Video: Here's Why The Last of Us: Part 2 Is Better Than Part 1, But It's Nothing Without It

Yeah I’ve always preferred 2… but I’m generally ’that’ guy.

Yes, it is. Glad we had this talk.

@LN78 I had to haha

Agree to disagree, I do however reluctantly agree is better at every single little thing except story. That said I'm glad the franchise is finally going to get a much deserved long rest till at least the PS6, right? 😌

Part 1 would have been a must-buy for me if they had updated the gunplay up to part 2 standard. Might get it on a sale eventually

I haven't even watched the video and agree. Part 1 had it's share of emotionally charged moments but Part 2 left me feeling sick (in a good way). The level design and gameplay were a big improvement too, IMO.

The first game was perfect from start to finish. I don’t throw the word ‘masterpiece’ around very often but TLoU Part I is definitely a ‘masterpiece’.

The second game… I find myself really wanting to like it (even with the controversial story choices they made) but it’s very messy and has some serious pacing issues. The gameplay is great but the narrative gets crushed under its own weight.

It’s like the first game knows it’s good and there’s a quiet confidence about it that feels perfectly effortless. The second game knows it has A LOT to live up to and comes across a bit ‘try-hard’. Like they’re trying too hard to top the first game.

Having played both in the past week, I will say Part II has good gameplay but a terribly edited story. Part I has a couple weak sections but was fantastic.
I seriously don't get the love for II as it ruined Joel's death with its terribly character switching at the beginning making it loss any impact for me. Abby was a great character but playing her so late in the game made it near impossible to care about her or any of her storyline. Ellie has a decent story but character motivations are too all over the place to make it easy to invest in.
Loved the characters in II but god damn was that story so meh.
I almost forgot to add how hilarious II made it that the enemies would announce when you killed someone and act mad. I found it hilarious as all I kept thinking about was South Park killing Kenny made every death funny just to see their reaction.

Part II is a Masterpiece. Part I is ALSO a Masterpiece.

Part 1 is a masterpiece. Part 2 is a master piece. Look, I understand a lot of folks prefer part 2. A lot of people I respect immensely like Colin Moriarty prefer part 2. But, I’m no fanboy. Naught Dog takes an L with part 2 in my book. The story is objectively (yes, objectively) bad. It’s plot structure is as convoluted as what you’d find in a freshman creative writing course. And, before people jump all over me for saying the plot is objectively bad, I understand rules in art are meant to be broken. You just need to master the rules first. Druckmann hadn’t done that just yet. The characters are universally unlikeable. Well, there’s Lev, but there’s the exception that proves the rule. It’s way too long. It’s just awful. I did like going prone and the workbench animations though!

@BritneyfR_ee I agree with so much of what you said. I think part 1 had an airtight story and a quiet confidence. Part 2 had a dumpster fire for a plot and a self awareness that just comes off as so much hubris to me.

@Would_you_kindly I think she just flat out killed the story…

1 is a mediocre game with a good story. 2 is more enjoyable to play with a mediocre story.

No its not.the last of us part 1 is way better.come on pushsquare stop with that nonsense.like public enemy say dont believe the hype.word up son

Both great games that compliment each other well especially since the remake. Ive just completed the remake and it is quite simply stunning and really worth visiting again even at full price. I thought the Story for Part 2 is still brilliant but when comparing it to Part 1 it does try too hard to be radical and overly Brutal. It's has a kind of complex way of subverting expectations and emotions which is definalty too much for some players to enjoy and the Pariah ending is heavy.

I've still not played the second game yet. I think I'm going to wait for it to pop up on PS Plus at this point. Looking forward to it when I do get around to it though.

Part 1 is best game I have played, part 2 somewhere between 5-10 best played games.

I love my children but I miss when they were growing up and they were my world. If you're a parent of grownup kids I think you may understand me. For that reason TLoU is the best.

I think The Last of Us Part 2 from a story-perspective has some issues, BUT it was incredibly blown out of proportion, it really wasn't as bad as most people made it out to be. I was one of the idiots that fell for all the hate the game received, and didn't end up playing it until January of 2021, and when I finally did play it, I understand why some might resent the game because of Joel's death, but after what Joel did what he did at the end of the first game, I truly believed at the time, IF they were to ever make a Sequel, there was no way Joel was going to make it out of that game alive, but I think the problem was, they killed him too soon into the start of the game, BUT I think this was done to reflect how Sarah died at the start of the game.
That being said, I thoroughly enjoyed the game from start to finish, and I plan on replaying again soon.
I still love and adore The Last of Us Par 1, it's my 2nd favorite game of all time for a reason, but The Last of Us Part 2 is still a great game despite it's issues.
(Donkey Kong Country 2 is my number 1 game of all time, if you're wondering)

@jrt87 that just about sums it up!

Also I just bought a The Last of Us poster for $20 off of ebay, the poster itself is the cover image they went with for the PS3 version, without the PS3 labeling obviously. Can't wait to hang it up on my wall in my Gaming Room.

@jrt87 Nothing more needs to be said. You've said it all.

@JustPlainLoco It's not just Joel's death that was the problem. It was the developers implying that Joel did something wrong in the first game (he didn't). They also think that having the gamer play as a psychopath for half the game was a good idea (it wasn't). Worst of all, they seemed to be saying something about the cycle of violence in a game that requires the player to murder hundreds of people (by design).

Sorry, Last of Us was a complete failure if you look past the gameplay.

I think Part II is a better game in every aspect. Part I is my favourite, though.

I have not played part 2 yet its in the seal i want to try to forget some spoilers but its a hell of remark say part 2 is better.

The story was fantastic in part 1 and would not have had a issue if they left it at that i loved the ending.

And Joel did the right thing i would have done the same thing.

Funny this came up as I'm playing through 2 again trying to get the platinum.

As to which is better, I'm sorry friend Part 1 is still better overall even though I don't dislike 2 either. Joel's death wasn't the problem. It's also not Abby that is the problem. She is actually a great character. For me it's the support cast that completely drops the ball in 2.

I just found the entire cast of new characters so...unremarkable and their motivations for certain actions just asinine. Dina was a dumb-dumb who decided to keep her pregnancy a secret so she could come with Ellie for...some reason. Then the other pregnant lady (can't remember her name) in the WLF that also just doesn't care about the fact she is SUPER pregnant and decided to go into a combat zone(and how the rest of the group was just like nonchalant about it). The father of Dina's kid (also can't remember his name) was as interesting as watching paint dry. I could go on but suffice to say one of the things that kept me invested in the original more was the support cast being so interesting and believable.

Tess, Bill, Henry & Sam, Riley, David all felt more believable and or relatable in ways the 2nd game's cast just didn't. I felt for Henry after what happened to Sam. I got why Bill was the way he was. Heck even David, the crazy cannibal, was so much more interesting than anyone in the 2nd.

