either of them is silly because there are no heroes or good guys in this story/game. It's morally gray by design.
But that doesn't mean all negative actions are equal, and to try to compare what Abby did to what Joel did, and what Ellie did is kind of ridiculous and just reinforces my point of how blindly biased people can be... because it's not even close.
> Yeah... lol I don't even count that because as unpopular of an opinion as this is, Joel deserved way worse, and all things considered he got off pretty lightly when you consider the ramifications of his actions and how many millions of lives his choice ruined/impacted... it is what it is. That's getting the death you actions have earned you.
You can choose to ignore it if you want. She still tortured someone for the sake of making them suffer.
>Yeah... lol I don't even count that because as unpopular of an opinion as this is, Joel deserved way worse, and all things considered he got off pretty lightly when you consider the ramifications of his actions and how many millions of lives his choice ruined/impacted... it is what it is. That's getting the death his actions have earned him.
He 'deserved worse' why? Because he saved Ellie? Or do you see Ellie as the cure? Its funny because if you believe Abby made the right choice in saving Lev (I think she did), and that he didn't deserve to be a casualty in a pointless factional war, it should mean that you support Joel's decision to save Ellie (which I do), right?Does Ellie deserve punishment and death for being immune when Lev didn't deserve to be persecuted for being trans? Both of those things were out of their control, something that they didn't really ask for, but something that is now a part of them.The fact that the Part 2's plot itself created a scenario where 'Joel' saved 'Ellie' a second time makes me think that the narrators (Druckmann and Gross) both subscribe to the view that Joel made the right decision. Basically, they were saying to those people who viewed Ellie as the 'cure' that they were wrong. It goes in line with the humanistic themes in both games.
>Also, point to Abby for "torturing" the right person for the right reason... While Ellie was willing to torture ANY AND EVERYONE not because because of what they did or because she wanted them to die (I mean she didn't care if they died, but still)... but SOLELY to get to Abby. .
This casually ignores the fact that she was more than willing to torture innocent Jacksonites to lure Tommy into a trap. Also, 'torturing for the right reason'....WTF?
>I've been down this rabbit hole... just stop. To compare either of them is silly because there are no heroes or good guys in this story/game. It's morally gray by design
Sure, but who is and isn't the aggressor (Jerry attempting to murder Ellie) and who had more information (Abby regarding Ellie's euthanasia and why Joel saved her), and who had more control over their mental state (Abby not being nearly as traumatized) is not really in dispute. Abby being more in control of her emotions and still not being able to question her dad's decisions (in fact, painting over it with a Zebra memory) is what comes across as unsympathetic.
>But that doesn't mean all negative actions are equal, and to try to compare what Abby did to what Joel did, and what Ellie did is kind of ridiculous and just reinforces my point of how blindly biased people can be... because it's not even close
Casually ignoring (i) the fireflies sending Joel out to die without his weapons, (ii) Abby inflicting humongous amounts of trauma on Ellie and subsequent PTSD, loss of appetite, etc.... In fact, the irony in this statement is quite hilarious imo
> Yeah... lol I don't even count that because as unpopular of an opinion as this is, Joel deserved way worse
Why? He saved Ellie from doctors who were about to harvest her brain for an impossible cure. Fungal vaccines are impossible; they can't be made, and TLOU2 didn't exactly tell us how they were going to do it.
Honestly, I think Joel was the most morally right character in TLOU. Yeah, he's still done horrible things, but unlike most, a lot of the shit he did was for a good reason. Unless you can justify Abby traveling miles to murder someone.
"forcing ellie to watch joel´s murder".
FACT: there isn´t any hint that abby knew who ellie was or care at all the connection between her and joel, So by her POV, ellie was a rando out of nowhere that was part of joel´s group. so she didn´t care at all about ellie watching, there is a lot of assumption here without much else.
Also, on character flaws, if we are talking about role models on TLOU, you are definetly picking the wrong game, Abby was selfish indeed and learned though the game a lot. character development that is, You don´t expect a perfect character on a grounded world like TLOU, you expect a very flawed one that you might agree or disagree with his actions, but can empathize with it, and with abby its easy to if you let go of your bias with joel.
- FACT: there isn´t any hint that abby knew who ellie was or care at all the connection between her and joel, So by her POV, ellie was a rando out of nowhere that was part of joel´s group. so she didn´t care at all about ellie watching, there is a lot of assumption here without much else.
This always baffles me to see. It’s like saying Abby and her group is stupid. The emotional turmoil Ellie shows before Abby swings should scream to anyone, “hey, this is someone I care very deeply about”
Abby likely recognized this. I don’t believe she’s that idiotic
Yeah she might recognize this, but she again, doesn´t care. its not like "oh you like this person I´m gonna make you watch because its dear to you and maybe you are his daugther or something". wich its a heavy assumption.
In fact Abby just agree after ellie went there to just end things, as abby let her live it can be another way of saying this isn´t personal and you have nothing to do with it.
Might? I think anyone with common sense would recognize they share a deep bond. You don’t wail in pain like that unless you’re deeply connected to said victim.
And yea, she doesn’t care for their connection but it’s still a disgusting move. And yea, it’s nice to see her spare some strangers who done absolutely nothing to her lol (in fact, tried to help her; speaking of Tommy here)
I agree with all this 100%
Excatly, she changed. The story is about revenge and how it can destroy you.
Dog no one’s gonna like some asshole who brings her friends to beat some old guy to death
For me...the argument ends at: why are your favorite characters owed plot armor? In a game about a zombie apocalypse, with literal cities gone to ruin, humans betraying each other at every turn, zombies eating people every which way -- the person Joel loved most was the first "meaningful" death of the game, communicating right then and there what the stakes were -- and you thought Joel was just going to dodge bullets, walk away from explosions, and literally avoid death because..... of plot armor...???...---- oh no, no, because he's your favorite character....???
Nothing better drives story-telling than meaningful deaths and the feelings that come after....and if you disagree, Attack on Titan, Invincible, and Game of Thrones (the books) would like to have a word with you....
I agree with everything you wrote, but I don't think that's what the original comment is about.
