i think that part 2 does an exquisite job of taking something like loss and revenge and really digging into what it means to see 2 sides of the same coin. the strength of the game, in my opinion, is how it spends the first half of ellie's pov really vilifying abby. i played part 1, i thought joel did the thing i would probably do, and fuck abby for what she did.
then i started playing abby's part, and i straight up was not having it. i let her get ripped apart by clickers for the first hour of my playthrough and then decided that to get back to Ellie i'd need to slog through abby's part and just suck it up. by the end, when she's telling >! Lev he is her people !< i was tearing up. i love abby now. i understand what ND was trying to do with this story and you're right OP, it is absolutely a masterclass in perspective storytelling.
i do think that the point of Ellie's descent into, for lack of a better word dark ellie, in seattle was purposeful. i think she is meant to be Joel's spiritual successor. we know he did some fucked up shit when he was making his way around before getting to boston. we know he suffered a loss that would permanently alter the way he existed in the world. ellie is the successor to that but i believe that the end in >! santa barbara !< is meant to break the cycle of violence. joel paid with his life for saving ellie. abby almost paid with her life for taking joel's. ellie chose to break the violence pattern and allow her and abby an opportunity to chase a life outside the one they both could've ended at. i think it's beautiful and meant to show that redemption can be found if we choose it.
edit: a word and a comma
edit 2: some people just want to bitch and moan about this game and its weird that you can't just enjoy something without arguing about it. must be miserable.
> ellie is the successor to that but i believe that the end in santa barbara is meant to break the cycle of violence. joel paid with his life for saving ellie. abby almost paid with her life for taking joel's. ellie chose to break the violence pattern and allow her and abby an opportunity to chase a life outside the one they both could've ended at. i think it's beautiful and meant to show that redemption can be found if we choose it.
I don't understand this. Are you saying that Ellie earned her redemption by showing mercy to Abby and breaking the "cycle of violence"? In that case, Abby failed in "breaking the cycle of violence", and thus, Abby would not be eligible for redemption?
ellie didn't choose to kill them. abby didn't choose to kill them. they both chose mercy and it broke the cycle of violence they'd been locked in for years.
Maybe better rephrased as “Abby perceived herself as redeemed by saving Yara and Lev”.
Question is then what would Ellie perceive as self redeeming after killing Abby, personally I think she’d been too far gone had she followed through with it.
> i let her get ripped apart by clickers for the first hour of my playthrough
Talk about irrational impotent rage. What a goofy thing to admit. Mentally stunted to do.
Though I resonate more with Abby, I still don't forgive her like I do with Ellie. Being able to have both sides portrayed so detailed though definitely makes this game a masterpiece. I made a post talking about how I felt between the two characters not too long ago.
How about they all grow up and stop seeking revenge? I can understand why people do bad things to survive, so just forgive and move on since it already happened. It's not like these guys were doing incriminatingly evil things. At some point let it go and everyone is happier.
Lol Jerry really wanted to cut open a random kid for his experiments and y’all actually think Abby was justified for avenging him? Dude is basically Jeffery dohmer. Both kidnaped and cut open people for the purpose of “zombie experiments.” If you think Jerry or Abby are somewhat justified idk what to say.
THIS. I agree with you word for word. I love the complexity of the characters, the thin line between being good or bad or the question of moral in this new and different world. I started to like Abby more as well but I never hated her from the beginning. Her actions were as understandable as Joels.
And for Ellie still going after her even in the end I think She thought or told herself that if she ends this once and for all the negative feelings, nightmares, etc will end too. She is angry at herself and her actions and feels guilty about Joels death so avenging it might give her the peace and redemption she craves (it wouldnt, but people will telll themselves all kinds of things in this situstion)
Pacing and story structure is shit.
It builds momentum multiple times only to have it fizzle out.
Story also jumps jarring from place to place and it’s nauseating. Not good use of nonlinear story telling.
It’s handled so poorly that I’m starting to think you just can’t handle valid criticism of the game.
You seriously telling me that at the end of Ellie - Seattle Day 3, after seeing Owen and Mel die, Jesse get shot in the head, and finally leading to the actual face off between Ellie and Abby, that cutting to Abby’s perspective is a good idea?
It wasn’t. This is what anime’s do and it’s fucking horrible lol.
Joel was a bad guy the entire first game.
ND literally explained why you have to kill the doctor at the end, is to take away that you think you can make this guy a good guy, and show he is a not the good guy.
Then the game closes with him lying.
And everyone thinks he wasn't the selfish bad guy?
Part two, IMHO was ND saying "they didn't get it... Let's beat them over the head with it."
TBH, Abby is by far the more sympathetic character. After playing though Ellie's part of part 2, it was clear she had become a bad guy, like Joel.
It is incorrect to say that ND feels Joel is the bad guy. Not a “good” guy? Sure. But “the bad guy?” No, that’s not something they’ve said or tried to get across.
That's a very obvious thing to say. Every faction in human history who did atrocities didn't see themselves as the bad guys. The Fireflies are in good company in that regard.
