Straley confirms that TLOU Remastered uses triggers instead of bumpers to aim & shoot and that it feels "so good". They also added Southpaw support.
Several developers agree with the point, and many fans are also pointing out that they prefer more guided experiences overall. “Easier to make, more creatively interesting, and not a time suck to play,” one fan said. “Sounds like a win-win to me!”
Of course they are. I absolutely love the original Last of Us, but, you play it once and you've pretty much seen everything.
It's a lot different than a game like New Vegas, Disco Elysium, or Morrowind, where there's a giant amount of content and pretty much every run could be vastly different than the last, based on your choices.
That's because choices are there.
Other than a few collectibles, I don't know why anyone would disagree with MadLad above. MadLad didn't say you can't enjoy multiple playthroughs, only that you are going to experience the same story and situations as you did the first time. It is a linear, singular storyline game. That's not bad, but it's so good because it was less work to focus on building out other things. The quality is increased to that level because of the focus. And that's good. It's not bad. Nor is what MadLad is saying wrong.
Yea, I always found it and the Uncharted games as replayable in the same sense as watching a favorite movie. You enjoy the experience so much, you go back and experience it again periodically. I don't feel that way for every game, but I feel these are so well paced and structured like good movies. God of War is another one I can continue to experience again from time to time.
Some people are one and done, and that's ok too.
You can make more linear games that have replayability, choices, and different paths. You can also make smaller open worlds that are more dense and focused. Like a Dragon/Yakuza is a great example of that.
"You can make more linear games that have replayability, choices, and different paths."
That's the opposite of linear
When people say linear vs open world they often mean closed off levels rather than a big open world. Linear games don't have to essentially be corridors.
"Linear games don't have to essentially be corridors."
I agree with gangsta here, if there´s choices, it´s not linear.
Sifu is a linear game that has a choice at every boss. That choice doesn’t suddenly make it open. I get what pork is getting at.
@obscure
So Until Dawn is what open world according to you?
@gangsta
Different paths would probably be like tlou2 is. It has different paths but leads to the same point.
Just because you can choose a different path , doesn't make that path less linear. It's pretty simple to understand what he's saying.
gangsta_red,
There is such a thing as "wide linear" which is far from open world, but not so restrictive that there is a single path. If there was a different outcome from taking a different path, that would be more open, but I would say Uncharted 4 is a fair example of wide linear in certain spots. You're going in a specific direction, but you can go straight there, cut around the left side that has more enemies and more fire fights, or the right side that has more platforming elements.
Point A to B is still predetermined, but it is a bit more flexible in how you arrive. That's wide linear.
Also what about just getting used to the combat and replaying the mission for “fun”
Actual fun.
Both have there pros and cons, both produce brilliant games and also both produce dud games.
A good game is hard to make whether linear or open world.
While you may have less to populate in one which makes it easier, the way 90% of most opens world are filled isn't exactly filled with awesome stuff it's usually just filler unless that game happens to be the witcher 3 or elden ring.
Don't understand the dislikes Madlad. You absolutely wasn't wrong on any of your hot takes
Most open world games including those you mention, minus Disco Elysium, are also far more repetitive, reusing templates and assets in a cut and paste fashion. You often find yourself doing the same mission style over and over and over.
In assassin's Creed Odyssey I literally had the same exact fetch quest in 2 different villages. Might have even been the same NPC.
I thought man that's so lazy
While I love The Last of Us, I liked Elden Ring and all of the Souls games more. Interestingly, I liked the slightly more linear souls games more in some aspects, but on others, Elden Ring was better. Perhaps, I'm a semi-open world kind of guy, the Zelda/Metroidvania type where things open up slowly and surely. The first Dark Souls was really interesting, and Demon's Souls approach, they were slightly limited, but still open. That's something I was hoping to see more in Elden Ring, locked doors and inaccessible areas from the beginning. There were a few, but given the scope of the world, it was really, really open from the beginning. It did make the 2nd playthrough interesting for a while, but having done everything on the first time around, there was no incentive to do it again.