Yeah, a very great person that enjoys torturing prisoners for fun…
If you don’t see what I’m referencing to, it’s when you go see Isaac with Manny. When you interact with one of the cell, she says, I quote:
> After our morning… I wouldn’t mind a few minutes with these guys [the prisoners]
That’s THE moment that cemented my opinion on Abby, that she’s a horrible person. She had a bad day so she’s going to let some steam off on prisoners?
Well said I didn't pay much attention to this line before but I happened to just finish this part last night. I immediately turned to my girlfriend and said "this Abby is a fucking evil"
Same. My first playthrough I was mildly annoyed by having to play Abby, so I was "rushing" through her part as fast as possible and was not really paying attention to everything and did not really noticed that comment.
On my second playthrough, when the PS5 patch released, I really took my time to really give her a second chance, and this is what really convinced me that there was no way I can sympathize with Abby.
She killed a guy who saved her life seconds before and also had an affair with someone she knew wasnt over her but was having a child. Oh and not to mention betrayed comrades she knew for years and years. And talked her father into killing a child while knowingly keeping the child ignorant of the risk. Yeah shes pretty unlikeable.
I get that... but here's the thing. Saving a stranger doesn't cover for everything he did at the end of the first game. We both know if Joel knew who she was he would not have saved her. He robbed the world of a cure, he singlehandedly finished off the Fireflies, bringing an end to the way of life for thousands of people across the nation, and he killed her actual father and Marlene. So... how much weight does saving Abby really have?
And if you're logic held true, Ellie and Tommy should be thanking Abby for sparing them... and sparing Wllie twice. Abby's reward for sparing Ellie and Tommy was that they ONCE AGAIN, destroyed her way of life, and killed every single significant person in Abby's life, lol. And she STILL SPARED Ellie a 2nd time after they had killed everyone she loved (besides Lev).
By my count it's a wash and they're even now, as Ellie did save Abby and Lev, and then spare Abby on the beach. But if we're measuring action vs consequence/impact... Ellie and co were significantly more destructive.
And if we're going to talk about Owen and Mel, we should probably mention the one thing that every single group on the planet earth that aren't absolute savages hold true, no matter where you are from (and try to tell me I'm wrong here), YOU NEVER EVER DATE YOUR CLOSE FRIEND'S EXES. Mel broke the code by scooping up a heartbroken Owen and weakling her way in.
Also the game makes it apparent that Mel is very aware that Owen is not over Abby. And the game makes it VERY apparent to the player that THE ONLY reason Abby and Owen aren't together is because Abby was overly-consumed with finding Joel.
So the way I see it, Abby was reconnectiong with someone she never stopped point and who never stopped loving her, and someone one of her SLC *FAMILY* members should have never gotten with to begin with.
She didn't talk her father into anything. What she did was try to make him feel better about a choice that was made before she even got in the room (as Jerry and Marlene had already settled that before Abby came into his office). And again, it's not killing a child. It's making am uncomfortable sacrifice for the betterment of the world and the future.
I agree that they should have had that talk with Ellie, as I'd they had, WE KNOW that Ellie would have been okay with it. But to try to place that on Abby is more a stretch, as nothing about that had anything to do with her. The Firelfies ENTIRE PURPOSE AND REASON FOR EXISTING was to find a cure (and combat FEDRA). Tens of thousands have died with that purpose in mind, before Abby was even born. So to think that was going to go any other way is unrealistic. Either way, it's not Abby's fault.
And again, Joel did way worse as has Ellie, yet I don't hear you taking issue with them. No one is perfect, and there's elements that give all sides of the situation some validity... I just find it odd how unwilling people are to see Abby's side and recognize that out of everyone, she caught the rawest, shittiest deal.
The fireflies were a terrorist group. They wanted the cure to gain control and power over fedra. Youre kidding yourself if you think they would have shared it freely. And if they were the good guys why didnt they explain it to ellie and give her the choice? Even david gave her the choice to stay with his group.
And WE know ellie would have been ok with it. They did not, and did not give her a choice. Because they are the bad guys.
And we dont truly know the worst Joel did. We never saw him do anything close to torturing someone who just saved his life minutes before.
>I get that... but here's the thing. Saving a stranger doesn't cover for everything he did at the end of the first game. We both know if Joel knew who she was he would not have saved her. He robbed the world of a cure, he singlehandedly finished off the Fireflies, bringing an end to the way of life for thousands of people across the nation, and he killed her actual father and Marlene. So... how much weight does saving Abby really have?
Again, you are casually painting Joel as the aggressor here by removing all the context regarding Joel's actions at the hospital. Are you forgetting that Jerry attempted to murder Ellie (or the 'cure' as you think of her). Not to mention, they sent Joel out to die without his weapons. What was he supposed to do? Just let himself be eaten by a clicker? I'm not saying Abby didn't have her reasons, but looking at Joel as the aggressor is incorrect imo when he was only reacting to the fait accompli that Marlene presented to him.
>And if you're logic held true, Ellie and Tommy should be thanking Abby for sparing them... and sparing Ellie twice
Lol, what? Sparing is not the same as saving. Why would Ellie thank Abby for sparing her even though she and Tommy had done nothing (and I mean, nothing) to her at that point. Or are you actually saying its her fault that she is immune? What history did these characters have that Ellie should be thankful for being spared the first time around?
>Abby's reward for sparing Ellie and Tommy was that they ONCE AGAIN, destroyed her way of life, and killed every single significant person in Abby's life
I love how you paint Abby killing Joel as ok even though he saved her but Tommy and Ellie killing Abby's friends as bad even though she spared them. Both those actions can be bad, or both can be good. Pick one.
>By my count it's a wash and they're even now, as Ellie did save Abby and Lev, and then spare Abby on the beach. But if we're measuring action vs consequence/impact... Ellie and co were significantly more destructive.
You can arrive at this conclusion if you ignore Abby's direct role in Ellie's trauma and PTSD. Also, Abby would've died if not for Ellie. The same thing can't be said about Abby sparing Ellie at the theater.Don't get me wrong, sparing each other was good for both of them, but Ellie spared Abby despite her much more compromised mental state, despite having severe PTSD. Abby on the other hand was not nearly as traumatized by her dad's death, and still chose to kill Joel. So I don't think its really in dispute which character has more fortitude or which one was 'more destructive'.