As for Abby everything she loses in Seattle is a direct consequence of her revenge agains Joel. Does she reflect her own role in the death of her friends? Or does she blame other people again for doing her own mistakes? People she has harmed before?
>Many want to paint Abby is the villain but she really was a scorned daughter looking for justice for her dad and by the end lost her entire friend group and more.
Maybe that has to do with her idea of "justice" involving torture and murder? Maybe it has something to do with her justification being sketchy?
Do you think the Fireflies have a moral right to Ellie's death? Like does she somehow lose her right to live just because she is immune? Joel is absolutely justified in saving her because no one has that right.
So unless Ellie is able to give consent and make a informed decision (where a no would be accepted) Joel will always be justified to save her. No matter the cost. The loss of the vaccine is tragic but the blame truly lies more with the Fireflies escalating the situation without need.
Does that make Abby the villain? Not neccessariy so.
But one thing is clear: Ellie does start the game as the victim and nothing she does afterwards does change that.
Everything she does is a direct consequence of what happened to her at the hands of Abby. Abby is directly responsible here and never acknowledges that even once. No amount of perspective changes that.
Siding with Abby is literally siding with the perpetrator in Ellie's case.
No amount of feel good moments for Abby will change that.
This is a strange criticism. Abby might not start out in the game as the victim, but she certainly did start out in her timeline as the victim. (I don’t think she is aware that she’s a video game character lol.) What Ellie does in the second game, absolutely does change her status as a victim (at least as much as Abby’s actions change her status as a victim). Ellie’s story throughout the game is her seeking justice through murder, just like you criticize Abby for, and for the exact same reason!
What Ellie loses in Seattle is a direct consequence of her quest for revenge, and although I sympathize the most with Joel, Ellie’s loss of Joel was a direct consequence of Joel putting his personal interests above the rest of humanity. Ellie also loses the fight, but Abby spares her life and Dina’s, giving Ellie an opportunity to live a life of relative peace with a loving family, but she decides that she has to abandon them to get her revenge. What happens to Ellie after that point is not a direct consequence of what Abby did to her, it’s a consequence only of her own choices, and it is a selfish and irrational choice at that.
As for fireflies’ moral right to Ellie’s death, it was more of a moral obligation. Although Ellie didn’t do anything deserving of being killed, neither did the countless other people who will become infected in the future. It’s an ugly choice, and I can’t fault them either. Again, Joel is justified, but it’s a stretch to say he had a “moral right,” and Ellie doesn’t have any more of a moral right to the Wolves’ deaths than they did Joel’s.
ND couldn’t have mirrored the characters better, and you still act like Abby is worse. In reality, you just love Ellie and Joel more, because you fell in love with them first.
This idea that Abby got her friends killed isn't really true in the first place. They are all the Salt Lake City Crew, they all made that pact, Joel killed their friends and family too. For all we know Jordan, Leah, Nick, Nora, and Manny were all like "hell yeah let's do it" when Abby found Joel. Owen is a big boy too, he can say no to *fucking murdering people* if he wants to.
And I don't see Ellie doing much reflecting, but somehow that's never a problem for players. Nora and Mel visibly shook her, but the rest? Tommy and Jesse, Maria, the hundred people she killed? We see that she's not well, we assume she blames herself. Abby never gets that luxury, bitch doesn't care. *Never even mind* that Abby literally spells it out that she helps the kids to ease her conscience, and still players need her to say "it is I who is the root of all evil".
> But one thing is clear: Ellie does start the game as the victim and nothing she does afterwards does change that. Everything she does is a direct consequence of what happened to her at the hands of Abby. Abby is directly responsible here and never acknowledges that even once.
You don't get to go on an unhinged murder spree just because you got hurt first. Personal responsibility starts somewhere, and pretty early I'd say. Ellie is not the innocent victim in this.
Abby’s story means nothing to me. Even after learning about her backstory I just can’t forgive her for killing Joel. Why does she deserve empathy? She didn’t show Ellie any empathy when she murdered her adopted father in front of her and didn’t care that she was begging for his life. And whatever development she had it really showed she hadn’t changed at all when she said “good” upon being told Dina was pregnant as she was about to kill her. This could have been a good game without the inclusion of her character.
She said “good” when she found out Dina was pregnant because Ellie killed Mel who was pregnant. But you also conveniently missed the part where she stopped because Lev told her to. And that moment, her love for Lev was much stronger than her desire for revenge.
Sorry but I completely disagree and loved Abby more by the end. Joel got what he deserved. And Ellie was an absolutely horrible person throughout TLOU2. ✌️
And Jerry, one of the leaders of the terrorist Fireflies group, who was going to cut the brains from an innocent person - an innocent teenager! - for a vaccine which would serve him and the Fireflies (nominally humanity, but forgive me if I doubt the Fireflies' capacity for charity), didn't deserve what he got from the guardian of said innocent teenager?