Disco Elysium was an interesting design, semi-open world. The dialogue was the open-world aspect more than the world itself.
Games like The Last of Us have to have a top notch writing or they just do not work. Personally, maybe the God of War type game would be even more interesting, a fantastic story in a semi-open world environment.
Just openly mumbling here!!
My biggest issue with most open world games these days is they feel like big grindy checklists, filled with the same repetitive side quests and activities or 100s of useless collectibles, they begin to feel like a slog.
Give me a well made, more linear game any day of the week, maybe something that kind of blurs the lines between both like the recent GoW games, open but still more or less linear.
Yep open linear for me anyway seems to be a best of both worlds.
Great stories, Nice spaces to explore with meaningful content.
Gow is a perfect example, jedi survivors seems to be going for this as well as does ff16.
I'm honestly just done with filler content, like I loved hogwarts legacy and finished the main while doing all castle side quests and hogsmeade ones but outside of that the rest of the world was just filler, added zero value to me.
So making an overall bigger game may be harder, it's doesn't make it better that's for sure case in point ubisoft
Considering the amount of empty, lifeless open world games we get, I would consider it easier to make linear games as you can focus all of your develop resources. Whereas open world games have a massive area to cover, especially if you want it to be good, I've only enjoyed a few open world games like HZD and BoTW personally, alot of others are easily forgettable for me.
As @Flawlessmic said, I'm done with filler content too, I have too many games and not enough time to play them, I'd rather have more fun or meaningful side quests to entice me away from the main plot.
In my eyes, the fable games did this quite well, although I do love a good open world game and would really like to see how/if the new fable can pull it off.
I miss Bruce
Can’t wait to see his new game
He’s been super quiet lately with TLOU show being out but I’m glad he’s active again.
He's the reason uncharted and the last of us were so good. Amy Henning as well of course.
Fro what's been said he was definitely the reason the last of us pitch was accepted. Neil druckman created the concept but couldn't get the writing and direction down. This is why tlou2 was so divisive. Bad writing.
@Poopmeister:
"Bigot-sandwich"? Mid term pregnant being allowed to not only put herself and child in danger, but get killed? Nevermind outright lying in promotions.
Yeah, great writing...
I really don't know why people are disagreeing Neil / Bruce have said so many times during the time TLOU first came out in interviews, podcasts and especially Reddit AMA stuff
They bled over into each others works which is why I can't believe Bruce didn't ask to get credit for the story / writing aswell although in his defence he probably didn't think anything would happen between the two.
https://www.reddit.com/r/IA...
Neil's own mouth
"I think a lot about design and Bruce thinks a lot about story. We wrestle with ideas and make sure story is working with gameplay"
This is the story we'd have gotten if Bruce wasn't involved
https://i.redd.it/572hilrwq...
Tess as a villain, chasing Joel across America for revenge while bringing along a small army of followers with her and he beats the shit out of him in the end resulting in Ellie's first kill being her. It's literally Abby's story he recycled in Part II since Bruce was now gone. Also there was one pitch where the infection only infected woman.
Why did Bruce reject it? Because it didn't make sense and wasn't logical which Neil then agreed with.
People always say "have evidence to back your shit up" and when they get it they disagree and make excuses up anyway.
Its funny how some of you people just decided this because you hate Druckmann. It's a weird narrative when the other 2 havent release anything since leaving sony.
@Foxtrot
"I can't believe Bruce didn't ask to get credit for the story / writing aswell"
So, should Bruce have argued with Amy Hennig about not getting a writing credit on Uncharted 2 as well when it was a similar situation (co-directors)?
There are rules for screenplay credits. Here's the most basic one though:
1) You have to write the script, or part of it
Neil Druckmann's writing credits: https://m.imdb.com/name/nm3...
Amy Hennig's writing credits: https://www.imdb.com/name/n...