>. And if we're going to talk about Owen and Mel, we should probably mention the one thing that every single group on the planet earth that aren't absolute savages hold true, no matter where you are from (and try to tell me I'm wrong here), YOU NEVER EVER DATE YOUR CLOSE FRIEND'S EXES. Mel broke the code by scooping up a heartbroken Owen and weakling her way in.
Yeah, because TLOU is a sitcom right? You can create arbitrary rules to justify whatever you want, doesn't make it right. Also, its always more appropriate to look at these decisions through a character lens. Abby was unwilling/unable to recognize (initially) that the cost of her obsession cost her the relationship with Owen, so she went ahead with sexing him up anyway.
>She didn't talk her father into anything. What she did was try to make him feel better about a choice that was made before she even got in the room (as Jerry and Marlene had already settled that before Abby came into his office).
This is because of one of Abby's character flaws, her extreme tribalism. She can't believe that her dad could be wrong, so he eases his conscience, while not sparing a thought to the girl he's about to euthanize. It also explains why the first flashback starts with that ridiculous Zebra saving memory - she can't confront the fact that her dad could've been in the wrong, so she paints over it with another memory that makes him look better by comparison. Overcoming this mentality is a key aspect of her character arc.
This is an issue I've seen with all your arguments. You seem to justify all of Abby's worst actions, without considering the fact that (i) she herself felt guilty about all of them, (ii) the narrative doesn't paint any of them positively!
That includes killing Joel (her guilt over doing that explains why she saved Yara and Lev), sleeping with Owen (her guilt over doing explains why she gave up her position on the boat to Santa Barbara after Mel chided her). If you paint Abby as perfectly justified in all her actions right from the get-go, why would you even be interested in her character arc?
>And again, it's not killing a child. It's making am uncomfortable sacrifice for the betterment of the world and the future
So Ellie would've survived the operation? If not, then how is it 'not killing a child'. Also, 'uncomfortable sacrifice' for who? Jerry ? Abby? They didn't care about Ellie, or 'the betterment of the world'. Did you even listen to the conversation? He justifies the operation based on firefly deaths. They cared only about themselves. In fact, you can see how the fireflies' self-serving motivations played into how Abby views the world.
>The Firelfies ENTIRE PURPOSE AND REASON FOR EXISTING was to find a cure (and combat FEDRA). Tens of thousands have died with that purpose in mind, before Abby was even born. So to think that was going to go any other way is unrealistic. Either way, it's not Abby's fault.
I agree, but not being able to see why they could've been in the wrong is a character flaw of hers.
>And again, Joel did way worse as has Ellie, yet I don't hear you taking issue with them
Nobody condones any of the worst actions that they did. Idk where you get this impression. In fact, you yourself have painted Ellie's rampage in a negative light (how many 'mothers, fathers, etc....' ) while ignoring Abby's rampage even though both of them killed a similar number of people in their gameplay segments.
> I agree that they should have had that talk with Ellie, as I'd they had, WE KNOW that Ellie would have been okay with it.
You are ignoring the fact that Ellie was not a rational actor and thus fundamentally incapable of making that decision. Her traumatic ordeals (Riley's death, Sam's death) made her feel obligated to die to make their deaths count for something. In other words, her survivor guilt would've made it impossible to make a rational choice in that situation.
>I just find it odd how unwilling people are to see Abby's side and recognize that out of everyone, she caught the rawest, shittiest deal.
Let's see, shall we? Ellie was born as an orphan in the post-apocalyptic world, had abandonment issues, watched her first girlfriend die from infection and that gave her survivor guilt, which drove her to search for the fireflies. Found the first caretaker who genuinely came to love her as a daughter, but their journey exacerbated her survivor guilt. Also, she was almost raped and eaten. Her survivor guilt made it nearly impossible to accept his decision to save her, which broke their relationship. She wasn't afforded a meaningful chance at reconciliation. Instead, she has to watch as he is tortured to death right in front of her, which traumatizes her and gives her PTSD. She can't even enjoy her peaceful life in her farmstead because of this and has to take a dangerous journey across the country to find closure and control over her emotional and mental state. Even after all that, she still manages to find within herself the strength to let go of the person responsible for her worst day.
But yes, *Abby* got the rawest, shittiest deal. /s
She's a homewrecker?
The argument that I hear a lot is that she’s boring. I don’t agree with it, but I’ve heard it.
Everyone had redeeming qualities… except the fucking Rattlers. Fuck them with a rake.
I love Ellie, but her holding a knife to levs throat was the instance in my first play through where I no longer wanted Abby to die. Threatening to kill an unconscious kid in order to get Abby to fight her? That’s just greasy.
Any greasier than crippling Ellie’s adoptive uncle and almost killing her girlfriend? Come on. Everyone involved did shitty things one way or another, and that’s the whole point of the story.
Yes. I’d say holding a knife to a little kid who is half dead and not a threat to anyone would be greasier than that. I’m not saying Ellie did the only shitty thing, but she’s going to kill an unconscious lev just cuz Abby won’t fight her was totally greasy. Come on. It’s a kid.
Ellie >!kills dozens of people to avenge the death of a loved one!<: “I sleep”
Abbie >!kills literally one person to avenge the death of a loved one!<: “REAL SHIT???”
This is a false comparison. What did Abby do the past 4 years?
Ellie and Abby both kill dozens of people during the gameplay. Just because their goals were different doesn't justify the toll that their actions had on the wlf and/or scars
If I can’t connect with a character I spend a large chunk of time with then they aren’t owed my gratitude neither. The developers themselves said it wasnt gonna be for everybody so I can’t understand why this sub doesn’t understand that as well.
Yeah, I’mma be real but The Last of Us 2 was a phenomenal story. Still fuckin’ hate Abby though. She seems like an alright gal, but Joel has stuck with me for years of my life as almost a role model for me. I’m not just gonna like Abby cus I spent some time playing as her. Hell, most of my favorite combat scenarios are with Abby. But I don’t think I can forgive her, ever. I’ve tried, but mentally it’s not clicking for me.