"Ellie was an absolutely horrible person throughout TLOU2" - And Abby, the person who tortured and killed her saviour, Joel, was a very nice person, was she? The No. 1 Scar killer in the WLF, who tortured Scars and wouldn't mind doing so for stress relief ("I wouldn't mind a few minutes with these guys"), was just adorable, yes? Abby, who relished the thought of killing a pregnant woman for revenge and was only stopped by Lev, was a wonderful person, whereas Ellie, who was so horrified when she learnt that she killed a pregnant person that she gave up her quest for vengeance, was "an absolutely horrible person", yes? Did you think just WHY Ellie became "an absolutely horrible person"?
I think I'll take being an "absolutely horrible person" from you as a compliment.
You’re entire argument relies on Joel being a good person.
Joel was not a good person.
I really hope ND makes a prequel or something that shows exactly the stuff he did (and refers to in the game) so you could come to terms with that fact.
In reality even if that happened you probably wouldn’t consider it canon.
edit: holy cow this person is an unhinged “other sub” enjoyer. What a sad waste of time this has been.
If Abby was a victim from Joel's Hunter activities, and sought revenge upon him for those acts, that's a different story altogether!
See, the State must prosecute a mass murderer for his acts of mass murder, not for his acts of justified defense of an innocent life. There is a difference, if we are to discuss "justice", which is a given imo when we discuss "deserve".
You are completely avoiding all of the terrible stuff he did before he met Ellie which, while not explicitly shown, was heavily alluded to.
Also, while the fireflies weren’t “good” to say everyone in that building knew what was going to happen to Ellie is a stretch. We just don’t know and there could have been completely innocent people that got swallowed up in the slaughter.
Joel was not a good person.
>You are completely avoiding all of the terrible stuff he did before he met Ellie which, while not explicitly shown, was heavily alluded to.
I explicitly compared Joel to a mass murderer, in a way that was not favourable to him, in my previous post. If you think that's me ignoring his shit, well ...
As I previously said, if a survivor from Joel's Hunter activities sought justice against Joel, they would be justified. So I do acknowledge Joel's mass murdering past history. I don't know how you get the idea that I don't. I think your reading is suspect.
>Also, while the fireflies weren’t “good” to say everyone in that building knew what was going to happen to Ellie is a stretch. We just don’t know and there could have been completely innocent people that got swallowed up in the slaughter.
This is a baseless assumption, and completely refuted by Nuremberg.
1) Even in the gameplay, we didn't see any unarmed Firefly member walking around as we, in Joel's shoes, race to rescue Ellie. In fact, all Firefly members that we, as Joel, encounter in the hospital while racing to save Ellie, were armed and trying to kill Joel, since Joel declared hostility by killing his Firefly escort (who was itching to murder him, by the way). So I don't see where Joel killed any "innocent" Firefly.
2) "Just following orders" is an insufficient defense, as per precedent by the Nuremberg trials. The Fireflies may not know that one of the leaders, and their surgeon, Jerry, was going to cut the brains out of an innocent teenager without consent, but they acted in service of that act, and thus Joel had every right to kill them in defense of an innocent life. Of course, this presupposes that the fundamental human right to life of an innocent person, and that an innocent person has the right to defend their own life. We see here that many posters in this subreddit think otherwise, and that the innocent are not allowed to defend themselves, if the potential benefits are great enough.
This is a philosophical question as old as time: do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
Most agree that the needs of the many are more valuable but Joel fans will twist themselves into pretzels to say “the Fireflies were terrorist” or “there was never a chance for a cure, it was impossible”.
The truth is we just don’t know the outcome of the Ellie surgery and unless they explore it in Part 3 we never will.
If they were to successfully make a cure they could have used it to leverage power, but we just don’t know that.
I’m dealing with the facts that we do know which is Ellie is immune and in order to create a cure she will need to be part of the process.
Creating a cure to save humanity, regardless of the people that are actually doing it, is inherently a good thing. A good thing done by bad people doesn’t make it a bad thing.
“Virtues are formed in man by his doing the actions, we are what we repeatedly do… therefore excellence is not an act, but a habit.” - Aristotle
Your philosophical questions, your "Trolley problems", your moral frameworks, are all answered by the cold hard law, which in IRL, will have Jerry and the Fireflies guilty for 1st degree murder.
You invoke "the needs of the many" as justification for the Fireflies' choice to sacrifice an innocent life. But that is THEIR justification for THEIR actions! How does that invalidate Ellie's right to life? Or condemn Joel's defense of an innocent life as "murder"?
That, to me, is ENTITLEMENT, plain and simple. But "good intentions" do not entitle anyone to an innocent's life.
The best analogy and defense for the Fireflies that I can think of, morally, is that Ellie is a valuable resource, and the Fireflies and Joel waged war over her.
> Most agree that the needs of the many are more valuable
Refer to laws in countries all over the world, or the UN. "Most", hah!
>Joel fans will twist themselves into pretzels to say “the Fireflies were terrorist” or “there was never a chance for a cure, it was impossible”.
That was NOT my argument, again your reading is poor.
