|
Bonaventure posted:my interpretation of this story is based entirely on my personal and particular neuroses
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 09:30 |
|
|
Joel is bad because he is an inveterate rake and he relieved the countess of Whitsford-on-Brilby of her family's prized diamonds and left her tied up in her carriage, only in her shift, with a note stuffed in her mouth that said "catch me if ye can! the chase is on, ye dogs!"
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:31
|
|
|
Stux posted:he already had closed that door by killing everyone Not really? You say that as if there aren't a bunch of cities under the control of the US government that would probably love to use Ellie to help synthesize a cure. Stux posted:you are meant to empathize with him not wanting her to die because of course you would, but that isnt meant to excuse either the extreme and total method he went with or his lack of respect for her. the game ends with a shot of ellie dejectedly saying ok because she is visibly pretty distressed that he wont tell the truth! the game is as subtle as a brick through a window with this stuff. Your point originally was that this "lack of respect" was due to his own selfishness and that he "didn't really care about her as a person", which again is not necessarily true. His decision to act on parental instincts and cutoff any access she had to sacrificing herself is not one borne out of "selfishness", it's a decision any reasonable parent would make. The method of his action, as well as the subsequent lie, are what's at fault here, not his motivation. My read again is that both the killings and the lie were to conclusively cut off any possibility that she'd kill herself for the greater good. Others might read from the ending that Joel's lie "is just him being selfish" and that he only cares that she remains in his life. Whichever it is (or if it's both), it seems we're getting a window into all that in the sequel anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:32
|
|
|
yes i am making fun of you Stux
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:32
|
|
|
Bonaventure posted:trying to hold Joel or Ellie on trial and figure out if they "bad" or they "good" is missing the point of the ending, the only actually interesting part of the story From what I gather, Stux is saying that Joel is bad because of all the bad poo poo Joel did and then lying to her about it on top of that. I mean, it's a piece of media. People are going to "hold them on trial" and judge them. But it isn't just the one thing that I think people Joel are judging him by. It is that he has a pretty long history that the player sees throughout the game of Joel pretty much just being an rear end in a top hat to everybody except for like 3 or 4 people.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:33
|
|
|
Bonaventure posted:yes i am making fun of you Stux as unaware as a brick wall lol
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:36
|
|
|
Stux posted:as unaware as a brick wall lol speaking of brick walls how about that Abby? hubba hubba
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:38
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:From what I gather, Stux is saying that Joel is bad because of all the bad poo poo Joel did and then lying to her about it on top of that. I mean, it's a piece of media. People are going to "hold them on trial" and judge them. But it isn't just the one thing that I think people Joel are judging him by. It is that he has a pretty long history that the player sees throughout the game of Joel pretty much just being an rear end in a top hat to everybody except for like 3 or 4 people. Someone earlier in the thread mentioned that a big part of the game's plotting relates to whether Joel can learn to care about people again - he does so, and by the end of the game he cares enough about this one person that he does what he does. Stux's original point was as follows: quote:to him ellie is Daughter Stand In and he only cares about her personal agency up to the point where it interferes with that which is why the end of the game is him imposing his will and lying about it because hes a bad person "Imposing your will" on this kid you consider a daughter that's getting sacrificed / convinced to commit suicide is completely normal. Saying "Joel doesn't care about Ellie because he wouldn't respect her agency in killing herself" is some dumb poo poo. I'll agree with the lying part though, that can be read eitherway.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:44
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:From what I gather, Stux is saying that Joel is bad because of all the bad poo poo Joel did and then lying to her about it on top of that. I mean, it's a piece of media. People are going to "hold them on trial" and judge them. But it isn't just the one thing that I think people Joel are judging him by. It is that he has a pretty long history that the player sees throughout the game of Joel pretty much just being an rear end in a top hat to everybody except for like 3 or 4 people. I mean not really? The only instance where I'd say he crosses the line of the standard mutual distrust of the apocalypse is when he pulls the big brother poo poo on Tommy, something he subsequently makes amends for. Those 'like 3 or 4 people' are the only ones that weren't actively trying to kill him or Ellie.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:51
|
|
|
Legions of abusive parents since time immemorial have justified their actions through "knowing what's best" or "it's for their own good." The idea of "conclusively cut[ting] off any possibility" of letting Ellie do the thing she has said she has always wanted to do, including using the specific phrase "no halfway" -- treating this as a morally neutral thing at best, and giving points for his "intentions" or "motivations" being good, is completely off. Again, treating the actual massacre as irrelevant (I'll even stipulate that it might be justified according to Joel Defender framing), the actual lie at the end is supposed to call into question how much of this whole situation is the result of Joel's unresolved grief and longing for the daughter he already lost! Like, that is strongly indicated by the story beginning with him being the victim of violence and carrying a girl in his arms!