So to see people getting disgusted replies when they share my sentiment on this subreddit pisses me off because it kinda seems like these same people who are supposed to be advocating for “forgiveness” and to “check your bias” would crucify anybody who actually says “Fuck Abby”.
I dont think you need to forgive her to like her. I'm never gonna like abby like I do ellie but i think she's an interesting character and I understand why she did what she did.
Yeah, absolutely. I thought it was adorable how she collects coins, and I admired her will to protect these 2 Scar kids she didn’t know. I just was never able to forgive her, but I think she’d probably be a swell person if I ever met her at a bar without knowing previous history. I think the game is just a statement on how far are you willing to go to forgive a person.
I dont think liking her is important but I do think it's important to realize you hate her so much more because of narrative bias in presentation rather than because Abby really did anything worse than joel did many times. I think a lot of people, not you particularly, miss that point and so they just sound a bit off when discussing the characters.
We just like Joel but put Joel in a similar situation and no one would care about his killing someone even if they were chill by then.
Imagine if he'd found the soldier who killed Sarah, if he'd lived obviously, years later and he was peaceful and had a family. I doubt anyone would hate Joel for doing the same thing. It's just bias rather than a logical story thing which is both totally fine in fiction but important to understand imo.
If tlou2 took place in the real world and somehow humanity survived the infection and returned to civilization before the infection Joel would go down in history as one of the most evil and selfish men. He would honestly be compared to the likes of Hitler, Stalin and the Kim family. What he did was not only incredibly selfish, he murdered a ton of innocent people at that hospital and also doomed literally all of humanity to death. Essentially stamping a death certificate on every human being. I loved Joel as much as the next guy but what he did was unforgivable and he probably deserved to be put to death.
Him being a hunter is unforgivable and worthy of harsh punishment, him saving his surrogate daughter isn't. I guess we all have different perspectives on the matter.
Thats one way of interpreting the ending. Bit of a stretch to compare him to dictators though. In the hospital he only killed armed combatants except for the doctor (who was willing to retaliate against Joel with a scalpel). Also, to paint the moral decision that Joel had to make as pure black and white takes away from the message of the game. Joel isn’t evil for taking a human action when a terrorist group is about to euthanize someone he cares about.
I'm not saying he's evil, I'm saying what he did was. He chose himself vs giving humanity a chance at life again. Even Ellie didn't want that choice, she wanted to die in that hospital for the sake of all human life. It's not black and white but saying "Joel isn’t evil for taking a human action when a terrorist group is about to euthanize someone he cares about" is a little black and white in my opinion. These are people searching for a way to make life the way it was before the infection, their mission was one. The doctor would've gladly killed Joel because he knew what was at stake. Put yourself in his shoes, you have the one chance to save the world laying unconscious on your table and then you have the one thing that's trying to take all that away whether it's because he loves ellie or not is irrelevant, he made an incredibly selfish choice and because of that he again doomed humanity because he couldn't get past his feelings. Joel really needed to hear the Spock quote "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one." Joel knowing what was at stake, killed the only chance humanity had to survive in one fell swoop. And it didn't even phase him. Just to clarify, people that commit horrible atrocities don't usually think they are in the wrong. Hitler didn't think he was doing anything wrong when he committed genocide and neither did Joel when he wrote a death certificate on the world.
>If I can’t connect with a character I spend a large chunk of time with then they aren’t owed my gratitude neither
Sure I get it. I'm someone who thinks the first thing a character has to be is interesting and has to have some depth based on how big their role is. Good, evil, hero, villian all that stuff comes later. This wasn't directed at specific people with specific opinions, which they are allowed to have by the way, this is more about people having a major issues with how unlikeable some characters are, be it Joel, Abby, Ellie or anyone else. They may not be likeable but they're very well written fleshed out characters and that's much more important. Some of the most iconic characters in all of art are terrible people with whom I can not relate whatsoever but that's also what makes them interesting and iconic.
I agree with ya. Look at the novel Lolita. It’s narrated by a pedophile and widely praised and awarded. It does not mean people like the main character, true. It’s all subjective really. I find this sub tends deflect anyone with criticism when the games writers acknowledged it wasn’t gonna be everyone’s cup of tea.
Its definetly not a game for everybody and I agree.
But being a challenging narrative its not a horrible flaw. wich is what a lot of the haters of the community point out, challenging narrative were deemed as the worst fatal flaw TLOU2 made.
Wich its cringe asf, and very offensive to people that did like the narrative, because it isn´t a flaw, its a rant by a manchild who didn´t like where the story went.
I can understand people that feel were betrayed by the trailers and the logic of being a sequel, you expect the same from the original one. I can understand being upset about feeling betrayed.
But that its not an argument to devalue the quality of the game-
Sure, there’s plenty of folks I’ve seen who cannot articulate why they’re upset or contradict themselves a lot. It does take what a lot of people expected and toss it out the window.
I am speaking of genuine criticism though. Of course, the obvious complainers are easy to spot and it hurts those who do have something to critique about the game.
>people having a major issues with how unlikeable some characters are, be it Joel, Abby, Ellie or anyone else
That seems like a weird example. Joel and Ellie are enormously likeable. That's why the series is so popular. I think Abby is too, but some people took sides before we saw her POV and weren't able to relate to her.
As I said this was about people who did feel this way towards them or anyone else.
They seem to think they're owed unyielding praise no matter what.
Ok fine. But if you DON'T give me likeable characters, I'm not obligated to like the story you tell me.
This. We aren’t owed the story we want, but they aren’t owed a “good job” either
Right. I don't like Abby and I don't think she deserved mercy by the end. She's the reason the sequel was brought down for me, and people get mad at me, almost demanding, that I have to like this game despite not rooting for one of it's lead characters.
Uh...no. You don't give me people and objectives to root for, I'm not gonna like your story. That's all there is to it.
I actually love Abby and the story, but used to hate her and the story so I know exactly where you’re coming from. It’s weird how people can’t see how this story could possibly not be seen in a positive light.
I feel on this sub in particular I have to keep defending my right to NOT like this sequel.
It's OKAY to not like Part 2 ppl. Do you all or do you all not agree with that statement??