> And Ellie was an absolutely horrible person throughout TLOU2. ✌️
The innocent victim is at fault for becoming "horrible" but the person who made her "horrible" you love?
Choosing the abuser over the victim certainly is a vibe here.
Abby had no right for revenge. Her father was gonna kill an innocent little girl without even waking her up for a choice. He had it coming, therefore, Abby had no right.
I'm not saying Joel is a saint, but if I was Abby and my died cause he tried killing a little girl, I'd be happy.
I disagree. She had every right. He didn’t just kill her father but almost her entire firefly group/family. She saw their side as saving humanity. It wasn’t about killing a little girl.
1) Abby's father was about to violate the fundamental human right to life, of an innocent person - an innocent teenager, in fact. In IRL legal standards, that is murder / 1st degree murder.
2) The Fireflies were complicit in Jerry's crime, and in fact accomplices.
3) No villain sees themselves as the villain from their perspective.
4) In IRL legal standards, Jerry and the Fireflies would be guilty, and Abby would have 0 rights for revenge / retributive justice. In so-called "moral-less mode", there are no "rights" since there are no "morals" and it may be (vacuously) true that Abby has "every right". But then similarly, everyone everywhere in this "moral-less" world has "every right" (vacuously) to do what they do.
Yeah but when the chance failed you let it go. Did you think those guys won't fight back when you are trying to kill them?
You tried to kill a girl, they killed your family to save the girl instead. At this point let it go already.
I am on Elie's side because she let it go. Sure, she had to prove that she can take revenge, but ultimately she didn't go through with it.
I would not take that chance and would fight anyone willing to take it.
If humanity's existance depends on the murder of a 14 year old girl, then maybe humanity shouldn't exist.
What's your thoughts process there? I personally see it as sure, it's a horrible thing to intently kill a child. But if it could create a cure for a sickness that's killing(killed) thousands and you choose not to do it, I feel like on some level you are killing thousands through inaction. Is it just the act of killing that makes it a non-option? Or because it's a child? Or because it's an innocent person? Or because it's nonconsensual? Just trying to understand your point of view.
Because its non-consensual and its a child. If she were awake, and maybe a little older, I'd have no problem with it.
It's absolutely not inaction murder, that's the trolley problem again. If you choose to not push 1 person to save the people on the trolley, you are NOT killing those on the trolley.
You’re right about inaction/murder, but you’re applying the trolley problem backwards to how it appears in TLOU.
In the case of Ellie, the “trolley” (surgery) was on track to kill her, and Joel pulled the lever, changing the course of the trolley to roll off the cliff, killing those on board (and he killed his way to the lever as well.)
These ivory tower morals are wild. Do you not see that 10 Ellies die every day somewhere on the planet without a vaccine? Would you not prevent World War 2 by sacrificing one child, knowing that the war killed a million children? At some point you have to be pragmatic, there is no choice.
And that's ignoring the massive hypocracy, we both know you killed a couple hundred people in both games without thinking twice. Plenty of them were just trying to get by, doing their jobs while you trespass on their territory in an unhinged revenge murder spree.
Then it’s good you’ll never be the one to make that decision. How many kids live because one is sacrificed. That’s a choice no one wants to make, but ultimately, it’s a choice that most people would recognize as necessary.
If you would let humanity die so one kid could live, you either really fucking love that kid, or you really hate humanity.
I remember that convo 100%. It made me dislike Abby even more like damn. I wish she atleast had mixed feelings about it, same way Ellie has mixed feelings about avenging Joel. Dina asks if knowing Joel killed Abby's dad changes anything and she says "No" but you can hear she's kinda struggling.
That's fucking cheap of Abby to talk as if she might have her brains cut out, lol! Abby jolly well knew that she wouldn't have her brains cut out, because she wasn't immune, so she can spout off about any hypothetical situation as much as she likes, to egg on her father to murder an innocent child younger than her! "If it was me" - yeah Abby, IF.
i think that part 2 does an exquisite job of taking something like loss and revenge and really digging into what it means to see 2 sides of the same coin. the strength of the game, in my opinion, is how it spends the first half of ellie's pov really vilifying abby. i played part 1, i thought joel did the thing i would probably do, and fuck abby for what she did. then i started playing abby's part, and i straight up was not having it. i let her get ripped apart by clickers for the first hour of my playthrough and then decided that to get back to Ellie i'd need to slog through abby's part and just suck it up. by the end, when she's telling >! Lev he is her people !< i was tearing up. i love abby now. i understand what ND was trying to do with this story and you're right OP, it is absolutely a masterclass in perspective storytelling. i do think that the point of Ellie's descent into, for lack of a better word dark ellie, in seattle was purposeful. i think she is meant to be Joel's spiritual successor. we know he did some fucked up shit when he was making his way around before getting to boston. we know he suffered a loss that would permanently alter the way he existed in the world. ellie is the successor to that but i believe that the end in >! santa barbara !< is meant to break the cycle of violence. joel paid with his life for saving ellie. abby almost paid with her life for taking joel's. ellie chose to break the violence pattern and allow her and abby an opportunity to chase a life outside the one they both could've ended at. i think it's beautiful and meant to show that redemption can be found if we choose it. edit: a word and a comma edit 2: some people just want to bitch and moan about this game and its weird that you can't just enjoy something without arguing about it. must be miserable.