And to top it off, the original was that perfect 15-20 hours long. Just right. Part 2 is around 35-40 hours long and around the 20 hour mark I felt every minute. Gameplay sure it's better no doubt but I don't get how people see the original's gameplay as outdated. TLOU2 added a prone and a dodge with better AI. That's good but it's a refinement of what came before is all it is.

TLOU1 is top tier. TLOU2 is great but flawed enough to where it just doesn't hold a candle to the original.

@JudgeDredd
You had me agreeing with you until your last sentence. The Last of Us games are deserving of all the praise they get. They truly are masterpieces in game design and storytelling.

@liljazzy2 I’ve just replayed Part I again recently (Remake) and the Left Behind DLC. Loved it! So much so that I purchased Part II again on eBay and I’m about to start it now. I swore I’d never play Part II again after the first time I completed it but my love for TLoU universe has been renewed (fingers crossed Part II doesn’t kill it off again like it did last time 👀🤣).

Best games (and some additional words because it wouldn't let me post just that)

I agree with those of you who say that those games are masterpieces. When I played part one I was completely blown away. It was like nothing I had ever played before. Everything about it was stellar. You can’t really felt the gameplay as it’s a product of its time. Part two had the advantage of coming after many technological advances in gaming.

When I completed part one I couldn’t wait to play the sequel. Then I played part two and it was absolutely stunning. So much so that no other game even appealed to me for six months. That the game has such a polarizing audience seems to me to be a product of exactly what it was trying to do with the story. To me it was a complete and total success. Even if it did ruin gaming for me for half a year. I love it for that and I always will.

Part I has a far superior story with much better fleshed out characters. But the gameplay overall is good, not great. It serves the needs of the game and nothing more.

Part II is almost the polar opposite. The gameplay is sublime, especially the mix between stealth and action at higher difficulties. But the story is a mess, the characters either boring or just ridiculous, and the pacing is all wrong. It drags on for far too long.

Part 1 is amazing, part 2 isn't....

I refer you to my avatar, good day to you.

Gameplay is potentially a little better in 2 given tech advances but story and impact of 1 is far far better

I loved the first one completed it many times, I just don't know why I can't get into the second one I have only managed to get through half way in my first playthrough. It doesn't seem to hit the same notes for me, whether it's burned out from playing the first one to much or just can't find the effort to play it.

@kyleforrester87 Evil Within 2 was so good. I didn’t like the first one but the second game was amazing. Still prefer TLoU Part I though.

@kyleforrester87 - Loved The Evil Within 1 & 2, The Evil Within 2 was damn near close to perfection, but I still prefer The Last of Us for having better characters and more emotional storytelling. Not to mention I have very little faith in The Evil Within 3 being anywhere near as good as the first 2 especially if the rumors of the third game incorporating Battle Royale are to be believed, which makes zero sense given the type of games these are.

Gameplay wise? Sure. But that's it as far as being better. Moving on...

Definitely. Improved in every single way. And indeed, it would be a much lesser game without the first to set the stage. Extremely hard-hitting stuff when played back to back.

I understand people who prefer the first game but I honestly don't know why it's created such a strong reaction against it. Think some people need to have a good at themselves 😬 certain types crawl out of the woodwork for every article lol

eh? last of us 2 is good , last of us 1 is AWESOME nuff said.

but we need closure bring on part 3!

I'm noticing that there's a pretty significant overlap between the "Part II sucks" and "Joel did nothing wrong" crowds. I think a lot of y'all missed the point of Part I's ending.

I like the direction part 2 went into so it was a pretty good sequel. It stood out different to other games. But I don't like that it's a game that just leads to hating this person and that person. At first I had this strong hate for Abby and then after we play as her, I was seeing this really bad side to Ellie that I hated her. Can't forgive Abby for Joel and can't forgive Ellie for the lives she took including the dog. lol

Part 2 has much better gameplay but I feel that story belongs with movies/series. Part 1 wins as one of the greatest game of the generation for me. Not playing as Joel in Part 2 was a downer and it changes things up too much for a game. Part 2 went quite serious in a realistic way while I wanted more of Part 1 with Joel and Ellie together. I get that Joel got what he deserved after the end of Part 1 but this is a game and for a game I just don't care about what he did. Movies or series would be a different story but not for a game. For a sequel game I wanted more with him.

I wouldn't mind having a Part 3 someday. But Part 1 will always be my favourite and my go to game. Part 2 is just to get the full story but not a game I'd be rushing back to. Can't see myself pre-ordering Part 3 though after seeing how Part 2 goes off into it's own direction so I may wait for a price drop. Will only be good for the story closure

Hi there fellow gamers.
Interesting topic for a debate, so here´s my take:
I recently played and finished The Last of Us Part I, and I really enjoyed it. And it was the story and the characters that really make the game shine bright. I still think it´s one of the best games I ever played.
However, gameplay wise, Part II is a vastly superior videogame.
Not only that, but in my oppinion, is a better game period.
Now I know that without Part I, part II wouldn´t exist, that is correct.
But I really aplaud what Naughty Dog decided to do and again, in my oppinion, were able to pull of.
In conversations with friends of mine regarding a possibility of a sequel, we would always go for the brand new characters but in the same world and not exactely a follow up to the story of the first.
But the mad lads and mad ladies decided to do both.
The story follows both existing and new characters in the same game.
I tought it was brilliant. Polarising, for sure, but brilliant.
And since I enjoyed the story of Part II very much, that is why The Last of Us Part II is my favourite of both games.
And you know what I wanted to do as soon as I finished Part I and Left Behind? Yes, you guessed it, play The Last Of Us Part II once more, for the third time.
Replaying these games, not only reinforces why I love Videogames so much, but also really makes me want Naughty Dog to make The Last Of Us Part III as a conclusion of the story.
Maybe someday, I guess. Oh but first, can we get a new Jak and Daxter game, prety please and thank you.
Cheers, stay safe everyone and all the best

Yep... as a combo it is an amazing piece of digital entertainment. One feeds the other.

Some finally understand that gaming is no longer the timing of pressing "X" in a primary color - safe for all - land.

TLOU can go toe to toe with anything I've seen on HBO Max or Bravo. And you actually interact with the story telling in real time.

Digital Art (and the technology that we need for it to come to life) at its best.

There are a few comments above that I think are rather over the top, in more ways than one.

My take is that Part II is a vastly better game. It needs the emotional story punch of the first to work, but on balance I personally found it more engaging and the experience lingered far longer after playing than it did Part 1.

In essence, I agree with the points in the video whole heartedly.

As a final note, I loved Part 1 too, just not as much as others seem to. I think what irked me most when I played it was that I felt it predictable, and the last scene where Joel shoots the surgeon Fire Flys in the operating theatre lacked urgency in the moment (they don't attack you, just stand there for eternity begging you not to kill them. They could of at least had them lunge at Joel with scalpels to force his hand!) A small point in an otherwise superbly crafted experience. Just think Part II learnt from this and did these moments better.