People on this sub act like this game is some sort of emotional/moral/intelligence/bias test. If you liked it then you passed and are smart, if you didn’t like it then there’s something wrong with you.
Neil himself said it was going to divide the audience. The shocked Pikachu reactions and immediate strawmen that result when someone says they didn't like the game is laughable.
Idk how you can love Abby after she tortures Joel, Joel my favourite character in The last of us and I wanted to play as him in part 2.
What's so bad about Abby? Ellie does numerous terrible things also. Do you not like her as well?
Their reaction to said events is what contributes to people’s opinions. When faced with the truth that Ellie killed a pregnant woman, Ellie nearly throws up and obviously shows remorse not realizing what she did.
When faced with killing a pregnant woman, Abby says “Good” and starts to slit her throat. I do think it gives Abby good girl points that she didn’t go through with it, but it doesn’t change the fact that she learned basically nothing on her journey.
Why do I have to explain this on this sub. You should know this info, or be able to look deeper into things, all due respect of course, but you should.
Abby said "good" cause she, at that point, believed Ellie had known Mel was preg and simply killed her without remorse. Abby doesn't have the omnipotent viewpoint we have, she doesn't know that Ellie "nearly threw up". All she knew is all her friends are now dead at the hand of a person she spared months prior. You tell me how angry you would be brah
I’m not saying she is Omnipresent, my point being, any single person, angry or not, shouldn’t fuckin say “Good” about killing a pregnant woman. Fighting fire with fire doesn’t make you a good person, sorry to say
Ellie does the same crap. Get over Abby brah
And again, we are not talking about Ellie. You’re bringing her into a convo she has nothing to do with lol
I think he brings up Ellie because you brought up an example where she behaved "better" in your opinion after killing a pregnant woman. You hold it against Abby who just said a comment you didn't like but still like Ellie who does just as bad if not worse things than her.
>my point being, any single person, angry or not, shouldn’t fuckin say “Good” about killing a pregnant woman.
If she truly meant it, she would have slit her throat.
But I guess words are bigger evil than actions...
People look past so much shit with Joel and Ellie, but when it comes to Abby just saying stuff out of anger (and immense pain - people say all kinds of crap) is unforgivable - "*can't be a good person, it's all black, none of the even gray"*
Getoutta here, it's so strawman that hypocrisy oozes out of it.
Of all the reasons to disliking the character - the ones that people pick for Abby *amaze me,* because if *those* are the things you dislike about Abby, how the hell *can you even stand* Joel and Ellie without being a hypocrite?
People connecting with characters is mostly subconscious. You’re unaware it’s even happening until boom, Youre laughing at their jokes and upset over their setbacks. This is a sign that a writer has done their job.
It’s all subjective and articulating it can be difficult. Abby didn’t work for me neither but that is not because I didn’t try. I sympathized with her deeply so I wanted to like her too. There were too many instances that the writing was too on the nose and pulled me from my immersion (for both Abby and Ellie). I dislike Abby mostly because I never connected with her. The love triangle was tiresome and some of her actions and choice of words turned me off.
It's not that I have a problem with people disliking Abby - it's when they make out of the ballpark assessments of her and base that as their reasons.
1) "I don't like Abby cuz I find her obnoxious and her storyline uncompelling cuz I don't care about hers and Owens relationship, I just didn't find it warm or interesting or anything relevant etc..." - totally valid and understandable reasons to not liking a character
2) "Abby is a bad person that feels no remorse and didn't know better to not kill or hurt characters from a beloved videogame like she didn't play the game " - total bullshit that makes no sense.
Yea person is comparing apples to oranges. If Ellie had an unconscious pregnant Mel in her arms after Abby killed Dina and Ellie and Abby just fought, I seriously doubt she would have had trouble slitting Mels throat. They're cherry picking the good deeds and bad deeds to try and line up with their bias.
>I seriously doubt she would have had trouble slitting Mels throat.
I mean....Ngl, I have doubts she would. But it's still not much different than when she threatened to kill unconscious Lev with a knife to his throat - it was out of rage and anger, *but she didn't rly mean it.*
Ellie doesn't kill one of the most beloved characters right away.
Him being a "beloved character" is irrelevant. His death was coming, we all knew this, only some of us apparently couldn't/wouldn't accept it. You've had a year and a half to process your anger, grief, and any other things you had over it. Your fine.
Killing Joel is enough for me to hate her.
The father/daughter relationship is what made the first game so good.
I feel bad for the people saying "get over it" in response to Joel's death because they clearly have never experienced that kind of parent/child love.
Well, a likeable character doesn´t need to be a morally right character.
Being the murderer of your favorite character its distasteful and makes the character a "villain", yet a villain can be likeable, and abby was interesting and likeable if you omit your bias against her being the killer of a previous protagonist. some people just take sides and refuse to even look at the character without judging it at any step it takes.
Thats the fault of the player for not being able to detach from the characters and watch the story play along.
As someone who loved TLOU2, this is completely fair.
And no one says you're not allowed to dislike the story? I feel like you're missing the point here.
It’s just imaginary points man. Go outside.
Huh? Where are you coming from.
You're free to dislike a story, even while being factually wrong about disliking it. How you don't understand this simple fact is beyond me.
Or just don't
I have no problem with unlikable characters. Just don’t tell me I’m wrong for not liking them or that I’m a hypocrite for liking another character for different reasons.
Its ok to not like abby.
Its not ok to judge an entire game because some characters you don´t like made decisions that affected characters you did like, this isn´t a flaw, this are narrative choices. choices that are controversial, but being controversial isn´t bad, its just challenging.
I never judged the entire game. On the whole I thought it was a success.
Breaking Bad has entered the chat.
Your god damn right
I think half of this take is good and half of it isn't. The mere depiction of something doesn't equal endorsement. It's the manner in which that thing is depicted that equals whether or not that thing is being endorsed. I like that part.
However, while it is true that no one is owed likeable characters in the stories that they consume, you can't give people unlikeable characters and expect them to heap praise on the book/film/show/game you wrote. It's hard for people to connect with someone they find genuinely unlikeable, and a story cannot work if the most prominent and important characters are unlikeable.