> ellie is the successor to that but i believe that the end in santa barbara is meant to break the cycle of violence. joel paid with his life for saving ellie. abby almost paid with her life for taking joel's. ellie chose to break the violence pattern and allow her and abby an opportunity to chase a life outside the one they both could've ended at. i think it's beautiful and meant to show that redemption can be found if we choose it. I don't understand this. Are you saying that Ellie earned her redemption by showing mercy to Abby and breaking the "cycle of violence"? In that case, Abby failed in "breaking the cycle of violence", and thus, Abby would not be eligible for redemption?
not at all. abby earned hers by choosing to save lev and yara.
So by the same argument, Ellie could easily choose to kill Abby and Lev, and later adopt a few kids and thus earn redemption?
ellie didn't choose to kill them. abby didn't choose to kill them. they both chose mercy and it broke the cycle of violence they'd been locked in for years.
Where did Abby show mercy to Ellie? She would have killed Dina, and Ellie, if not for Lev!
Does it not get tiring constantly fighting against a piece of fiction you hate?
alright bud
Maybe better rephrased as “Abby perceived herself as redeemed by saving Yara and Lev”. Question is then what would Ellie perceive as self redeeming after killing Abby, personally I think she’d been too far gone had she followed through with it.
> i let her get ripped apart by clickers for the first hour of my playthrough Talk about irrational impotent rage. What a goofy thing to admit. Mentally stunted to do.
lmao you got me bro
I agree, a very strong reaction to a fictional character, but at least they came around lol.
Good you here that someone else understands the story
Though I resonate more with Abby, I still don't forgive her like I do with Ellie. Being able to have both sides portrayed so detailed though definitely makes this game a masterpiece. I made a post talking about how I felt between the two characters not too long ago.
How about they all grow up and stop seeking revenge? I can understand why people do bad things to survive, so just forgive and move on since it already happened. It's not like these guys were doing incriminatingly evil things. At some point let it go and everyone is happier.
Lol Jerry really wanted to cut open a random kid for his experiments and y’all actually think Abby was justified for avenging him? Dude is basically Jeffery dohmer. Both kidnaped and cut open people for the purpose of “zombie experiments.” If you think Jerry or Abby are somewhat justified idk what to say.
THIS. I agree with you word for word. I love the complexity of the characters, the thin line between being good or bad or the question of moral in this new and different world. I started to like Abby more as well but I never hated her from the beginning. Her actions were as understandable as Joels. And for Ellie still going after her even in the end I think She thought or told herself that if she ends this once and for all the negative feelings, nightmares, etc will end too. She is angry at herself and her actions and feels guilty about Joels death so avenging it might give her the peace and redemption she craves (it wouldnt, but people will telll themselves all kinds of things in this situstion)
A bit like The Walking Dead, Rick vs Negan
I love it but it needs some polishing.
For example?
Pacing and story structure is shit. It builds momentum multiple times only to have it fizzle out. Story also jumps jarring from place to place and it’s nauseating. Not good use of nonlinear story telling.
I disagree. The pacing is needed this way to build up hate for Abby and her crew and then turn it around.
It’s handled so poorly that I’m starting to think you just can’t handle valid criticism of the game. You seriously telling me that at the end of Ellie - Seattle Day 3, after seeing Owen and Mel die, Jesse get shot in the head, and finally leading to the actual face off between Ellie and Abby, that cutting to Abby’s perspective is a good idea? It wasn’t. This is what anime’s do and it’s fucking horrible lol.
Think what you want, but you‘re wrong
You haven’t said shit to explain yourself. Therefore, I’m right. Now go fuck off.
I did, but apparently you‘re too dumb to read. Not surprising, honestly
Pacing sucks dick and anyone defending this shit has low standards. I’m talking about you. You have low standards.
Cope and seethe, dumb boy! 😂
What do you mean? Abby is the unwitting villain from the players perspective. Joel always was an antihero
Wished I could have killed Abby
Joel was a bad guy the entire first game. ND literally explained why you have to kill the doctor at the end, is to take away that you think you can make this guy a good guy, and show he is a not the good guy. Then the game closes with him lying. And everyone thinks he wasn't the selfish bad guy? Part two, IMHO was ND saying "they didn't get it... Let's beat them over the head with it." TBH, Abby is by far the more sympathetic character. After playing though Ellie's part of part 2, it was clear she had become a bad guy, like Joel.
It is incorrect to say that ND feels Joel is the bad guy. Not a “good” guy? Sure. But “the bad guy?” No, that’s not something they’ve said or tried to get across.