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:53
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:I feel like this is just a rationalization after the fact, because I remember when I played through the game, it is pretty much left ambiguous whether the procedure will do anything or not. At the very least, they will most likely know information about what is going on than before. Nah, I thought long before I got there that they were a chickenshit outfit and the bit with the monkeys clearly spelled out that they didn't have their poo poo together. They you get to the hospital and it's destructive testing ahoy, with one specimen, and a ruined facility with no means of replicating whatever actually would fight the fungus. Injecting antibodies is only valid so long as you get more antibody supplies, she'd be sacrificed ritually to get turned into ten pills of zombrex. Well, if the fireflies could find their asses with a map and both hands, which they can't. They are still doing The Stupid Thing outside of mere morals: the sacrifice of any long term in favor of the short term. As for attacking Drukman while defending Joel, it's simple: Joel is a victim of Drukman's sacrifice fetish and bad writing, I feel sorry for him because there's actually a potential in the concept and Drukman isn't capable of unearthing it, and that's why the entirety of Joel is very angerdad who lost his family (in the zombie apocalypse, in which everyone lost their family). Not saying there's much potential in him, of course, he's a pretty boring concept.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:54
|
|
|
Ham posted:Not really? You say that as if there aren't a bunch of cities under the control of the US government that would probably love to use Ellie to help synthesize a cure. there arent, theyre under the control of the military. the fireflies explicitly are the ones who want the US government reinstated and are trying to achieve that alongside synthesizing a cure!!! quote:Your point originally was that this "lack of respect" was due to his own selfishness and that he "didn't really care about her as a person", which again is not necessarily true. His decision to act on parental instincts and cutoff any access she had to sacrificing herself is not one borne out of "selfishness", it's a decision any reasonable parent would make. The method of his action, as well as the subsequent lie, are what's at fault here, not his motivation. the subsequent lie is what elucidates the motivation. theres also extreme thematic framing during how he acts. the game begins with joel carrying his child around, then after the intro we see him colder, and he is especially closed off with ellie early on. as he softens he also puts his trust in her, as well as giving her responsibility, to the point of trusting her with his own life. the arc throughout their journey is one of a healthy and respectful relationship between a surrogate family unit. at the hospital he literally regresses, he is reliving his trauma extremely vividly to the point of carrying her around in the exact same way he carries sarah. he is in no possible meaning of the word reasonable at this moment, he even murders in cold blood a woman who refused to engage in further bloodshed as she begs for her life. this is his motivation at this moment, it isnt him caring for ellie, its him reexperiencing loss and refusing it regardless of anything else, regardless of ellies wants, regardless of human life, regardless of a cure. the lying after the fact, when all possible avenues had been shut off utterly, is what brings his motivation full circle. ellie knows what has happened, and all she is looking for is for joel to be human and be honest. if he cant be honest then she cant forgive him, and if he actually cares about Ellie and not "ellie" then he would want that forgiveness. but the problem is he doesnt need to be forgiven, because he already has fufilled his own need to avoid loss, and so he refuses. he tells her a comical lie and then when she calls him on it he refuses to acknowledge it. she is visibly upset and it doesnt matter to him.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:55
|
|
|
Ham posted:Someone earlier in the thread mentioned that a big part of the game's plotting relates to whether Joel can learn to care about people again - he does so, and by the end of the game he cares enough about this one person that he does what he does. i mean the game is using an extreme example of this specifically so that motivations can be called into question but its very obviously meant to be analogous to unhealthy parental relationships, the extremely obvious parallels being in healthcare where a minor can overrule a parent. the game is using a sacrifice and her dying to be dramatic and to make the audience give some credit to joel, but its pretty clearly making these connections.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:58
|
|
|
Ellie dying at the end would've saved us from tlou2.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:06
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:Legions of abusive parents since time immemorial have justified their actions through "knowing what's best" or "it's for their own good." The idea of "conclusively cut[ting] off any possibility" of letting Ellie do the thing she has said she has always wanted to do, including using the specific phrase "no halfway" -- treating this as a morally neutral thing at best, and giving points for his "intentions" or "motivations" being good, is completely off. Are you really arguing preventing kids from committing suicide is abusive parenting? So long as the kids have always wanted to commit suicide?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:07