Both games are 10/10 in my opinion.

@Agramonte Yes, totally agree. This is why I got back into playing video games during the pandemic. I'm 42 years old and never touched a controller since selling my very well used SNES as a mid-teen. I was watching really crap Netflix and felt bored just passively receiving stories – mostly poorly written – and not feeling at all invested in the characters. Long story short, my mind started wondering to all the world's problems and I started searching for more active forms of entertainment. That got me watching YouTube videos of Death Stranding, as I'd read a news article about Kojima's knack of predicting the future – in this case the humble courier driver being the key person keeping the world connected. I was back in the PS fold from that moment.

Part 1 was fine. Didn’t make me feel the need to get round to playing Part 2 anytime soon. Probably due to me waiting so late to play the first one.

I haven't watched the video but I agree. On so many levels PT2 is special:

-2 stories in 1.
-Semi-Open World
-Even more intense scenes - like Sniper part.
-Combat

• Leaves you with a feeling you can't explain after it all.

It's just such a unique experience like PT1 but it takes it up a couple more notches.

You know the episode of Simpsons where Homer takes over from Flanders to manage the local football team? as the credits roll and Homer is saying "he's cut" or "they're all cut" for the staff. That's Druckmann when he was planning the story for the game. Kill them all and lets just have a lesbian knife fight in the sea. Game went OTT with the killing characters. It was too heavy for me to enjoy.

FLANDERSSSSSSSSSS
FLANDERSSSSSSSSSS

@BritneyfR_ee I just replayed part 1 and then played part 2 for the first time immediately after. I reckon you’ll be just as disappointed as I was.

Yeah no, TLOU1 is better in every way.

I disagree. TLOU2 is one of the worst games out. It suffers from excessive bloat, poor pacing and terrible writing. The first one is far better.

Part 1 is great (personally digging the remake at the moment).
Part 2 is also great but just went on a bit too long for me, plus it felt more depressing too.

There is no part one and there is no part two. There is only The Last of Us. Which is one of the best games I have played since I first picked up controller. On my 2600

@liljazzy2 Your comment loses merit when you think something what is pretty subjective is objective, you just lose all value by doing that. I could say the story is objectively great with great themes and character work with the only minus being some big pacing problems by the end, of course what i've said is my opinion just like what you think is an opinion and not a fact. You know its comments like these what don't help the "haters" side.

I have mixed feelings with Abby overall. I didn't bat an eye to her appearance unlike a number of insecure heads on the web. I didn't mind her motivation, she lost her dad because of some random dude who not only killed some of the best surgeons around that could've cured the pandemic but essentially sealed the world's suffering for as long as Ellie shall live. Then lost her friends along the way from Ellie's act of vengeance. But her overall character is a very selfish person with a lack of compassion until she happened to be saved by two characters, one who I can see they tried to parallel Joel/Ellie's relationship in LOU1 but less toxic. Joel was an a-**** to Ellie even after she saved him until he 'apologized' by finally letting her cover him with the sniper. Regardless, Abby is a hard person to like outside the sympathy that she lost loved ones. I can see people had fun with letting her fail in the sneak duel against Ellie. Despite disliking Abby's personality, she is a lot of fun to play as.

That said, I can see why the story pacing is a problem for many. It dragged on for quite some time as they were playing out how Abby arrived to Ellie/Jesse's position. It was thrilling playing as her taking out enemies, and the survival horror moments on the boat and hospital. But as it dragged on and on with more intense moments, it was overstimulating to where I needed a break. Just another section with Ellie/Joel or someone else would've eased the tension and all, since usually when writing out a lead-up to a certain scenario it doesn't take that long normally to see the end result.

Aside from that, the gameplay was addicting that I purposely screwed up on encounters just to replay them to see the AI's new tactics. TLOU1 won narratively but TLOU2 was more of a thrilling ride.

The Last of Us is perhaps my favorite video game story of all time. Every minute was riveting from the wrenching start to the perfect ending.

Part 2 has so many good things about it-but it also has a very real pacing problem. The game dragged way too long, and the message about the cycle of violence and the cost of revenge was not delivered with much nuance or subtlety.

Part II is a very good game. I am glad I played it. Part I is an all time great game (especially when paired with the fantastic Left Behind DLC).

Your Mileage may vary of course, but to me Part I is much better and it isn’t particularly close.

TLoU1: Better story
TLoU2: Better gameplay, environment/level design

@Mr_Gamecube All of the characters that die get dispatched by Ellie while she's on her revenge killing spree before you play as Abby and actually meet the characters you kill. You're supposed to feel justified in your killings as Ellie and dehumanize those people who you're killing. You're not supposed to connect with those characters at that time. You're not supposed to feel for those characters at that time. They're supposed to just be people in your way that get offed in a blink of an eye, as you say. That's intentional.

The game then wants to recontextualize those killings as you play as Abby. It wants you to re-evaluate everything you had done as Ellie as you meet all the characters she killed while you play as Abby. Those characters that Ellie kills mean a great deal to Abby. So those deaths do have meaning, and your own emotional reaction to evaluating those deaths is entirely reliant on your ability to empathize with someone you think is the villain when given new information. It's reliant on your ability to understand motive and perspective. It is reliant on your ability to retrospectively evaluate past events when given new context.

The genius of this approach is that it uses the distinct unique abilities of video games as a mode of simulation. You could write a similar narrative in a book or movie, but it would never have the same effect as a video game simulation by involving the player/reader as an active participant in the actions of the two playable characters. Through this simulation in which the player is involved with the choices, the player should be able to more fully feel the emotional repercussions of the narrative. The players should more fully comprehend what it means to dehumanize other people when refusing to comprehend and give credence to other perspectives and motivations.

A truly empathetic player could draw lessons from this game when engaged in conflict in the real world in trying to understand the perspective and motivations of those on the other side of the conflict.

@liljazzy2 Proclaiming that ND takes an L for TLOU2 is such a weird take. It's sold over 10 million copies, had the best-selling PS exclusive release of all time, won numerous game of the year awards, and is considered one of the best games of the PS4 generation. It is for all intents and purposes a quality game with some controversial narrative choices.

Even if I don't like a game for its narrative or gameplay choices, I can still recognize quality when I see it. I can be like, "I didn't like this game and object to certain choices, but I can recognize the quality and still appreciate how so many other people might love it."

Regardless, outside of the story itself, the gameplay is absolutely exquisite.

Calling it an L, even if it's an opinion, just comes across like massive hyperbole.

And the story structure is very intentional, and goes hand-in-hand with the central themes of the game. It's convoluted, as you put it, by design. The game constantly replays the theme of shifting perspective and revisiting past events through a new lens with a different perspective. It is constantly re-contextualizing.

It is vastly more complex than the first game. Where the first game seems hyper focused, neat and tidy with it's narrative, the second game can come across convoluted if you completely ignore its intent and lack the ability to connect with it.