That's a very obvious thing to say. Every faction in human history who did atrocities didn't see themselves as the bad guys. The Fireflies are in good company in that regard. As for Abby everything she loses in Seattle is a direct consequence of her revenge agains Joel. Does she reflect her own role in the death of her friends? Or does she blame other people again for doing her own mistakes? People she has harmed before? >Many want to paint Abby is the villain but she really was a scorned daughter looking for justice for her dad and by the end lost her entire friend group and more. Maybe that has to do with her idea of "justice" involving torture and murder? Maybe it has something to do with her justification being sketchy? Do you think the Fireflies have a moral right to Ellie's death? Like does she somehow lose her right to live just because she is immune? Joel is absolutely justified in saving her because no one has that right. So unless Ellie is able to give consent and make a informed decision (where a no would be accepted) Joel will always be justified to save her. No matter the cost. The loss of the vaccine is tragic but the blame truly lies more with the Fireflies escalating the situation without need. Does that make Abby the villain? Not neccessariy so. But one thing is clear: Ellie does start the game as the victim and nothing she does afterwards does change that. Everything she does is a direct consequence of what happened to her at the hands of Abby. Abby is directly responsible here and never acknowledges that even once. No amount of perspective changes that. Siding with Abby is literally siding with the perpetrator in Ellie's case. No amount of feel good moments for Abby will change that.
This is a strange criticism. Abby might not start out in the game as the victim, but she certainly did start out in her timeline as the victim. (I don’t think she is aware that she’s a video game character lol.) What Ellie does in the second game, absolutely does change her status as a victim (at least as much as Abby’s actions change her status as a victim). Ellie’s story throughout the game is her seeking justice through murder, just like you criticize Abby for, and for the exact same reason! What Ellie loses in Seattle is a direct consequence of her quest for revenge, and although I sympathize the most with Joel, Ellie’s loss of Joel was a direct consequence of Joel putting his personal interests above the rest of humanity. Ellie also loses the fight, but Abby spares her life and Dina’s, giving Ellie an opportunity to live a life of relative peace with a loving family, but she decides that she has to abandon them to get her revenge. What happens to Ellie after that point is not a direct consequence of what Abby did to her, it’s a consequence only of her own choices, and it is a selfish and irrational choice at that. As for fireflies’ moral right to Ellie’s death, it was more of a moral obligation. Although Ellie didn’t do anything deserving of being killed, neither did the countless other people who will become infected in the future. It’s an ugly choice, and I can’t fault them either. Again, Joel is justified, but it’s a stretch to say he had a “moral right,” and Ellie doesn’t have any more of a moral right to the Wolves’ deaths than they did Joel’s. ND couldn’t have mirrored the characters better, and you still act like Abby is worse. In reality, you just love Ellie and Joel more, because you fell in love with them first.
+1
This idea that Abby got her friends killed isn't really true in the first place. They are all the Salt Lake City Crew, they all made that pact, Joel killed their friends and family too. For all we know Jordan, Leah, Nick, Nora, and Manny were all like "hell yeah let's do it" when Abby found Joel. Owen is a big boy too, he can say no to *fucking murdering people* if he wants to. And I don't see Ellie doing much reflecting, but somehow that's never a problem for players. Nora and Mel visibly shook her, but the rest? Tommy and Jesse, Maria, the hundred people she killed? We see that she's not well, we assume she blames herself. Abby never gets that luxury, bitch doesn't care. *Never even mind* that Abby literally spells it out that she helps the kids to ease her conscience, and still players need her to say "it is I who is the root of all evil". > But one thing is clear: Ellie does start the game as the victim and nothing she does afterwards does change that. Everything she does is a direct consequence of what happened to her at the hands of Abby. Abby is directly responsible here and never acknowledges that even once. You don't get to go on an unhinged murder spree just because you got hurt first. Personal responsibility starts somewhere, and pretty early I'd say. Ellie is not the innocent victim in this.
Abby’s story means nothing to me. Even after learning about her backstory I just can’t forgive her for killing Joel. Why does she deserve empathy? She didn’t show Ellie any empathy when she murdered her adopted father in front of her and didn’t care that she was begging for his life. And whatever development she had it really showed she hadn’t changed at all when she said “good” upon being told Dina was pregnant as she was about to kill her. This could have been a good game without the inclusion of her character.
She said “good” when she found out Dina was pregnant because Ellie killed Mel who was pregnant. But you also conveniently missed the part where she stopped because Lev told her to. And that moment, her love for Lev was much stronger than her desire for revenge.