|
|
|
Ham posted:Someone earlier in the thread mentioned that a big part of the game's plotting relates to whether Joel can learn to care about people again - he does so, and by the end of the game he cares enough about this one person that he does what he does. I think this is one of the places where we will have to agree to disagree. I do think Ellie is at the age where she can make those decisions for herself if given enough information about it. I ultimately think it is Ellie's choice even if she is 14 years old. lurker2006 posted:I mean not really? The only instance where I'd say he crosses the line of the standard mutual distrust of the apocalypse is when he pulls the big brother poo poo on Tommy, something he subsequently makes amends for. Those 'like 3 or 4 people' are the only ones that weren't actively trying to kill him or Ellie. Joel was a hunter in his previous days, tortures and kills someone, and pretty much treats anyone he comes across like poo poo until he basically gets used to them. I mean if you want a good contrast to Joel, look at Tess. Tess is tough when she needs to be but compassionate as well. At times, I think people see Joel as the character that Tess actually is. SIGSEGV posted:As for attacking Drukman while defending Joel, it's simple: Joel is a victim of Drukman's sacrifice fetish and bad writing, I feel sorry for him because there's actually a potential in the concept and Drukman isn't capable of unearthing it, and that's why the entirety of Joel is very angerdad who lost his family (in the zombie apocalypse, in which everyone lost their family). Not saying there's much potential in him, of course, he's a pretty boring concept. Joel is a character in a video game. A character that if someone told me that they were MAGA, I wouldn't even bat an eye. Joel honestly isn't really that interesting of a character. To me, he is an example of a protagonist that everyone takes to loving because he is the protagonist, while ignoring the awful poo poo they do and justifying it after the fact. Ham posted:Are you really arguing preventing kids from committing suicide is abusive parenting? So long as the kids have always wanted to commit suicide? I think this is a bit oversimplified. I think preventing someone who was dead set on doing it for a noble cause would be pretty abusive. I think as long as that person knows the ramifications of their decision. I mean, what is the alternative? What will happen the next time a decision of that caliber comes up? blackguy32 fucked around with this message at 04:23 on May 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:16
|
|
|
The world going to poo poo doesn't mean that kids are suddenly capable of making big decisions like "die for the greater good" for themselves, it just means that there's less structure around to stop them from doing so.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:16
|
|
|
Ham posted:Are you really arguing preventing kids from committing suicide is abusive parenting? So long as the kids have always wanted to commit suicide? is every piece of media where someone sacrifices themselves just someone committing suicide or what
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:18
|
|
|
Stux posted:is every piece of media where someone sacrifices themselves just someone committing suicide or what Yes? That's what committing suicide is.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:22
|
|
|
Ham posted:Are you really arguing preventing kids from committing suicide is abusive parenting? So long as the kids have always wanted to commit suicide? 1. This is a dramatic situation where the equivalence you are trying to draw is untenable, and honestly Ellie probably has more justification for wanting to sacrifice herself even for a fraction of a chance of it helping. 2. If you are going to keep using this analogy which expressly muddies the waters for no reason, the equivalence isn't "preventing kids from committing suicide," it's taking a kid who tried to commit suicide because they're depressed and putting them in a straitjacket while telling them "you're not depressed." In your own words, "conclusively cut off any possibility"
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:22
|
|
|
Viridiant posted:The world going to poo poo doesn't mean that kids are suddenly capable of making big decisions like "die for the greater good" for themselves, it just means that there's less structure around to stop them from doing so. joel explicitly lets her make big decisions like that during the rest of the game to the point of her killing others and directly protecting his life. almost like its part of some themeatic elements in the story to set expectations of how the characters interact, so you can invert it later to provide a contrast. you could even call it a "becoming older" story or something snappier maybe
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:23
|
|
|
Viridiant posted:Yes? That's what committing suicide is. and you dont believe this is reductive?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:25