Where folks with your opinion find a convoluted plot, I find nuanced complexity and an intentionally crafted tale where form meets function. A massive W.

@WallyWest nope. Stories are supposed to have plot structure. Setting, conflict, climax, resolution. I’d imagine you couldn’t map the narrative in that way because it literally doesn’t have a coherent structure. It’s bad.

See, I’m even providing you with an objective standard for analyzing story. I also mentioned that rules are meant to be broken in art, but I believe (this actually is opinion here) that Druckmann hadn’t yet earned that right.

@kcarnes9051 I believe you missed the bit where I said “in my book.” I didn’t “proclaim” anything about its critical reception or sales figures.

Also, lots of stories are told from different perspectives and shift around in timeline and still tell a coherent and compelling story.. Take Wuthering Heights, for example. That book is a masterpiece! It’s chaotic. It’s disorienting, but in the end it’s coherent. We’re just not dealing with Brontë here.

@liljazzy2 and TLoUP2 has all of those things. You're free to think otherwise and take issue with it but its still just an opinion, what you think is not a fact its a subjective view what again you're free to have but suggesting your thoughts are objective just make whatever you say lose all merit and value. End of the day when the game has won endless awards, has heaps of praise from critics from both game and film and also from people from the film industry it does suggest what liljazzy2 thinks is objective is clearly not when people who are more in the know with these things can't see this supposed fact.

Without this game, I would have bought the Xbox.
I'll wait for part 3.

I really enjoyed the last of us but found part 2 to be too long, boring and a terrible story. It really killed my enthusiasm for the franchise, and I know it did for alot of other people aswell

@jm816

Nailed it.

@kcarnes9051

Exactly! Billy Idol gets it…

I think this video from wisecrack explains it very well what makes TLoU2 so difficult yet so fantastic if you'd be open to think beyond "oh, they killed off Joel = bad story" or those who can't play characters they can't identify with. Check it out, it's worth the watch.

https://youtu.be/wf-nQUiD6_g

@liljazzy2 The game’s story does indeed have a structure. You just don’t like it, and it apparently doesn’t resonate with you. But it very much has purpose, and it does indeed resonate with a great many players. Its a structure that intentionally tricks you into thinking that you’re the hero as Ellie and that everyone she kills is a two-dimensional villain that’s inconsequential to kill off in a revenge fantasy. The game is pointing out than in real life, nobody is a two-dimensional villain. Everyone has complex motivations and perspectives. Even moreso it wants us to feel the repercussion of failing to understand that. But we can’t fully understand the emotional repercussions without first acting out the revenge and then doubling back to learn to regret it by understanding Abby’s perspective. This game wants us to commit violent acts so that we can later learn and feel what that truly means after those violent acts are set in stone. Telling this story in a more conventional structure would completely undermine the entire games intent.

Are you high?! It's not on the same level. Gamplay wise its better but the story is nowhere near.

I've got to disagree overall. I could have gone completely without playing as Abby. You could have had the fact she was a firefly's daughter come out a different way and I'd completely understand her motives. I didn't need to play as her to like this story. It just added way too many hours onto the game.

@liljazzy2 How is the game not coherent? I followed it perfectly fine. Everything made complete sense to me. Seemed plenty coherent if you understand the game’s intent. People that simply hate Abby seem to have the most problem understanding the game’s intent because they let their hatred and grief get in the way of understanding the game’s complexity.

@jamison1993 The entire point of the game is for you to play as Abby. Not playing Abby would entirely change the thematics of the game, the emotions you’re supposed to feel, and the moral failings you’re supposed to wrestle with. The game’s entire intent hinges on you playing as Abby.

Very good video, thank you.

@kcarnes9051 too each their own, But I felt the killing of her pregnant friend was enough to start the thought process of hey these are people with friends, family etc. In Ellie's arch along with the scene of Abby protecting Lev as Joel once did for her. I still feel nothing was added by playing as abby. I'm not opposed to Abby as a character like a lot of others. I just didn't feel like playing as abby made me feel any different then those scenes I mentioned along with others in Ellie's story. I wouldn't even have had to known she was a firefly to feel for her and her group. Joel was said to wrong alot of people and probably had it coming at some point.

@RaZieLDaNtE Agreed. I aired my opinion 2 was the better game when it released but emotions were too heated back then. But more than anything you said I totally agree that we need more Jak and Daxter in our lives. I really can't understand how they're letting such an amazing IP be little more than Easter egg finds in their other games. An absolute tragedy.

Different worlds. TLOU 1 is inspired buy The Road (McCarthy). TLOU 2 is inspired by MTV teens reality shows. Which is better depends on what you like 😀

Not even close. I have a guilty love for the game. I see it's flaws and they are MANY. Part 1 is infinitely better. That's pretty objective. Not even up for debate unless you like teenage drama with no decent resolution.

They're both great games. Horizon Zero Dawn is still my favourite PS exclusive though.

Thanks for voicing your opinion, but it's wrong.
While I don't think I would have any problem if you said "I like the second entry way more" I don't think it's possible to qualify as better, the story is kind of dumb, but the worst is the pace and the side characters.

IMO,
the second part is 'good enough'.
we really didnt need a sequel of any kind after part.
the problem is that LOU 2 had a alot to hold up/keep up with its predecessor and it didnt just meet the expectations...

@jrt87 You complain about one-dimensional vapid characters and then come up with a barebones cliche kidnapping story . . . Why exactly? . . . Just another romp with the old crew? To explore what new themes exactly and what new morality tale? How does a kidnapping story progress these relationships and the overall story beyond what they were at the end of the first game into new territory that’s more deep than what we got. Your idea is shallow and doesn’t contain an ounce of the pathos in TLOU2. You complain about supporting characters and yet your basic idea is hardly skin deep. As supporting characters, they were fleshed out as much as necessary for the purpose of the story. If you were unable to empathize with them you’re so clouded by the emotions surrounded the killing of Joel that you’re unable to get beyond you’re hatred. There were things to like about these characters. You just refuse to see them. You’re blinded. They each had their separate motivations and were as deep as necessary for the story. And it seems like you’re just pissed about them killing your BFF and that you didn’t get the romp with the old crew that you wanted, seeing as how your cool kidnapping story is your super smart idea to keep your BFF alive and well. Druckman was not interested in staying in a safe place with these characters and just running it back. He is exploring far more nuanced and complex ideas than your vapid kidnapping idea.