Bruce Straley's writing credits:
"This is the story we'd have gotten if Bruce wasn't involved"
No, this was never Neil's original concept (you would play as a hardened cop who had lost his daughter, had turned criminal but became a protector of a young girl from infected). It wasn't even one of the first few versions. lol.
Tess was introduced in later iterations - this was just a single iteration which came after even weirder ones like only women being infected. That was a version called "Mankind" which Bruce had no issue with and women on staff had to argue against.
The quotes you provided present it as a mutual decision ("we", "us"). Neil was good at assessing a problem, and then revising and fixing things.
Example: the original opening for Uncharted 2 wasn't very good and then Neil fixed it and made it the iconic one we have now.
"That wasn’t our original opening, actually. It was more of a simple, linear three-act structure, which made it a bit of a slog to get into the story. It was Neil, pretty late in production, who came up with the idea to take the middle section of this train wreck and put that at the beginning." - Bruce Straley
You want to have your cake and eat it too. Bruce made Neil creative director and writer, and ran with his pitch, for a reason.
Yeah, Hennig was so good she butchered U3, got U4 stuck in development hell, left ND, had her Star Wars game cancelled, then went into VR game development and created zero VR games. Then she wrote Forspoken.
I have no experience in game development. But surely creating a linier game with a great story is harder than say making a open world game with a boring story (some Ubisoft games).
It's not about being open world, necessarily. It's about creating solid storytelling that shifts the story.
Being able to create a world and story that shifts with player choices is way harder than writing a story that just goes A to B; the end.
Notice that you just compared making a good game with a bad game. You could literally just switch it with your logic and say it's surely harder to create an open-world game filled with exciting activities and quests that give hours of enjoyment, don't get repetitive, and also link it together with a good story (Elden Ring). Compared to making a short linear game with boring gameplay.
Compare two good games maybe TLOU and Elden Ring and see what you think. I'm not sure what I would pick tbh.. maybe Elden Ring would be harder to make.... maybe.
Bruce Straley, one of the veteran game directors responsible for The Last of Us and its Left Behind expansion (not to mention much of the Uncharted series), has called for unionization in the video games industry. Straley was not credited for his role in shaping the setting and characters featured in HBO's hugely popular adaptation, with Neil Druckmann and Craig Maizin being awarded official writing credit.
Well that effing sucks, probably he was the reason why TLOU part 1 was so damn amazing gameplay and story wise, saying this because the horrendous story turn that TLOU part 2 did with Neil.
Bruce Straley was the co-director with Neil Druckmann so he was instrumental in making The Last of Us into the successful game that it was. A game's creation is not just from the script but from the direction. Regardless of whether he fell out with Druckmann & Naughty Dog or not Straley should've been credited on the programme, its manners. Respect for its co-creator.
Exactly. I don't know why anyone would call Bruce and be so awful when all he seemed to want was a "special thanks" or something. Neil through all the PR marketing for the show has NEVER mentioned Bruce once, the way he comes off makes it that it was only him who directed it and all ideas were his. We've seen plenty of interviews and AMA on Reddit that it's not the case
I don't see how anyone can be against this, not like he's slandering everyone on twitter or something. He hardly talks about Neil or ND at all.
Neil doesn't mention Bruce because he was pissed with the stuff he was held back from doing with the first game.
The first game was good because of Bruce NOT Neil. Read up on what Neil's ideas for the first game were....would not have been nearly as incredible.
Bruce is the reason the IP is famous and successful. Neil would've destroyed the story of the first game.
Sony's hasn't realized it but Neil is a negative to naughty dog not a positive. They'll find out soon though.
@crow. Dude you are delusional. Neil is fantastic and xbox would kill to have someone like him on their team. You do realize he has major roles is all of naughty dogs best games right? Uncharted 2, uncharted 4, the last of us, thr last of us 2
You people sure are going out on a limb taking all credit away from Neil for his contributions. Straley has made what since then? I mean this was his original idea https://www.thegamer.com/in...