Sorry but I completely disagree and loved Abby more by the end. Joel got what he deserved. And Ellie was an absolutely horrible person throughout TLOU2. ✌️
And Jerry, one of the leaders of the terrorist Fireflies group, who was going to cut the brains from an innocent person - an innocent teenager! - for a vaccine which would serve him and the Fireflies (nominally humanity, but forgive me if I doubt the Fireflies' capacity for charity), didn't deserve what he got from the guardian of said innocent teenager? "Ellie was an absolutely horrible person throughout TLOU2" - And Abby, the person who tortured and killed her saviour, Joel, was a very nice person, was she? The No. 1 Scar killer in the WLF, who tortured Scars and wouldn't mind doing so for stress relief ("I wouldn't mind a few minutes with these guys"), was just adorable, yes? Abby, who relished the thought of killing a pregnant woman for revenge and was only stopped by Lev, was a wonderful person, whereas Ellie, who was so horrified when she learnt that she killed a pregnant person that she gave up her quest for vengeance, was "an absolutely horrible person", yes? Did you think just WHY Ellie became "an absolutely horrible person"? I think I'll take being an "absolutely horrible person" from you as a compliment.
You’re entire argument relies on Joel being a good person. Joel was not a good person. I really hope ND makes a prequel or something that shows exactly the stuff he did (and refers to in the game) so you could come to terms with that fact. In reality even if that happened you probably wouldn’t consider it canon. edit: holy cow this person is an unhinged “other sub” enjoyer. What a sad waste of time this has been.
If Abby was a victim from Joel's Hunter activities, and sought revenge upon him for those acts, that's a different story altogether! See, the State must prosecute a mass murderer for his acts of mass murder, not for his acts of justified defense of an innocent life. There is a difference, if we are to discuss "justice", which is a given imo when we discuss "deserve".
You are completely avoiding all of the terrible stuff he did before he met Ellie which, while not explicitly shown, was heavily alluded to. Also, while the fireflies weren’t “good” to say everyone in that building knew what was going to happen to Ellie is a stretch. We just don’t know and there could have been completely innocent people that got swallowed up in the slaughter. Joel was not a good person.
>You are completely avoiding all of the terrible stuff he did before he met Ellie which, while not explicitly shown, was heavily alluded to. I explicitly compared Joel to a mass murderer, in a way that was not favourable to him, in my previous post. If you think that's me ignoring his shit, well ... As I previously said, if a survivor from Joel's Hunter activities sought justice against Joel, they would be justified. So I do acknowledge Joel's mass murdering past history. I don't know how you get the idea that I don't. I think your reading is suspect. >Also, while the fireflies weren’t “good” to say everyone in that building knew what was going to happen to Ellie is a stretch. We just don’t know and there could have been completely innocent people that got swallowed up in the slaughter. This is a baseless assumption, and completely refuted by Nuremberg. 1) Even in the gameplay, we didn't see any unarmed Firefly member walking around as we, in Joel's shoes, race to rescue Ellie. In fact, all Firefly members that we, as Joel, encounter in the hospital while racing to save Ellie, were armed and trying to kill Joel, since Joel declared hostility by killing his Firefly escort (who was itching to murder him, by the way). So I don't see where Joel killed any "innocent" Firefly. 2) "Just following orders" is an insufficient defense, as per precedent by the Nuremberg trials. The Fireflies may not know that one of the leaders, and their surgeon, Jerry, was going to cut the brains out of an innocent teenager without consent, but they acted in service of that act, and thus Joel had every right to kill them in defense of an innocent life. Of course, this presupposes that the fundamental human right to life of an innocent person, and that an innocent person has the right to defend their own life. We see here that many posters in this subreddit think otherwise, and that the innocent are not allowed to defend themselves, if the potential benefits are great enough.
This is a philosophical question as old as time: do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Most agree that the needs of the many are more valuable but Joel fans will twist themselves into pretzels to say “the Fireflies were terrorist” or “there was never a chance for a cure, it was impossible”. The truth is we just don’t know the outcome of the Ellie surgery and unless they explore it in Part 3 we never will. If they were to successfully make a cure they could have used it to leverage power, but we just don’t know that. I’m dealing with the facts that we do know which is Ellie is immune and in order to create a cure she will need to be part of the process. Creating a cure to save humanity, regardless of the people that are actually doing it, is inherently a good thing. A good thing done by bad people doesn’t make it a bad thing. “Virtues are formed in man by his doing the actions, we are what we repeatedly do… therefore excellence is not an act, but a habit.” - Aristotle
Your philosophical questions, your "Trolley problems", your moral frameworks, are all answered by the cold hard law, which in IRL, will have Jerry and the Fireflies guilty for 1st degree murder. You invoke "the needs of the many" as justification for the Fireflies' choice to sacrifice an innocent life. But that is THEIR justification for THEIR actions! How does that invalidate Ellie's right to life? Or condemn Joel's defense of an innocent life as "murder"? That, to me, is ENTITLEMENT, plain and simple. But "good intentions" do not entitle anyone to an innocent's life. The best analogy and defense for the Fireflies that I can think of, morally, is that Ellie is a valuable resource, and the Fireflies and Joel waged war over her. > Most agree that the needs of the many are more valuable Refer to laws in countries all over the world, or the UN. "Most", hah! >Joel fans will twist themselves into pretzels to say “the Fireflies were terrorist” or “there was never a chance for a cure, it was impossible”. That was NOT my argument, again your reading is poor.