@jamison1993 Except the game wants to put you in the position of fighting Ellie as Abby at the theater. It wants you to wrestle with the idea of fighting with the person who you originally viewed as the protagonist. And fight as the person you originally viewed as the antagonist. It wants you to occupy that role reversal. To really embody the other side, to see how one person or another can be viewed simultaneously as the hero and villain. You can’t occupy a role reversal unless you literally do it. They didn’t have you play as Abby just for funsies. This is a deep form of simulating two sides of a conflict that only a video game can provide by making you an active participant as each character. Actively participating as Abby is essential. It is this confrontation when we as the players are asked to continue pushing forward to kill Ellie, despite empathizing with both characters. The game wants to create the hesitancy. It wants to make you uncomfortable and attempt to see Ellie as the enemy as Abby would. It wants you to more fully explore both sides from a deeper empathetic place by embodying them each. If you don’t play as Abby, you can’t have this same confrontation. You can’t have as deep of a connection. That theater scene is the fulcrum for the entire story. This isn’t just a “revenge is bad story” or a “hey, these are real people, too” story. That’s surface level. It ignores the distinct advantage of the video game medium as a simulation that is being leveraged to force the player into two people at conflict. This isn’t just a morality story that you read. This is a morality tale that you experience. You would not have the same experience if Abby was just an NPC that you fought and who watched in cutscenes. That would not land in remotely the same way and would not achieve the very intentional goals the game sets out to achieve. Making you fight the protagonist as the antagonist and feeling torn about the situation is the dynamic the game wants to create. That is completely unachievable unless you play as Abby.

Talk about gaslighting

@Eldritch Hi there friend.
It is one of the many Ips that Sony owns and does not do anything about it.
I mean, I know the teams need to have that desire to make such games, but even still.
Games like Sly Cooper, Jak and Daxter, The Order 1886, Legend of Dragoon, Bloodborne, Puppeteer, they all deserve to make a comeback of somekind.
Like I said before, maybe one day we´ll see it happen.
Cheers, and have a good one

@kcarnes9051 Well said mate. They just don't get it, they wanted the same old tired "you're the good guy, now kill all the bad guys, the end." PTII is an experience that I've never had in any other game. It's great they weren't afraid to try something new. What's even laughable is people act like the 2 games have different writers, yet it's the same Neil Druckmann. It's his story, get over yourselves.

@kcarnes9051 Ok. Here goes…SPOILERS ahead people.

The conflict begins when Joel dies. Ellie’s on a revenge tour searching for Abby. Fine. She follows her to Seattle, goes to the aquarium, kills the vita chick, a dog, Owen and Mel. Check. Then Abby shows up at the theater and we have our climax. The confrontation between Ellie and Abby.

But wait! Now we play as Abby. The problem with the people who say that the story is great because it revolves around that theme of revenge is that it’s almost completely absent during Abby’s three days in Seattle (that’s key- it’s absent during her days in Seattle which from a plot perspective are supposed to propel us to the theater). It actually doesn’t become a motivation for her until she finds her friends dead at the aquarium. So her story is utterly pointless. But, eventually we get to the theater with Abby. We have our climactic fight and then we’re on a farm with Ellie.

But wait there’s more. Now we follow Abby to Santa Barbara to track and Jill her. Which of course we don’t. Ellie goes back to the farm without her two closest friends or two of her fingers.

So, sure it has a structure. It’s setting, rising action, climax, crash and reset, meaningless 2.5 days in and around Seattle, rising action, climax, resolution, rising action, climax, resolution.

If that’s not convoluted, I don’t know what is.

In my opinion, not only is Part 2 better than 1, it’s the best game ever made..

@TheArt That may be what some people wanted, but not necessarily what I wanted. The get over yourselves thing is hilarious. It’s like Druckmann himself posting the “man in the arena” stuff when he was criticized. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t absorb the positive reception and reject the negative. Yes, it is his story. He wrote it for public consumption. Therefore it’s there for people to praise or criticize. If people should get over themselves for being critical, shouldn’t people also get over themselves for defending it?

@RedRiot193 you used the word objective. The clickers are coming for you now…

All characters except Dina were unlikable by the end of P2. P1 was the better experience. If they do P3 then I'll say P2 was better than P3. Because it will be.

Absolutelly not. Part 2 have a better gameplay and graphics of course. However, the story, passing and side content are way better in part 1. The main story is a crap in part 2, they completely destroyed great characters, Joel, for instance will never be dumb to go to a trap like that. In part 1 he immediately run over a dude that was pretending to be hurt and in need of help. The way that Tommy and Ellie behaved in part 2 are also completely against how they were in part 1. Side stories in part 1 are way better, for instance, the tale about people living in sewers (showed by documents found and the place itself) is much more elaborated, convincing and even heart touching. All characters are better developed in part 1, see Tess, Sam, Henry, Tommy, Marlene and so on. In addition, playing with Abby broke the passing and was disgusting, no one cares for the Abby's gang and petting dogs is not sufficient to connect with Abby. The story could take several different ways in part 2, for instance, nothing was advanced about the Ellie condition and how it could help mankind. I'm not a fanboy and defending so much a game that have mixed reception by fans (part 2) is strange, although its gameplay and graphics must be praised.

@kcarnes9051 Your position is very well articulated, and I agree that is exactly what TLOU 2 was doing. I will even agree that the idea itself is kind of genius for a game story and theme.

My problem is not TLOU 2’s theme or structure, but that it went on too long. What Naughty Dog was saying about the cycle of violence and the corrosive nature of revenge was obvious well before the game was over. They could have done half of the Abby section and still made their point. But they did not trust the player to get it, and as a result the game dragged as they pushed the same theme over and over.

Again, this is mainly nitpicking; TLOU 2 is a really good game. But it needed an editor in a way the first game did not. YMMV of course.

@liljazzy2 Well since y'all keep attacking, people who like it have no choice than to defend. Like Aaron said in the video, he's tired of hiding and liking it in secret, all because of folks like y'all. So yeah the "get over yourselves" applies more to the attackers than defenders cause you're trying hard to make everyone accept the game is bad.

@TheArt the guy didn't attack anyone he stated his opinion & then the people that didn't agree with him told him he was wrong lol

i want to know what happened to Abby and lev now they've got to Catalina

@Westernwolf4 The game's length is like 25 hours on average for most people to complete. This is not a long game by any stretch of the imagination. I'm sorry, it's just not. Not in comparison to most AAA games. Medium length maybe.

But it is indeed exhausting, which makes it feel long. Which is not the same as actually being long. And, again, herein lies the point. You're supposed to feel exhausted when you reach the theater because Abby is exhausted.

The game wants you to feel exhausted. It wants you to be fed up and exhausted by the death, exhausted by the cycle. Tired of your own culpability as the player. And it wants you to push forward despite all that exhaustion to encapsulate the drive for revenge, to show you how far revenge pushes a person. To literally push you as the player to continue completing the game despite maybe not wanting to. Pushing you as the player beyond exhaustion, beyond what's good for your own wellbeing, beyond rationality.

Again, this is a game that doesn't just want you to understand the complex emotions of the characters. It literally wants you to embody them via simulation and feel them as your own.

The length of the game, as in the feeling of exhaustion, is literally a design choice. It is a feature. It is form following function. It fulfills the intended thematic goals of the game.