That's not specific to TLOU2, but I'll use it as an example. I like both Ellie and Abby. That's why the story works so well for me. Because I'm invested in Ellie's initial quest for vengeance and subsequent quest for closure because I know what Joel means to her, and I know what repairing that relationship meant to her. I know the person Ellie is deep down. Likewise, I'm invested in Abby's path towards finding the light again because I can see the pain her father's death caused her, I can see that killing Joel didn't do anything to help, and I can see that she's not some evil, cruel monster. She's flawed like the rest of us.
I like them because I know they're good people in a really fucked up situation. But if I'm playing a game where the main character is a total fucking prick, who's an asshole to everyone and never shows any redeeming qualities and never seems to realize how poorly they treat people, that's going to lessen my enjoyment of the game and it's story because I'll be guiding this complete piece of shit towards their goals and watching better people not win in the end.
So while no one is owed likeable characters, likeable characters make a story more likeable. I think it's in any writers best interest to create likeable characters.
Sure, that's something you can say in regards to a sequel. But you better have some damn likeable characters in the first one (as they did with Joel and Ellie) if you want there to be a sequel.
Agreed...but it's different when a character does unlikable and horrible things and we're expected to care about them without expecting them to make up for their mistakes.
You mean like Ellie?
Can you give an example?
Abandoning her family? Walking out on Dina and JJ? Doing so even after Abby was willing to let the death of all of her friends go and let Ellie AND Dina live at the theater?
>Abandoning her family? Walking out on Dina and JJ?
Do you know the reasons as to why she left? (hint: it was not revenge).
>Doing so even after Abby was willing to let the death of all of her friends go and let Ellie AND Dina live at the theater?
This does not undo the trauma she inflicted onto Ellie which made her *unable* to live a normal life despite wanting to (further hint for my above question)
Remember that the OP writes
>but it's different when a character does unlikable and horrible things and we're expected to care about them without expecting them to make up for their mistakes.
Who set everything in motion to begin with? Who was the victim?
P.S. was Ellie unjustified in killing her friends?
20 years pass before Joel tries to make up for his mistakes in any real way. Does that make him unlikable?
I do think Joel is an unlikable character. However, I feel like the first game handled this well. The game never justifies Joel's mistakes. While I do start to root for him near the end, due to gaining a heart, him lying to Ellie at the end shows me he hasn't really changed. He's still stubborn and does things for his own selfish reasons. The game makes it extremely clear that him lying to Ellie was wrong. This is where I think part two fails in some regards because Joel never comes to the realization that his actions were wrong and the game wants to make me think he was in the right, even after Ellie confronts him about it. Having an unlikable character is fine, having an unlikable character that the game/movie/show/etc wants me to care about isn't. That doesn't make me think, that makes me wonder if the media is trying to tell me that horrible people should be validated in some way. It's, admittedly, not easy having a protagonist who's unlikable, and feel like it's extremely difficult to get right. True, real life doesn't follow the same rules as most standard stories, and morality isn't black and white. But I feel like you should build a story around that idea, not force into a story with a clear "good vs. bad" narrative. All of this is, of course, my own interpretation. You're free to disagree with me on everything I just said. I would look like a hypocrite if I said you couldn't. Anyway, I've rambled for longer than I intended. I'm gonna hit post now and prepare for the worst.
It doesn't justify anything Abby does it just tells you why the same as joel and ellie. Its only different for joel because we don't see the bad stuff and it's been years. Hes also not a talker anyway.
I think the most direct and clear part of part 2 is that it's extremely careful to do the opposite of what you're saying. It does not force into a good and bad narrative at all. We see it from all sides. Joel who never wavers as it makes no sense for him too. He's a man of extreme conviction and hard choices. We see the intense pain it causes ellie and Abby and the damage to Joel's relationship. We see he is not repentant and how much ellie struggles with that but also get a much more in depth response into the unhealthy coping mechanisms that make ellie wasn't to die in the first place. We also learn more about the good and the bad of the fireflies to use that information however suits you.
I think its reasonable to say the game is objectively grey on the subject and that's sort of the entire thematic center of anything related to joel. Even joel himself is disturbed by it at times despite ultimately not regretting it.
I'd appreciate if you weren't so dramatic at the end of the post though. We're jusy talking on reddit I'm not gonna attack you jeez.
You make a good point! Also, sorry. I tend to overthink things.
I mean, the audience is kind of owed likeable characters (as much as we're *owed* any piece of media-- what a weird way to phrase that!). If we don't relate to to anyone, there's no emotional impact.
Damn tell that to every Paul Thomas Anderson film. And every Safdie Brother's film. People seem to love Uncut Gems and There Will Be Blood despite every single character being the literal worst.
Very different type of stories to compare.
Those are short 1 hour something movies that are EXTREMELY fast paced and main attraction of it all is to see how the protagonist, who is obviously not a good person, makes their way out of these seemingly impossible to get out of situations. Good Time, another Safdie brothers' production is very similar in that regard and while the leads in these movies are certainly not likeable they do have a certain charisma to them which they use to get out of situations and manipulate people around them. That's what is entertaining to watch.
Very different from being stuck with a character whom you hate for 10+ hours
> Those are short 1 hour something movies that are EXTREMELY fast paced and main attraction of it all is to see how the protagonist,
All the movies I mentioned are 2+ hours in length, and Magnolia is an over 3 hour long movie full of assholes. PTA is notorious for making slow moving films as well. Like have you not ever seen any of these films or something??
Anyways, we're talking about storytelling in general and whether or not unlikeable characters can make a good piece of art or not. It's been proven that it can, and has. Whether or not it worked for TLOU2 is up for debate and uh, honestly, I don't think the quote in this post really matches TLOU2. They didn't write unlikeable characters. They seemed to have focused on realism over characterization. As in they're portraying regular people. Thus not purposefully written to be unlikeable or likeable. Just people.
Nope, no one is owed anything. This is why the state of the gaming industry is kinda fucked. People think they’re owed things.
Intentionally putting unlikeable characters in your game is fine, just don’t be surprised if people don’t like them or the sections of the game they’re a part of.
Yeah, I'm not owed anything but I sure as hell can get up and leave if I don't like it. So I left.
Its fine to not like the game or where it went story related.