Replies(12)While unions have their own bureaucratic issues, this is better than the system in place and benefits employees more than employers in the end. But, the gig economy is what is really harming the developer industry right now.
Neil is a jackass TBH. So full of himself and his agendas. Bruce kind of kept him in check and that's why TLOU felt amazing and his departure shows
You’re projecting too much. This has nothing to do with your flakey feelings about the story. Take one step back and look at what is being said, it’s crediting people who contribute to the final product regardless of you like it or not.
I don't even think he's asking for much, just a credit would have done
He helped with the story and world, that's the least he could have done. It's nice to just get a "special thanks to" credit.
https://i.redd.it/i-dont-un...
https://preview.redd.it/yx3...
I'm surprised he's said something, he's been quiet about NaughtyDog, Neil and TLOU since he left dropping only little hints on Twitter or liking comments.
He's mentioned that his relationship with Naughty Dog is "strained". Seems like he was butting heads with Druckmann and that's likely why he left.
I think the same happened with Amy Hennig
Nolan has maybe a comment about her being dismissed
https://youtu.be/F0vmYGnTJF...
Then Richard did..."Replaced" and "Not Her Choice"
https://youtu.be/5FdUkVP3Ml...
Just seems funny to me but I'm more surprised that no one has really picked this up, it was all speculation and now it's pretty much like "Yeah she was replaced, not her decision"
Helped? Straley and Druckmann co-directed TloU but of the two, Straley was the senior director and he was chosen to lead the project. Straley had the final word during TloU development and I have no doubt that TloU2 would have gone in a completely different way had he remained at ND and I say this because the story that Druckmann had originally planned for TloU was basically the blueprint for TloU 2 story.
https://www.eurogamer.net/t...
""Originally in the story Tess took more of a villain role," Druckmann explained in the latest issue of Game Informer (thanks, Videogamer). "Tess was betrayed by Joel and took on a mission to pursue him across the country. That storyline never worked out. The storyline shifted and Tess took on this role where she became more of a believer and she helped motivate Joel.""
And Bruce shot down this idea
https://preview.redd.it/mjc...
Another little bit of info about him reusing ideas cut from the first game is even the Zebra Jerry helped save in Part II
The Giraffe in the original was supposed to be a Zebra
https://i.redd.it/z0rbnc4df...
Bruce was given a special thanks recently in the remake, and there's obviously a high chance that Neil did that given their relationship. https://www.kotaku.com.au/w...
Millions are going to play the remake and see this, and it's about to come to PC too. The likelihood of an evil plan by Druckmann to downplay his contribution is ... very low.
Don't forget that, for years, Bruce and Neil were falsely blamed for pushing Amy out of Naughty Dog due to "forced gossip", as admitted by Mitch Dyer.
https://mobile.twitter.com/...
It was a fake story but many clinged onto it. Let's not do the same thing again.
I agree that it would be nice if Bruce was credited instead of it saying "Created by Naughty Dog" but it's more likely a combination of following reasons than "Darth Druckmann":
1) This approach may be for legal reasons (Sony, IP owner). Saying that Bruce and Neil are the creators could potentially open a case for them being entitled to royalties, as Bruce is advocating for.
2) It could also be a decision by HBO or Craig Mazin. TV shows usually just have a brief "Created by" screen for the original work and they stuck to that tradition. If Sony didn't want any individual to be credited as the creator, they'd also do as they're told.
Neil just isn't the person you portray him to be. For example, even though Sony has a bad relationship with Colin Moriarty due to pushback against his conservative politics and his fallout with KindaFunny, Neil doesn't care and gives him access to stuff anyway. He doesn't abandon his friends.
Well he had to have something in Part I, they couldn't erase him completely but they did get rid of of the art director at the end so Neil could put his name down twice
https://preview.redd.it/nyu...
" It was a fake story but many clinged onto it. Let's not do the same thing again"
Lol. I'm sorry but considering (like I've just posted above) that Amy was forced out when everyone at the time said she wasn't only for it now to be revealed she was. Who is to say there's a POSSIBILITY that they or one of them did have a say in it. Everytime you mentioned Amy people turned around and said she left by choice but now we have Nolan North and Richard McGonagle say she was forced out. Now everyone goes quiet.