Furthermore, it is challenging you to sympathize with Abby on the same level that you sympathize with Joel or Ellie. You don't have to, but the game is very much putting your empathy to the test. The game intends to challenge the player to embody Abby, despite absolutely detesting her, as a character deserving of empathy. As deserving just as much empathy as the other characters we've been positioned to love. You do not do that by giving Abby a pittance of the gameplay time.

@TheArt i couldn’t care any less whether anyone likes the game. You’re allowed to like whatever you want.

I made an account just to write this. If you guys think tlou2 is better than tlou1 you need to stop calling yourself a game journalist. Quit today.
Taping a banana to the wall deserves more attention than this article. Watching paint dry is more educative than this... Whatever this is

Seriously, quit, this is not for you.

@liljazzy2 Your comments about the cycle of revenge and that being absent from most of Abby's story betrays that you fundamentally do not understand the story and what it is trying to achieve.

Abby's character isn't so much supposed to mirror Ellie's arc and thematics. Thus, when we start playing Abby the thematics of revenge haven't kicked in.

Abby's character is moreso supposed to mirror Joel when we find him at the beginning of game one. Both Joel and Abby are grey people that have done questionable things in their past. And they're both put into a position of helping a younger person navigate a dangerous world and learn to love them. Abby and Joel both grow in similar ways.

Abby learns to love Lev and betrays her people to save him because of that love and regains some of her humanity.

Joel learns to love Ellie and kills a bunch of people to protect Ellie and, likewise, regains some of his humanity.

We as the player in the first game are positioned by the framing of the game to associate with Joel and think of him as the hero of that story. We are positioned this way despite the bad things he has done in his past.

The second game is challenging us to look at Abby in the same way. It is challenging us to sympathize with her in the same way we sympathized with Joel, despite the bad things she's does.

It is trying to challenge us to recognize the hypocracy of associating with a particular side and dehumanizing the other side when all things are relatively equal.

This feeds back into the themes of perspective and contextual motivation as they relate to violent acts. This is not just a "revenge bad" game. If your takeaway is that revenge is the deepest, most complex thematics of the game you've woefully only broken ground on the true depths of this game. You are not reading the full intent.

So critiquing Abby's arc as lacking revenge is a complete misunderstanding.

The game is far more complex and intentional than just having revenge everywhere willy nilly.

@kcarnes9051 the problem is that Joel’s character develops organically with the plot of part 1. Abby develops almost completely apart from the actual plot of part 2. I get it. You like the game. Good on you.

You’ve lectured everyone about the purpose of Abby’s arc like five times in here. My point isn’t that it doesn’t make sense to play as Abby. My point isn’t that revenge is the only theme (never said that btw). I don’t actually think you’ve told anyone anything they don’t know. Literally anyone who played the game knew what they were trying to do with Abby. My point is: so what? What does this have to do with the plot at all? I could tell you many things about myself but unless they’re organically tied to a plot they would hit like nothing more than a personality profile.

I’m done. This comment section is running the risk of being as long, exhausting, and pointless as part 2 itself. Glad you enjoy the game!

@TheArt I whole heartedly agree. The moment you're tasked with trying to kill Ellie as Abby at the theater is a monumental storytelling and thematic achievement from a game design perspective. The complexity of emotions, thematic overlays, and intentional dissonance that this scene creates is unlike anything created in any medium because it's wholly unique by taking advantage of a video game medium. You can't do this in a book. You can't in a movie. They can't actively make you be two sides in a conflict. And no other game has attempted this level of role reversal that I'm aware of. It's groundbreaking honestly and reaches a level of mature, nuanced storytelling never before seen in a game (or at the very least rarely seen).

@liljazzy2 It's called a converging plot line. It's done quite regularly. Like it's not an uncommon phenomenon in narratives. Ever read a Song Of Ice And Fire book? Basically every character in that series develops separately with the consequences of each only tangentially affecting other characters. The actions of one character and their development on one side of the continent can have Earth shattering effects to characters and their development on the other side of the continent.

Regardless, everything that Abby experiences separate from the first half of the game directly affects the final confrontation and resolution. Abby's ordeal with Lev directly puts her in her state of mind at the beach. It is all consequential.

It doesn't matter if Abby's character develops separately. Criticizing the game on that front is a bit unfair in the grand scheme of narrative design.

Even still saying that her character wholly develops separately is a bit of an exaggeration, as Abby frequently comes across Ellie's war path and is affected by those events. She is directly affected and develops due to the consequences of the first half of the game. It's often interwoven.

This game isn't supposed to follow the exact same character development formula as the first. It mirrors certain aspects but that's it. It has different goals in mind.

@Would_you_kindly Not him exactly, it's to the PT2 "haters".

@kcarnes9051 Yep, nothing like I've ever seen. It was real uncomfortable, a unique experience. People are so mad about the plot you'd think the characters actually exist IRL it's laughable.

@Would_you_kindly thank you

@kcarnes9051 are you Neil druckmanns alt account lol

@kcarnes9051 no I have never read a Song of Ice and Fire book. I have, however, played last of us part 2 and thought the story was terrible. I thought the gameplay was good enough that I’ll probably go back and get the last few trophies I need for the platinum.

Really, I’m glad you enjoyed the story. I think I came off as condescending in some of my posts and I’m willing to admit that. I say that first because I think you’re coming off the same way.

It’s interesting that one of the themes of the game is seeing things from different perspectives and yet it’s one of those games where it seems nobody wants anyone else to have a different perspective about it.

Really, I’m so glad you like the game. I wish I would have. I just don’t. I think the story’s trash. I think that objectively it’s convoluted. Therefore I subjectively dislike it. But I don’t think anyone is stupid or less than me if they do like it.

That’s my final word on the subject. I’m too busy playing the BRILLIANT River City Girls at this point.

@kcarnes9051

Sure, if you blaze through the main story. If you do side quests and exploration the game is closer to 40 hours than 25.

But more importantly: your novels about this all make the assumption that we can’t understand what the game was trying to do. We do. The intent and themes of this game were not hard to figure out. A lot of people, me included, don’t think it was executed as well as it could be. The fact that a lot of people feel that was doesn’t make us right, but you shouldn’t assume that it means we don’t get it.

What you call exhausting, I call redundant and repetitive when the themes were already hammered in. If you feel differently, great. Glad you enjoyed it. But what this game was trying to say was not a mysterious puzzle, and the fact that I didn’t need to hear it for the 4th or 5th time by the time they finally slogged through the final confrontation doesn’t mean I didn’t understand it. Quite the opposite, actually.

But we're not talking about 100%ing a game. Cyberpunk takes about 25 hours to complete the main story, but you can spend upwards of a 100 hours to doing everything. And, yet people actually complain that Cyberpunk's main quest is too short.

The extra hours are simply gameplay minutia that you're free to play or not. Heck, you can draw out Uncharted 4 to like 30+ hours searching out every nook and cranny for collectibles. But that's still a short to medium length main game. Obsessively searching out collectibles is separate from the main narrative. TLOUS 2 is still a medium length game for the intent of this discussion.