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:Joel is a character in a video game. A character that if someone told me that they were MAGA, I wouldn't even bat an eye. Joel honestly isn't really that interesting of a character. To me, he is an example of a protagonist that everyone takes to loving because he is the protagonist, while ignoring the awful poo poo they do and justifying it after the fact. Yeah, Joel is a character, he's a set of computer files that appear in order X, Y, Z, and I feel sorry for him because he's a lovely character written in a lovely story. He's not the first character I feel sorry for that way, it's not particularly rational, but Drukman really did him in. Stux posted:is every piece of media where someone sacrifices themselves just someone committing suicide or what Yep, sacrifices are bad things, even when they are necessary and whatever else the author contrives, a sacrifice is not a happy or good thing, it's a failure of better options. Less blithely, yeah, sacrifices are best avoided, and in this specific case, the sacrifice is stupid, enforced by authority over a child and survival guilt, and it has a zero percent chance of success because the fireflies as they appear in game are total fuckwits that only manage to make everything worse.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:29
|
|
|
Stux posted:is every piece of media where someone sacrifices themselves just someone committing suicide or what Yes? The question is whether the loved ones of these people are ready to accept that suicide or not, and if they have the ability to stop it. In the context of TLOU, Ellie's father figure both cares enough about her and is able to prevent it by doing what he did. The broader effects of the suicide aren't considered by the loved ones because people don't think in terms of statistics or altruistic morality, they think most of all about their loved ones who are suicidal - no matter who this suicide benefits. No, a 14 year old kid shouldn't be given a decision about committing suicide or not, and a group of paramilitary dudes aren't justified in "convincing her to do it". Any reasonable parent would 100% refuse that outcome, what the gently caress.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:29
|
|
|
Stux posted:joel explicitly lets her make big decisions like that during the rest of the game to the point of her killing others and directly protecting his life. almost like its part of some themeatic elements in the story to set expectations of how the characters interact, so you can invert it later to provide a contrast. you could even call it a "becoming older" story or something snappier maybe Me agreeing with one of Joel's decisions doesn't mean I agree with all of his decisions, nor does it mean that there aren't circumstances in which I'd agree with Ellie giving up her life. The situation as presented in the game was not one of those. I always got the impression that the game was not making a judgement either way as far as that decision goes, that they were leaving it up to the player to make a judgement. If the game was in fact saying Joel made a bad decision, then the game presented the scenario badly.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:30
|
|
|
Ignore the loving massacre try to explain why it's good Joel lied with an obvious lie to Ellie's face
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:32
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:1. This is a dramatic situation where the equivalence you are trying to draw is untenable, and honestly Ellie probably has more justification for wanting to sacrifice herself even for a fraction of a chance of it helping. Putting Ellie in a psychological straitjacket is an option that prevents her suicide and buys time for her to live, grow and eventually make informed decisions - including leaving Joel behind possibly. If your kid is suicidal and the only option to stop them is putting them in a straitjacket for a time, yes, you'd do it if able.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:33
|
|
|
"A character choosing to sacrifice themselves = they are suicidal" is super goddamn offensive and it's sort of bewildering people are trying to argue they are the same. You can make arguments about Ellie being motivated by guilt and pressured into things and that's fine but when a dude blows himself up to stop the world from ending that isn't remotely the loving same as an actual act of self-destruction and it's really weird to claim they're born of the exact same thing.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:34
|
|
|
Ham posted:If your kid is suicidal and the only option to stop them is putting them in a straitjacket for a time, yes, you'd do it if able. lol
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:35
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:Ignore the loving massacre try to explain why it's good Joel lied with an obvious lie to Ellie's face I don't think it's good that Joel lied, but let's not pretend that the Fireflies were going to let Joel just walk in and carry her away. They were threatening to kill him if he tried to stop them. This wasn't Joel massacring a bunch of Red Cross workers, this was Joel massacring a bunch of revolutionaries who've carried out their own fair share of massacres. That's not to say that Joel killing them was GOOD. Killing is never GOOD. It's bad, it's ugly, it's awful. But so is letting someone you care about die. Are we going to solve the trolley problem in this thread? Because that seems to be what some of you want to happen.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:37
|
|
|
need to put a moratorium on anything other than completely 100% literal storytelling until gamers have sorted themselves out
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:38
|
|
|