"Neil just isn't the person you portray him to be"
Don't act like this is just me, I'm going off how he's been acting since Part II released, what am I and others supposed to do ignore them? Everytime people say things and show links backing up what they are saying, for example above, showing Neil clearly reused ideas from his rejected pitch for the original game it's met with disagrees because people don't want to believe it.
"Neil doesn't care and gives him access to stuff anyway"
And? It's not like he can do to Colin what he does to everyone else who has a different opinion to him and that's block them on Twitter or call them trolls.
@Foxtrot. I noticed it when it happened. Bruce left after Part 1 (2013) and Amy before UC4 (2014). It’s nearly a decade after that now. The studio has since continued releasing top tier titles after Amy and Bruce. Druckmann enjoys the spotlight, which is well deserving to him, but the heart of ND is Evan. I think most would disagree under their 30’s
Yup. It pisses me off. It's why these small indie studios with a few guys or girls who pour their heart and soul into a project and end up successful make me so happy. No backstabbing, no politics, no dickheads acting like they solo'd a project that alone would be nothing more than a fantasy in their head.
Big studios make some great games but it's so sad how people get treated.
Even on the scene project, modding, fansub, fantranslate, even with no money involved, the more people gather, the more the probability of a clash happen. That's just natural.
If this is so, then get his name where it belongs. However, I do believe his name may be on the original work, the game itself. Since the show had to be rewritten to an extent, how much we don’t know, and he had nothing to do with THAT is probably why he isn’t given credit. When parts change it’s considered an entirely different work. Look at any movie that has an Asian version followed by the much later American version. The departed for example. It’s almost word for word at points. Still zero mention of any of the original writers.
When you do any kind of essay, for college let say, don't you have to credit original source that you use?
Even tho those people are not writing Your essay?
11 people that agree on your logic must have done doctorates I guess.
We are not talking about an essay. They want you to put your sources so IF they want to fact check or make sure you didn’t word for word something instead of putting it in your own words for example. You’re one of those people that think how things work in SCHOOL is how they work in the real world. You thought you listed your sources to give them credit? Lol. You must have read ABOUT school cause you still don’t get it.
That being said, in the REAL world, movies like internal affairs are directly copied by the departed and because SOME things were rewritten, there’s zero credit given in the credits to the original. Martin Scorsese and William Monahan. Those are the writers for the departed. Alan Mac and Felix Chong wrote internal affairs. THAT is the real world. No mention.
What? You don’t just reinterpret someone else’s work without crediting them. That fact that 11 people upvoted you is insane.
Your logic is that stealing someone's work is normal.
The whole reason why we don't have MGS games remastered or ported is because creator and producer put his name on it: Hideo Kojima Game.
Now Konami doesn't want to credit the guy. That's the reason. It's not because Cell processor is impossible to port.
Doom music guy had the same problem.
Absolute talent that made Doom sound cool af.
Cuckman copied key scenes, from text to color grading and character position, but hey, they race swamped characters so it's not the same.
Legal team... are we good? Good.
This garbage happens I know, but don't defend it.
Your reading comprehension is beyond me. I do not morally agree with it and if it’s owed to him, put his name where it belongs. I LITERALLY started with that. I then gave an example of other situations where things changed and the writer of the original was not given credit. That’s it. Nothing more, nothing less. Now you’re talking about I’m defending it…. No, I gave examples of similar situations. On TOP of all that, the Kohima situation is because he made those games FOR Konami. Kind of how Salvatore made The legend of Drizzt FOR Dungeons and dragons or wizards of the coast. It’s THEIRS. Do I agree with it? No. In the real world do they care about morality? I think you know the answer. Stop looking for a fight and understand what you’re reading before you type. Please and thanks.