In regards to hammering the themes in. Abby had to go on a journey of her own to put her on the same narrative and sympathetic level as Ellie and Joel. So, again, minimizing her narrative would diminish her footing with Ellie and Joel as an equally sympathetic and important character, and the thematic goals would not be met.

It's like you argue you know the thematics of the game without allowing the thematics of the game to actually play out. This game is intended to be as much Abby's game as it is Ellie's game. Not surprisingly you play as each for about the same exact time.

The game wants you to give equal credence to both these characters. Diminishing Abby undermines this goal.

You say: "They could have done half of the Abby section and still made their point."

No, they absolutely could not have. That would betray the intent of the game.

@kcarnes9051

1.The first two paragraphs of this post are strange in the context of the rest of your argument. You argue that every second with Abby is vital. But then you argue that the rest of the stuff the developers put into the game is “minutiae” that can or should be skipped. Just because the parts with Abby are important to you and some of the rest of the exploration isn’t doesn’t mean it is irrelevant to players.

You said the game is relatively short. If people fully explore what Naughty Dog put there, that is not correct.

2. Your responses to my post skip right past what I am actually saying to what fits your view of the game. You say things like I want to make Abby’s story a “pittance”, which is not what I wrote. I think the game would have been just as powerful without going through all of the same scenes again from another perspective. You think they needed every one of those moments. I don’t. That is fine.

3. I can’t believe I am arguing this much over a game I really like, and I am going to stop doing it. You clearly feel strongly that this was the only way Naughty Dog could have told this story, and that all of the people who don’t feel that way are wrong. Which: More power to you. I am glad the story spoke to you. It is a really good game.

@Westernwolf4 C'mon now. We are discussing Abby's role in the narrative and how that adds length to the narrative. We are not talking about running around and collecting items that have little to no bearing on the central plot dynamics.

There are 144 collectibles in the first game and nearly double that in the second while hidden in much larger environments. If you want to complain about the game being too long that's not on Abby's involvement.

You can make just about any game unbearably long by collecting every last thing. But that's not what we're truthfully talking about.

My actual argument is that our playtime as Abby is just as vital as our playtime with Ellie.

If you want to argue shortening Abby's story, then you have to shorten Ellie's. (But even if you do this I think this would undermine the goal of wearing out the player on an emotional level). Because the game's intent is to put them on equal footing.

If you want to belabor calling it a long game (which I still contend that it's not in the grand scheme of gaming) and if you want to shorten it overall, you can't just remove parts of Abby's story. You'd have to shorten the entire game to maintain the artistic intent of the game.

Jumping immediately to trimming Abby's role without acknowledging that you would need to trim Ellie's, as well, to maintain the balance the game is intent on striking, betrays a misunderstanding of the intent behind the narrative's form.

I admit to exaggerating the pittance statement. My point was that you don't seem to want Abby's role to be as large as Ellie's, as evidenced by your preference to jump immediately to only reducing Abby's role.

This betrays hints of tribalism, subconsciously or otherwise, in favor of Ellie. This game is daring you not to be tribal.

@liljazzy2 I would then recommend doing some reading up on converging plot lines as a narrative device. Your opinion that TLOU2 has a convoluted narrative appears to, in part, lie in your unfamiliarity with this writing technique.

Just because something seems convoluted doesn't mean that it does not fulfill an artistic intent.

A painter can paint an ugly painting with the intent of illustrating a truth. That truth justifies painting something that is ugly. If you just look at the painting and say, "I don't like this painting because it's ugly," that just shows you don't understand the intent of the work.

When you call a converging plot line convoluted as a negative, it suggests you don't understand the artistic intent of using a converging plot line as a device.

Something being convoluted is not inherently a negative if there is a reason for it. And there is very much a reason why TLOU2 is structured the way it is.

I know I said I was done, but your last paragraph is ridiculous. This isn’t a team Ellie vs. team Abby thing. It is a narrative thing. And even if it was, tribalism is the wrong word to describe it. I’m not sitting here surrounded by TLOU merch while throwing at a dart board with a picture of Abby’s face on it. I truly don’t care that much.

If I have a slight preference for Ellie, it is probably because I want to see characters from TLOU in a sequel to TLOU. Which, I mean, duh. But if Abby’s story were first, would I have been happy replaying the same time period and encountering the same characters as Ellie over and over because Naughty Dog wasn’t sure that I realized that the characters on the other side were also people with their own perspective and worthy of empathy? No.

The reasons this landed for you are not complicated. The reasons it didn’t quite land the same for me: also not complicated. Tribalism, as you describe it, has zero to do with anything.

@kcarnes9051 friend, take a deep breath. I tried to be kind and end the conversation, but you just won’t quit. I don’t understand a converging plot line because I haven’t read you fire and ice whatever? You sure do assume quite a bit about me.

I’m glad you’ve had your opportunity to wax eloquent ad nauseam about TLoU. I’m not responding to anything else you say, so if you’ve got anything else to say I’ll just attribute that to your love for your own words.

@Westernwolf4 your discussion partner can’t help him/herself. Check their comments history. They’re talking about tribalism but nearly everything they’ve posted is pro Naughty Dog. Definitely nothing tribal about that.

"If I have a slight preference for Ellie, it is probably because I want to see characters from TLOU in a sequel to TLOU."

This is the inherent tribalism the game is exposing. Learning to empathize equally with people even when you have a greater attachment originally with one person.

You've expressing exposed the point. Some people have much greater reactions to Abby's equal role. Yours is not as great. But it's still there. That is what the game is exposing.

@kcarnes9051
"In regards to hammering the themes in. Abby had to go on a journey of her own to put her on the same narrative and sympathetic level as Ellie and Joel. So, again, minimizing her narrative would diminish her footing with Ellie and Joel as an equally sympathetic and important character, and the thematic goals would not be met.

It's like you argue you know the thematics of the game without allowing the thematics of the game to actually play out. This game is intended to be as much Abby's game as it is Ellie's game. Not surprisingly you play as each for about the same exact time.

The game wants you to give equal credence to both these characters. Diminishing Abby undermines this goal.

You say: "They could have done half of the Abby section and still made their point."

No, they absolutely could not have. That would betray the intent of the game."

THIS. People don't realize TLOUPT2 has 2 MAIN characters: Ellie & Abby. Heck, check in the PlayStation avatars available when changing your profile picture on PSN, you have both of them. You don't have Rafe from Uncharted 4 or Hades from HZD there. Speaks volumes.

This feels like such a click bait article and you can tell it worked.

However, I'll reiterate what many have said, setting aside the small-minded ones mad about what the ignorant have deemed wokeness.

I absolutely think the Part 2 is a better game in terms of how it plays. IT's story however is way to drawn out, over edited and chopped up and at times feels like more of a walking simulator and soap opera than a cohesive driver of that gameplay.