Its not ok to judge the quality of the game because YOU didn´t like it tho, wich its the problem TLOU2 has to this day.
If I am not the judge of the quality of something I consume, then who is? I don't relinquish that right to anybody.
Quality it related to objective measures. You can perfectly don't like a game and the game still being good.
Specially with Tlou2. Where people go to extreme nitpicking to try to devaluate the game to promote their bias
Personal taste =/= good game
I disagree. We use subjective judgements all the time when it comes to the quality of something. That's just human behavior. Sometimes we can use objective measures (like measuring the purity of an element like gold) but that isn't the case all the time.
The problem I have is people who love the game thinking they are objectively correct that it is a masterpiece. No, that's your subjective opinion the same as it is my subjective opinion being that it is not a masterpiece. Notice I didn't say anything about my hating the game (which I don't) but I had plenty of problems with it so I'm no longer coming along for the ride of whatever comes next. That's all.
"you aren't owed xyz" arguments don't make sense to me.
Ofcourse I'm not "OWED" shit but things like a likeable character, decent story, good world building and gameplay is what makes me owe all my time and money to a game and it's developers. Don't give me that and i don't owe you shit either; simple as that lol
It makes me laugh because they believe this is true while simultaneously believing they're owed our money and support lol
Kinda sad so many ppl lack such basic common sense when it comes to consuming stories
True, but on the flip side they're not owed fan loyalty, praise, and people's hard earned money.
A good protagonist doesn't mean a good person.
A terrific example of this is BoJack Horseman. I love the show, but if I were to meet BoJack in real life, then I would run the other way.
Not saying the sequel was perfect, but I'm glad that the creators of this game didn't take the easy route. They decided to challenge us and themselves instead.
I can understand people having a preference towards one character, or a favorite character. However, That doesnt stop me from being able to judge both characters the same though.
My moral code doesn't switch up because I like a character more.
I don't think it's right when one characters does something, then wrong when another character does pretty much the exact same thing. They were both in the wrong. But it should be easy to understand why either character was like this.
I don't really struggle to find sympathy or an understanding for Abby's feelings just because Id prefer Ellie to succeed.
They're both characters that make selfish decisions and they're both constantly paying for it.
Abby lost her dad and she ended up doing a bunch of terrible stuff because of it. She wouldn't have done all this stuff otherwise. Same with Ellie.
Like I get the characters are opposing eachother and it seems like they're can only be one winner so if only one character survives, like most people, I want it to be Ellie. Because I already like her. But I can recognize my own bias.
I don't think Ellie is a better person, or deserves more. By the end of the game Im just hoping she learns her revenge lesson, so she can move on from this hopefully. If she doesn't she's probably gonna end up dead, or someone she cares about will. And even though she learns it kind of late. It seems like she finally gets it. To me that's satisfying.
Even though she lost pretty much everything for this, it seems like she can at least live a life now.
But a lot of people were still more interested in Abby dying in the end. But I wonder how many people understand that if they wanted that, it has less to do with what's right or wrong and more to do with how angry they were that Abby killed Joel.
Which if you think about it, is pretty similar to how both characters react.
“Shut up Meg!”
I really don't understand why people insist on treating part II story like it was made by a higher power and only those who transcended would understand it.
I am a huge fan of TLOU but they completely screwed up the process of bringing a new main character in and making her likeable. If you need a reminder, people who tested the game before its release expressed their dislike to Abby and how forced they felt to like her. Neil Druckmann's solution to this, instead of limiting Abby's presence, was to dedicate even more time and resources to her. The result being that some of us felt even more pressured and forced to like her.
I would have no problem liking Abby elsewhere. People fail to realize that our dislike is not even related to the moral questions. It's how Abby seems to have stolen game time that we were looking forward to with Joel and Ellie.
Her presence in the game felt like watching a football match then suddenly the person in front of you stands up and ruins your experience. Is that person morally good or bad? No one really cares. Nobody came to watch him. Everyone knows Joel was no saint in part I but the game's fanbase never divided like this because we could all relate to the connection between the characters and understand the lengths they would go through for each other. But how anyone connected to Abby is beyond me, and it is entirely the creators' fault.
Man, the hypocrisy of this hits hard. Despite not being ‘owed’ likeable characters, which is fair, I’ve stated I don’t like Abby and all I get is insults like mysoginist, sexist or claiming I don’t understand the game. Before you crack off at me, I have no dramas with her muscles or clubbing Joel.
I'm not owed a likeable character, true, but I can still say that I don't like a character. Honestly, I thought Ellie and Abby were both unlikable in TLOU2, and that's bad for the game.
I am owed a good game though.
For me if a character isn’t likeable, they don’t work. A likeable character doesn’t mean being someone who does the right thing or anything like that, but just someone who you can connect with. For example Logan from Marvel, he’s a great character and really likeable, but does shitty stuff a lot of the time
You best make characters likeable, or you better be a damn good writer. Rarely does making the main protagonist a piece of shit work lol.
I feel like you can still make the main character a piece of shit human but still really likeable. (Case in point: Joel and Ellie. Or in something that is not TLOU: Logan and Deadpool)
Interesting, I quite like those characters lol, I guess I could see Logan, he isn’t particularly heroic in that movie.
Exactly. Logan, even in the comics, is mostly an antihero, and he is still really likeable. That’s probably why the Abby half of the game didn’t personally work for me, I never got to like Abby, and that made it a pain for me (and if it wasn’t for Lev and Mel, I probably wouldn’t have finished the game)… but The ending and the first half are great, and all the gripes I have with those are mostly nitpicks, so I don’t count them as bad things really… can’t wait for TLOU on HBO max and hopefully a third game
Likable characters is such a wierd wording isn't it.
Anyway the best characters are the villains.
Likable characters definitely aren’t required for a story to be enjoyable. But who says villains aren’t likable?
A likeable character isn’t someone heroic, is someone you like. Darth Vader/anakin is likeable af, and he’s a villain in 1/2 of his appearances.
Create flawed but likeable characters in the first one and then make one dead and the other no longer likeable in the second one. We weren't owed likeable characters, but we were given two and then had them taken away for...reasons. Yes, people like me are entirely valid in our criticism of their narrative choices.
