Sam explores the story line of "The Last of Us" and wrestles with whether or not the ending should've let players decide the fate.
I'm all for free choice in some games, however I feel in this case it shouldn't be a player choice to change the story. The powerful ending is stripped down to player interpretation of which ending they prefer to think of as canon to the story, and that takes away from the experience more than it adds to it. At least in my opinion, anyway.
Agreed. The ending was done the way it was to make the player question the morality of joel's decision. Whether he was right or wrong will be debated as long as this game is talked about. The only way to accomplish that was to force everyone to make the same decision. By giving people a choice everyone would choose the ending that they are most comfortable with and that would not really push people to seriously contemplate the complexity of the decision that was made.
Alot of people dont underatand the ending completely either. Alot of people think what joel did was bad but, if they bothered to listen to the science recorders laying around the last level, they would know she more than likely was not a cure and that there were more immune people than just ellie.
this game was desighned to play out like a movie, having multiple endings wouldve watered them both down, there are games that have done multiple endings right, but even then they werent as philisophical as the last of us ending.
Not every game needs to give the player choice. Some stories are best told a specific way.
designhed is a word i guess.
"Sam explores the story line of "The Last of Us" and wrestles with whether or not the ending should've let players decide the fate." no. because then we wouldn't have heard the end of how people's "choices" didn't matter.
would've ruined the game
(Sorry spoilers below) I hate it seems to give you the choice that you can shoot the doctors at the end or not.. But you don't have a choice, you have to kill them , what if I don't want to? That might as well be a cut scene then
They actually originally planned that whole sequence as a cutscene. Personally I prefer the way they did it. Plus, you don't have to kill all of them, just the one threatening you with the scalpel, and you don't have to shoot him, you can take his scalpel and stick him in the neck with it.
(spoiler free) The game's finale is perfect as it is. It's the writer's own vision and idea of what the story should be like that shaped the ending- and the Last of Us, without any compromise or any input from a second perspective, is the story they PRECISELY wanted to convey. Even the slightest change on the story would spoil the entire magic surrounding the game's script for me. Besides, if they wanted you to shape the ending the way you prefer, they'd easily let you do that. But in the end they didn't, and that's because they wanted to tell THEIR version of the story with its entirety, not anybody else's. I'd say it's understandable, and a rather valid choice for this game as multiple endings would diversify the experience of the audience, and could not create a collective, globally aggreable understanding of what the story is so keenly trying to tell. The ending is so simple, powerful and thought provoking. It's what they wanted to achieve with the ending- and I believe they couldn't form such a notable and intense emotional ride any other way possible.
The game never gave you a choice about anything story related the whole time, why would it just give you that one choice at the end? That wouldn't make any sense at all. It's not a choose your own adventure. We weren't meant to influence the story, we were meant to experience it.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.