I also agree that the later 3rd of the game was pretty bad in terms of story, In my opinion even the gameplay and resource gathering began to feel very repetitive. I personally think that Naughty Dog should try a completely different type of game, because if you really take away the different set dressings in their last like 6 games. they are all literally the exact same gameplay mechanics just with a different coat of paint (story, setting, and characters). It's a dated overall format and it shows no matter how flashy they make finishers and overall visuals.

2 is better to play but it is still highly overrated in my opinion, and the first doesn't at all hold up or justify the price it is now, using the same gameplay and linearity of the time it was originally released

@Westernwolf4 it’s funny that you think that tribalism has nothing to do with this game. Which suggests you don’t understand this game as well as you think you do. Seraphites. Fireflies. WLF. Rattlers. Factions. In other words tribes. Tribalism has EVERYTHING to do with this game. It’s embedded in the game’s DNA. And how we relate to Ellie and Abby directly is influenced by our tribal relations to these characters. We start out as a tribe as players with Ellie and Joel in the first game. We are a tribe of three. Ellie. Joel. The player. We highly relate to them based on our familiarity. Familiarity is what gels a tribe, in part. Abby is unfamiliar to use in the second game and is distinctly in conflict with our tribe, Joel and Ellie. Tribalism blocks our ability to extend empathetic understanding to those we find ourselves in opposition with. This game wants to challenge are tribal nature by placing someone outside of our tribe on equal footing with those inside our tribe. To extend the same empathy. That you want Abby’s gameplay time to be shortened while showing preference to Ellie suggests that tribalism does indeed affect how you’re approaching this game in contrast with how the game is actively requesting that you give up your tribal affiliation by giving Abby her due as a full co-lead alongside Ellie.

First game is far better , especially when you consider how old it is, 2 had some good points but awful story and pacing , opinions will vary of course.

@arsmolinarc they did though

@EMQZ exactly and they both complement each other better than most sequels. They both do things that help the other be even better

@Constable_What good game but hell no lmao

@kcarnes9051 couldn’t have said it any better. Most of this comment section is comments form people who never comment on this website but tlou part 2 brings the haters out like no other game I’ve ever seen

@BloodEagle yep like the saying goes opinions are like ***** everyones got one . It’s just too bad people on the internet can’t be mature and respect peoples opinions. Like your opinion on the story being awful is honestly comical to me because the game is better written and acted than any game out there with maybe only rdr 2 giving it a run for it’s money but that games pacing is truly bad not to mention the game grinds to an absolute halt and jumps the shark with the tropical chapter. With all that said I respect your opinion even though I don’t agree and I wish more people could be like that

@kcarnes9051

Did I say tribalism had nothing to do with the themes of the game? No, I did not. I said that tribalism on my part has nothing to do with my reaction to the game. Since I don’t have a strong enough preference for Ellie for that to be the case. Because that would be silly.

Of course tribalism is a theme in the game. Duh.

Your reading comprehension needs a great deal of work if you intend to keep telling everyone else they don’t understand things.

@kcarnes9051 Yes, people who go to a a sequel to something want to see the characters from the first one. You got me. That had never happened before in human history and it clearly means that I don’t understand tribalism, and that I am incapable of grasping the concept of empathy. What a sick burn.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I am going to watch the new Star Wars. It is about people working in a bank!

@Westernwolf4 “Now if you’ll excuse me, I am going to watch the new Star Wars. It is about people working in a bank!”

I want to be you when I grow up.

@TheArt This is a valid opinion. The issue with the poster you are replying to is that he is acting like his way is the only possible way to feel about the story. And he is being extremely condescending while doing it-what Naughty Dog is trying to say is important, but not especially complicated or hard to see. It seems important to him that these issues are hard to unpack so he can be the one to point them out to everyone. They are not difficult to unpack.

What I don’t understand is why the argument persists. TLOU and TLOU 2 are both great games. No one should care who likes one better than the other, or why. I think the story in TLOU is better. 2 is also good. So what? This only keeps going because some guy continues to insist that no one other than him could possibly understand the nuance of Naughty Dog’s intent. Which is ridiculous.

@liljazzy2

LOL when I actually grow up, I will let you know!

@TheArt I’m only saying this to be cheeky and although I want to I just can’t look away from this comments section.

Here’s the thing: if we’re looking at psn avatars to determine who the main characters are in part 2, it’s pretty awkward that old man Joel is one of the avatars. Ooooooppppps!

@Westernwolf4

“Tribalism, as you describe it, has zero to do with anything.”

I don’t know, man. This was a pretty broad all-encompassing statement. Pardon me for misconstruing your hyperbole.

Even still, you say you understand tribalism. And yet you say tribalism has nothing to do with your opinion.

And then you say: "If I have a slight preference for Ellie, it is probably because I want to see characters from TLOU in a sequel to TLOU."

This is a tribal statement. Showing preference for a group, .I.e the previous game’s characters, due to a sense of familiarity.

So on one hand you say tribalism isn’t part of your opinion, and on the other hand you’re showing signs of tribalism while saying an opinion.

And you seem to want to undermine the thematics of tribalism by cutting the playtime as Abby.

There is an incongruity between your statements is all I’m saying. I’m not saying you’re completely unfamiliar with the idea of tribalism. But it does seem like you’re missing how the game is intentionally using the idea of tribalism to manipulate our feeling about Abby and Ellie on some level.

If you shortchange Abby’s playtime the tribal experiment the game is executing on the player would be ruined.

@Westernwolf4 Well these articles are meant to rope in new subscribers, I should know, I subscribed to this site just to comment on some questionable top10 they put out haha. So it's business, but still fine that we have these talks.

@liljazzy2 Well yeah, that's my point, the 3 of them are all protags. People just wanna see Abby as the bad guy.

I'm sorry but @kcarnes9051 makes extremely valid points. This thing about ND didn't have to drag it out with Abby, no, they had to and it's fine, there's more trash repetitive fetch quests in other games. ND games don't have to always be short.

@Would_you_kindly Wait who is the woman you're referring to?

Because of this video, I finally decided to spend the $15 to buy a used copy of TLoU2. The first game has stuck with me for several years, but from everything I read about the second, I decided not to get it. Now, with some distance, I feel I should give it a chance.

@Priyesh Anita sarkeesian

I politely disagree 😂

Strongly disagree and I didn’t play 2.(because it’s story driven is what motivates to play)
Fact is TLOU is mostly popular because of the story. It’s all about the story first, then the rest.
Other fact for TLOU people can’t talk about the story forever. It’s ambiguous enough to get the conversation going.
2 there not much to talk about honestly. They tell you this is how it goes and you need learn that and experience this for your own mental good because they know better and that’s it.
It’s a different game contradicting the first ones story that was actually making sense. They r going for the chosen one theme but weirdly not doing anything with it.
No discussion possible apart from saying you like it or not.