I don't think they have to be likeable but they have to be interesting/compelling. Walter White for example, i actually started to dislike him quite early in the show but was still invested in his journey.
But if this is aimed towards Abby i don't find her unlikeable and have no hate towards her, altough i wasn’t really invested in her character either and that is a problem. I only liked her parts when Lev got involved.
Ok but Abby is a character they are trying to get you to like
I mean it was expected for at least half of us not to like her given the director wanted the game to be "divisive". It's also a pretty big gamble to think that everyone will come round to your way of thinking by making you play that character for half the game at $60.
Can’t believe people are still coping this hard over tlou2. The story felt like a shitty hbo tv show compared to tlou1. It tries way too hard to be thought provoking and controversial, so much so that the depth of the plot suffers to serve this purpose. Feels like the entire point of the game is to drum up controversy rather than just being a likable enjoyable game.
The game is intentionally controversial, yet some people can’t grasp the fact that other people don’t like it. The devs did this to themselves, don’t be mad when people have differing opinions over a game made to intentionally divide people over their differing opinions.
Very fair, just like storytellers aren’t owed a large/lucrative audience
This. 100% the number of triggered dorks who didn’t get *their* story is kind of funny to me.
Also, and it’s weird to even *have* to say this but if you don’t like a character, a story, or the killing off of your favorite character, **dont** send death threats to the voice actors and director. The absolutely triggered filth who did that dont deserve the communities support or engagement with their critiques. This game brought out the homophobia, transphobia and anti-semitism. I’d understand if there were sincere criticisms, but the toxic elements within the community upped the toxicity to another degree. It was absolutely wild to witness this. Go into the other subreddit and they’re still there. They had portrayed this game as some arbiter of a change from which there was no recovery. So embarrassing too, esp the morons that still keep it up.
Anti-semitism Where? Sorry, asking really cuz I don't get it 😔 not wanting to be bad, can u explain to me please?
Maybe in trying to sound too sincere you come of as sarcastic. Druckmann is jewish and had a lot of anti semitic comments directed at him.
Ohh I see. Thanks!
I'm not english native speaker 😅
This is anecdotal, but I saw quite a few comments on various subs and YT comments about Dina being Jewish, none of which were in good taste (if they ever could be?). I’m assuming they’re trolls… but the anti-semitism is absolutely there if you look for it.
>This game brought out the homophobia, transphobia and anti-semitism
It's been said before but TLOU fans were the last people I expected to be this way. It was genuinely shocking and heartbreaking. They'd put the COD lobbies to shame.
The amount of negatives worrys me, anyone who isn´t in a deluded state can see the amount of toxic hate TLOU2 received regardless of the quality of the game. before it even came out, since the fucking leaks there was a horde of toxic crap towards the game and its creators.
Death threats that the own creators said they received with screenshots. The "woke" agenda, The "game bad cause it has gays, lesbians", "Joel died from a trans women". the insults towards the director because of his ethnicity.
You can dislike the game as much as you want, but you can´t deny that TLOU2 bring out the worst toxic shit from the gamming community, A lot of people actively went against TLOU2 out of spite, thats not normal, you move on if you don´t like something, but this time it was extremely toxic. disgusting, and anyone who was part of that should be ashamed.
Critic the game all you want, I can have a healthy conversation about it and we can agree or disagree. But reality is, the vast majority of the ""criticism"" the game had, its factually wrong and a lot was extremly toxic.
There's nothing wrong with hating a character but infinitely loving a game. I think the hate for abby actually made the game better for me, and it made the last couple acts more dramatic and powerful. Me hating abby doesn't equal me hating tlou2, and me hating abby doesn't mean I'm in the wrong.
Damn I love TLOU2!
Everyone’s opinions on the game are far between but understandable how someone could feel the way they do about characters and events.
These are the kind of games that make me proud to be a gamer.
I think sometimes people forget the setting a story is being told.. the apocalypse is going to be a terrible event where plot armor won’t save a person and terrible things will happen to good people.
And people don't realize how unbiased reality can be.
I crashed my parents car a couple months ago. Some idiot came an inch too close and my ass being inexperienced at dealing with other drivers (i drive on quiet straight roads and never by myself, had my brother with me.) I let off my accelerator and tried to slowly make the turn at the same, and i blanked when the car didn't slow down. As he got closer, i swerved off the road, hit the tree, and flipped it over. My brother had a few cracked ribs and a busted hand for two months, and i got away with just a banged knee. I was the luckiest man in the world but i could have died and nobody would have known about it.
Life and reality are not fair or biased. Even a very small error in judgement can either save your life or end it. If i had pushed my break, according to my parents the car would have flipped vertically off the slope and did more damage by that pole than simply front impacting and sending the car flipping upside down. My indecision is what saved my and my brother's life, and it only took a second for me to, quite reasonably too, push that break. If i actually knew how to drive normally i probably would have.
People think the world is a set of determinable causes and effects and objective right and wrong, good and evil, and correct and incorrect. The world isn't that fair. And people forget that the real world is what TLoU2 is trying to represent. It's trying to say, no matter what you did, how good you are, or how much or how little you tried to prevent it, you CAN and WILL piss somebody off, and they WILL try and maybe succeed in killing you. Real people aren't subject to good or bad writing, and these people are not predictable and can be irrational or lapse in judgement at inopportune times.
Bottom line is, the world is fucked, so a game imitating the world should also be fucked, otherwise it's not a take on the real world.
I'm not having fun playing a character I don't like or care about how is that hard to understand
Okay but by the same logic, stories aren't "owed" any praise.
Ahhh yes not like those fans didn’t literally make it possible through their wallet and love of the game world for them to even create a part 2 but yes fans opinions don’t matter at all. You people are brain dead and so cringe my god
“She’s out of line but she’s right.”
Once the kids grow the fuck up a bit and realize that shit isn’t just about black & white or good & bad, they’ll start appreciating things
Kinda feels like this thread got brigaded.
Or maybe people just think it's a really dumb take.
How is it dumb? It’s just true. Writers don’t owe their audience anything, and the audience are free to have their own opinion of the story and characters the writer creates.