Joel is a fairly poo poo person at the start of the game, and he's severely, severely emotionally damaged. He's basically a closed off wall of repressed sadness, pushing it down under mountains of anger. His daughter died, his brother ran away to join the fireflies, his wife is presumably dead by this point. He's implied to be a murdering piece of poo poo having done some truly awful poo poo to survive, probably topped off with a nice case of survivor's guitl. I mean at best at the start he's a grumpy old man, who is seemingly surviving out of spite and or habit, because he doesn't really have anything to live for. He largely wants nothing to do with ellie at the start, especially after Tess dies. But then he warms up to her over time, presumably through a lot of time spent together and copious amounts of awful puns. By the end of the game, Joel has not only warmed up to Ellie, and started turning back into a human being again, but he's ready to die for her. He probably also sees her and her immunity as some degree of redemption for himself at some point, but eventually he doesn't see the immunity as redemption, but Ellie as redemption. To the point where he's essentially willing to doom the rest of the world so he could protect her. He's a fantastically interesting character, and naughty dog did a good job on the last of us. but their aggressive defense of the game from the leaks and abuse of the dmca has been sure they aren't confident, and im definitely not buying the game.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:40
|
|
|
Stux posted:need to put a moratorium on anything other than completely 100% literal storytelling until gamers have sorted themselves out This 'god drat I'm so much smarter than the plebs who disagree with me, they just don't understand storytelling' poo poo is pretty tiresome and I'd wish you'd stop it.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:42
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:Joel was a hunter in his previous days, tortures and kills someone, and pretty much treats anyone he comes across like poo poo until he basically gets used to them. I mean if you want a good contrast to Joel, look at Tess. Tess is tough when she needs to be but compassionate as well. At times, I think people see Joel as the character that Tess actually is. I don't dispute his backstory or that he's a fallen man, but during the course of the game I'd say he's generally portrayed as too amicable for the player to be expected to perceive him as uniquely set apart from the rest of humanity in those respects, assholes generally don't warm up to anyone even with time. Similarly I interpreted the ending as implying a lamentation of human nature in general instead of Joel individually. lurker2006 fucked around with this message at 04:47 on May 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:43
|
|
|
im not being funny but the last of us is an exceptionally not complicated use of storytelling and its genuinely wild so many people have missed so many major themes so i guess i am just smarter sorry
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:43
|
|
|
Stux posted:im not being funny but the last of us is an exceptionally not complicated use of storytelling and its genuinely wild so many people have missed so many major themes so i guess i am just smarter sorry Maybe you should write the next game then so that it can actually handle those themes well, instead of how it did handle them, which was badly.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:44
|
|
|
im not a writer
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:46
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:"A character choosing to sacrifice themselves = they are suicidal" is super goddamn offensive and it's sort of bewildering people are trying to argue they are the same. Suicide is here used as to emphasize what the people (parent figure) that care deeply about the person sacrificing themselves feel about it. To these people, the benefit from the sacrifice is dwarfed by their attachment to the person. Ellie's desire to die to change the world is admirable and well intentioned (ignoring the survivor guilt) when considered by people not affiliated with her, but will still not be accepted by her dad figure. How is that off base? Suicide is defined as the act or an instance of taking one's own life voluntarily and intentionally - the term doesn't tackle the reason behind the suicide.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:49
|
|
|
lurker2006 posted:I don't dispute his backstory or that he's a fallen man, but during the course of the game I'd say he's generally portrayed as too amicable for the player to be expected to perceive him as uniquely set apart from the rest of humanity in those respects, assholes generally don't warm up to anyone even with time. Similarly I interpreted the ending as implying a lamentation of human nature in general instead of Joel individually. I disagree. The part where he tortured the guy for information and then ended up killing him anyways and how he pretty much murdered Marlene in cold blood sealed it for me. Other people might buy his rationalizations, but I don't. I guess that is a benefit of the storytelling. Some people see someone who has redeemed himself. I still see him as an entitled monster that is willing to rationalize whatever awful thing he does, and that is fine. I think the game is open to different interpretations.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 09:30 |
|
|
-hyperventilating- g--g--gamers!!!
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 04:52
|
|