From You I understood that the show had to be rewritten, because it is a show, and since he is not on it... no credits and that's fine. Butts...
He made with Drunkboy original game, story and production wise, so...
It would be... idk... fair to give a credit for original material that the show is based on. (for story and production since that is really important for the show)
You than started giving scummy examples.
That is defending. But ok whatever.
I'm not giving WokeTodler another cent in my life. Can't wait for the cast of Abby man.
And I'm done with this garbage. You won. Hura for you. You're the best.
You know, people need to hear that more often.
You are solid, dude. Metal gear solid. Until someone takes credit for your work.
His name is on the work he created which was the games.
Neil and Craig worked on the show, Nd as a whole are mentioned so that includes him unless people want the credits to include all of the people from naughty dog who worked on the games also lol
Standard fake outrage in this age we are living in, getting sick of on constant everyone's a victim of something, feel sorry for me.
It's happening so much now it's hard to feel sympathy for anyone as it's just people fishing cause they know in today's age cause we pander to it.
If that's the case then almost everyone who worked on it from start to finish should be on the credits aswell.
1 or 2 people don't make a game, it's 100s.
Neil is there as he is the only person from.nd working on the show simple as that.
I wouldn't call it fake outrage, but I will say he's fighting the wrong fight.
Would it be nice if he got a mention? sure. But it's not like he made the tv show. He helped with the first game, not the t.v. show.
It's like he has a good argument but he's fighting the wrong enemy here.
And it's not like he was the ONLY person left off credits for creating the franchise. Should they name every single person that made the first game in the show too?
Just think of how many franchises that have gone on to be tv shows and movies based off games. Do they name EVERYONE? No, they don't.
I don't know.
He directed the project. The game is mostly known for the writing; and it's a pretty damn close adaptation from what I've seen so far. Without him we wouldn't have the Last of Us that they're basically mirroring within the show.
I addressed that, give me an actual argument against my points.
He got credits on the game which he worked on.
Naughty dog is also listed as whole for creating the game which includes him.
Neil's name is only there because he helped on the show, if he didn't then his name wouldn't be there either, it would just say based off the game created by naughty dog lol
J.k Rowling name is on everything Harry Potter even if she don’t put in an ounce of effort
It’s because she OWNS it all. She created the story for herself. She wasn’t a hired writer or something. The Harry Potter WORLD is hers. She hires Kojimas to make her games and create worlds for her. Then Kojima leaves and although he created and became famous for a world he built, he built it for her. She can ultimately do whatever she wants with “his” created world and not mention him at all on anything he didn’t have a “current” hand in making.
The Last of Us never dreams of insulting its audience’s intelligence. And the best example of this is, of course, is its ending.
Shit the beginning was to. I'm not sure how I would feel if I didn't have kids but having them it broke my heart to see.
Yes. The beginning and ending…how they break you, make you think , question things etc. so impactful.
And yeah, I have a son (he’ll be going to college here next year) and just feeling Joel’s pain, heartbreak, loss…it hits you differently when you have a kid (s) of your own.
I didnt have kids when i played it and the beginning had me sobbing. That story left an impact on me
The story was a rollercoaster from start to finish. Probably my 1st or 2nd most favorite game on PS3 (the other being MGS4).
I agree with you. MGS4 was truly special, I wasn't the biggest fan of the long cutscenes but I understand is part of Kojima. Great game nonetheless.
Best Metal Gear game, coming from a HUGE fan of the series. I bought a PS3 JUST for MGS4. And got the collector's edition too. Worth every bit of money.
Yes, the cutscenes can be very lengthy. But a lot of it was quite necessary to really tie things together. Previous games had some longer cutscenes as well. It's just that they were trying to wrap everything up with MGS4. So, it's understandable that they'd have to throw some info dumps into the game here and there.
The cutscenes are long indeed, every Kojima game sets a new record there :P
But the game was awesome, the second they showed that first E3 demo, it was clear it was going to be something special.