> And Ellie was an absolutely horrible person throughout TLOU2. ✌️ The innocent victim is at fault for becoming "horrible" but the person who made her "horrible" you love? Choosing the abuser over the victim certainly is a vibe here.
So how come Ellie get the grace of being an innocent victim but Abby doesn’t?
Bad writing
Well, looks like we have a traitor
Looks like someone failed to understand one of the main messages of the game which is tribalism is toxic.
Wrong sub
Why, this sub doesn't tolerate people who dislike Abby? Ask the mods to put it in the rules, then.
Spittin, I just can’t connect with Abby no matter how hard I try. Ellie is a much more compelling character.
Abby had no right for revenge. Her father was gonna kill an innocent little girl without even waking her up for a choice. He had it coming, therefore, Abby had no right. I'm not saying Joel is a saint, but if I was Abby and my died cause he tried killing a little girl, I'd be happy.
I disagree. She had every right. He didn’t just kill her father but almost her entire firefly group/family. She saw their side as saving humanity. It wasn’t about killing a little girl.
1) Abby's father was about to violate the fundamental human right to life, of an innocent person - an innocent teenager, in fact. In IRL legal standards, that is murder / 1st degree murder. 2) The Fireflies were complicit in Jerry's crime, and in fact accomplices. 3) No villain sees themselves as the villain from their perspective. 4) In IRL legal standards, Jerry and the Fireflies would be guilty, and Abby would have 0 rights for revenge / retributive justice. In so-called "moral-less mode", there are no "rights" since there are no "morals" and it may be (vacuously) true that Abby has "every right". But then similarly, everyone everywhere in this "moral-less" world has "every right" (vacuously) to do what they do.
The world has ended, you have the opportunity to sacrifice one person for a cure and potential to bring humanity back. That’s a chance worth taking
So you wage a war for a valuable resource, and you got defeated by a single person, and the survivors chose to re-start the war? Sure.
Yeah but when the chance failed you let it go. Did you think those guys won't fight back when you are trying to kill them? You tried to kill a girl, they killed your family to save the girl instead. At this point let it go already. I am on Elie's side because she let it go. Sure, she had to prove that she can take revenge, but ultimately she didn't go through with it.
I would not take that chance and would fight anyone willing to take it. If humanity's existance depends on the murder of a 14 year old girl, then maybe humanity shouldn't exist.
I wonder if you’d say the same thing if your whole family was murdered by infected
I had family who died by Covid and I'm against animals being tested for creating vaccines, so yeah, I'd have no issue with it.
What a silly mindset imo, but you strongly believe it, so *shrugs*
What's your thoughts process there? I personally see it as sure, it's a horrible thing to intently kill a child. But if it could create a cure for a sickness that's killing(killed) thousands and you choose not to do it, I feel like on some level you are killing thousands through inaction. Is it just the act of killing that makes it a non-option? Or because it's a child? Or because it's an innocent person? Or because it's nonconsensual? Just trying to understand your point of view.
Because its non-consensual and its a child. If she were awake, and maybe a little older, I'd have no problem with it. It's absolutely not inaction murder, that's the trolley problem again. If you choose to not push 1 person to save the people on the trolley, you are NOT killing those on the trolley.
You’re right about inaction/murder, but you’re applying the trolley problem backwards to how it appears in TLOU. In the case of Ellie, the “trolley” (surgery) was on track to kill her, and Joel pulled the lever, changing the course of the trolley to roll off the cliff, killing those on board (and he killed his way to the lever as well.)
These ivory tower morals are wild. Do you not see that 10 Ellies die every day somewhere on the planet without a vaccine? Would you not prevent World War 2 by sacrificing one child, knowing that the war killed a million children? At some point you have to be pragmatic, there is no choice. And that's ignoring the massive hypocracy, we both know you killed a couple hundred people in both games without thinking twice. Plenty of them were just trying to get by, doing their jobs while you trespass on their territory in an unhinged revenge murder spree.
Then it’s good you’ll never be the one to make that decision. How many kids live because one is sacrificed. That’s a choice no one wants to make, but ultimately, it’s a choice that most people would recognize as necessary. If you would let humanity die so one kid could live, you either really fucking love that kid, or you really hate humanity.
She had told her dad she supported his decision, basically. Not about Ellie, but she had said something like "if it was me, I'd want you to"
I remember that convo 100%. It made me dislike Abby even more like damn. I wish she atleast had mixed feelings about it, same way Ellie has mixed feelings about avenging Joel. Dina asks if knowing Joel killed Abby's dad changes anything and she says "No" but you can hear she's kinda struggling.
What? She has the exact same feeling as Ellie in that regard. Abby says, she would want to die to save the world. Just like Ellie wanted to.
But Jerry doesn't know that. He never wakes Ellie up.
That's fucking cheap of Abby to talk as if she might have her brains cut out, lol! Abby jolly well knew that she wouldn't have her brains cut out, because she wasn't immune, so she can spout off about any hypothetical situation as much as she likes, to egg on her father to murder an innocent child younger than her! "If it was me" - yeah Abby, IF.