I still remember being mind blown by the Octocamo. It was also the first third person shooter game where I felt like the controls and aiming etc all went smooth / fluid and weren't janky. Hard to explain in words, but it felt 'natural' to aim, move etc in it.
I thought the game went on a little too long and it started to wear thin. It should have stopped at Winter. That would have been a great way to end that game with the sequel continuing from there (if necessary).
I loved it however the ambiguous ending was kind of ruined in the sequel
The first game had this conflicting grey area of Joel's actions, a decision to let you think it over and discuss it with people, however the sequel created a narrative that "OMG JOEL 100% DOOMED HUMANITY...HOW SELFISH" and making out Ellie wanted to die in the hospital even though 1) She didn't know she was going to die and 2) She was ready to see Joel once she got out of surgery so he could teach her how to play Guitar.
For me he did the right thing, I mean they pretty much attacked him when he was trying to save Ellie, they lied to him and said they were going to kill her without thinking any other decision out or asking Ellie herself and they pretty much were going to throw him out onto the street without any of his weapons/gear where he could have probably died. There was no guarantee a cure could be made with these guys, it was all "chance".
Exactly. He made the first good decision and this time around the girl he took care of didn't die while escaping...which alluded to the beginning of the game. He was prepared this time.
Like I just don't know why the Fireflies (and now Jerry in Part II) didn't think about any other tests, it was literally "Yeah this bitch has gotta die". You're telling me they couldn't wait for more blood tests, think of new ways to approach it? The worlds been gone for decades, it's not going to collapse even more by waiting, the damage is done.
If they woke Ellie up and asked her but Joel also told her what they did and were going to do to him I don't think she'd really want to sacrifice her life for these guys compared how she suddenly reacts in the sequel.
Even the hospital setting in the original game was run down, dirty and literally the best they could do, that alone didn't inspire confidence they had the tools to distribute a cure let along make one. I know the sequel and remake kind of retcon it where it looked cleaner, brighter and newer but again I'm going off the original, the first time I played it. The Fireflies at the end of the day were not good people, they were still terrorists with their own ambitious goals in mind, I don't think they would have been fair handing out the cure if they did get it made
It's a work of fiction, and more than once Bruce and Neil stated that the cure was a given, it was a sure thing and they regret not making it more clearly. If the cure wasn't a thing, the ending wouldn't ne nearly as impactful as is.
Think the reason why she was going to die was because the guy was a vet, not a doctor
Yet suddenly was the only person who could create a cure
"We deffo need to kill her"
"Wait...WHY"
"Trust me....I'm a vet"
Jerry was a doctor. A lead doctor. His bio makes it clear that he attended Northern Utah Medical University. He just happened to like animals. I wonder if people really pay attention to the games they play anymore (if they played, it’s a toss with TLOU2’s critics)…
TricksterArrow
You should play the PS3 version. Once you do, you'll realize that the ending was retconned because Jerry wasn't the surgeon that was going to kill Ellie.
He was not in the original version of the game but the "Jerry" that Joel killed in the original clearly wasn't someone that acted professionaly or inspired confidence because he was willing to work in a dirty operating room and was wearing boots.
Jerry was a minor unnamed role that got expanded on the sequel and also got recast, not unlike any TV series and games before this one (such as Resident Evil, in which Claire, Leon, Carlos and Chris all look considerably different from one iteration to the other). Also, still not a vet. And also unsure what argument you are trying to make by “dirty room” and “wearing boots”. He is still a doctor that has the ability to develop a cure, it doesn’t matter what he is wearing or what tools are at his disposal, the story is what it is.
I think when you realize he's a vet, Joel's decision feels a bit more justified for those who played both games. Just playing, since you're in Joel's shoes, you don't really question it. Then playing the second there's a justification that doesn't take away from Joel's decision but for the player should reinforce your understanding of it.
You said it in the second comment. "The Fireflies at the end of the day were not good people, they were still terrorists with their own ambitious goals in mind." That's why they just went along with killing her cause they didn't want to figure out some other way.
Foxtrot
I think they just tried to show you how Joel's decision affected more then just Joel and ellie . Just showing different angles and a bigger picture. I think Joel did the right thing.
The story had me emotionally engaged. Gaming for 40 years it was the first time a game story messed with my emotions in the way movies do. As far as the game and gameplay? Not so much lol. It wasn’t bad in my opinion but the game itself was ok. It was the storyline that kept me going in TLOU 1 and TLOU 2.
“As far as the game and gameplay? Not so much lol. It wasn’t bad in my opinion but the game itself was ok.“
What exactly did the game do that qualifies it for just being ok? And same question for the gameplay?
That’s a tough question because I could ramble on and on as to why. I’m speaking for myself because I usually pass on survival horror type games. So instead of getting into a debate as to why I found the gameplay to be ok. I originally commented on how the narrative had me emotionally sucked in. Especially the opening segment. So much that I purchased a game I would never have purchased if not for the story. It’s more kudos to the developer for getting people like me out of my comfort zone to play a game I wouldn’t usually play.
I know some people were upset with Joel lying to Ellie (friends of mine) that they felt it should’ve given the player an option to have Joel either
A. Lie to Ellie or B. Tell Ellie the truth. Type of situation, which just makes no sense. The game nor its story doesn’t given the player any control to have/make any choices that change the direction or outcome of ANY of these characters in this unforgiving and dark world.
I don’t blame Joel for doing what he did.
1. Ellie became the “Something” that he needed to keep fighting for, beyond just living day to day, simply being survivors.
2. Marlene gave orders to that no -name guard to kill Joel if he tried anything…you just done pissed him off all the more with those words. I wonder, if Joel had been killed and Marlene ever came across Tommy again (Joel’s brother) would she have the guts to tell him “Listen Tommy, we need to talk! About Joel…I couldn’t waste this gift. Tommy “What the hell you talking about, Marlene??” Marlene “I had Joel killed, if he” Tommy “YOU SON OF A BITCH!” Got carried away there lol. You get the idea tho. To my point, it wasn’t guaranteed that Ellie was the cure, and after all Joel did, went through, not even allowing Joel to see Ellie, just talk with her, that’s messed up.
3. Of course looking at the actions Joel took in the hospital and how that has major consequences in Part 2 for him, Ellie etc. it’s not like there wouldn’t have been a big threat later on at some point. This world is wicked, dark, unforgiving and everyone’s growing up, has their own WANTS. NEEDS. DESIRES. Solely for themselves, loved ones, or group. All while trying to survive.
Joel I think knew when he said “I Swear” that he’d done something much worse than when he actually saved Ellie from that operating room and possibly causing death to humanity (as if it would be appreciated anyways.
Yes, he lied to the one person who gave him purpose to live, purpose to have hope, purpose to be that father again (which he of course wasn’t looking for, but it just naturally happened upon him) like he was to his daughter Sarah all those years ago. And to him, maybe in that moment, lying would be worth the little bit of time, the years they’d have together creating memories, seeing Ellie grow up before his eyes etc. rather than lie to her and see a reaction in words and deeds in which she might’ve ran off losing all hope and trust in him etc. I mean, she did lose trust in him all those years later etc. but as we saw, she was willing to work with him, try to repair what Joel broke, and he knew it wouldn’t be easy, as did she. But with time she understood I think why he did what he did.
It’s just sad in the end, his lie, the time they lost with his betrayal, and than horrific death, caused Ellie to go seek revenge in a way in which Ellie changed, she kept chipping off more of herself along the journey, scary and sad thing to see, and exhausting. But powerful storytelling throughout it all.
Left handed gamers rejoice!
Yes I can still use L1/R1.
Can't wait to play this! I missed out the first time around.. I'm set for this go-round!!
DS4 triggers are fantastic, makes sense to move to them. I can see why they stuck with the bumpers for the DS3. Triggers on that were horrendous.
Time to plug in my DS4 to get familiar with it on the ps3 mp.