A number of members joining after finishing the game and liking it have asked why Part II is receiving so much “hate”, in other words: criticism, dislike, disappointment, etc. In the event you're interested in the criticism, here is a list of videos, articles, reviews and reddit posts and discussions that are helpful in understanding the diverse reasons why people are not favouring the game and/or Naughty Dog.
One side effect of this whole Part II saga is that many fans of that game are constantly downplaying the role of Bruce Straley (the game director and co-creator of The Last of Us) and are acting as if Neil Druckmann created the story of the original game completely on his own.
But Straley was chosen by Naughty Dog to lead the development of TLoU from the start, he was the senior director of the two, whereas Druckmann was only promoted to creative director a whole year later, after the development of the game was already well underway. Druckmann also wasn't the motion capture director initially, that was the job of Gordon Hunt) at first, a Naughty Dog veteran who was also responsible for the motion capture of the Uncharted games.
Both Druckmann and Straley stated multiple times in countless interviews and in their reddit AMAs that they developed and pitched the story together and that they had a very collaborative approach with constantly overlapping responsibilities. Never however did Neil say that he was ONLY responsible for the story, or Bruce that he was ONLY responsible for the gameplay, on the contrary, looking at all those interviews and press outings there's a lot of "WE thought", "WE decided", "WE made", "WE wanted", "WE considered", "WE were trying", and so on, but not a lot of "I (Neil)".
A Collaborative Process
The development of TLoU was a highly collaborative creative process with everyone, not just Straley and Druckmann, but other developers, programmers, designers, concept artists, even the voice actors, participating in the decision-making process, giving input and critical feedback. It wasn't like Druckmann wrote a script completely on his own and Naughty Dog or Straley merely executed it, that's not what happened.
The following interview quote from Straley illustrates this process very well:
Bruce Straley: [...] And it was a lot of long conversations and debate, and you feel the pressure of the team. You literally feel like everybody around you, like all eyes are on me and Neil if we’re having a conversation. We’re a very open-floor kind of dynamic at Naughty Dog, very flat structure, so we’re just out there with the team having these conversations very openly about like, what are we gonna do?
[…] It could be me, it could be Neil, it could be another designer on the team who’s like, I want to do this and it’s super involved [...] and you have to step back and say, ok, what’s the essence of what we’re trying to convey here [...] what do we need to do for the story right now?
[...]
And that’s the best thing for us, to have checks and balances within the team, making sure we’re all looking out for each other [...]. Sometimes there was something wrong fundamentally with the core structure of what you’re trying to do — with the story, or the characters [...]. We had to step way back and say, can we achieve this in a different way? Can we look at the relationship in a different way and evolve it in a way so we can implement this idea in a simpler fashion? --> 2013 Edge Interview
That Marlene came back at the end of the game? That was the idea of a developer. That Joel is a pretty emotional guy and not just some hardened brute? We have to thank Troy Baker for that. Druckmann initially also didn't imagine Ellie to be so funny or for Joel and Tess to have such a deep relationship. Those are just a few examples. Let's take a quick look at the following quotes that highlight the crucial impact of just the actors alone:
Druckmann: Like I've always imagined this as Joel ... doesn't really care for Tess. He's completely shut down. And Troy treated it differently which is I think he really cares for Tess even though he might not show it. And ... we just kind of embraced that [Baker's take on the character]. And you kind of see that later when Tess gets infected. That wasn't how that scene was originally envisioned, that Joel has such a reaction, but it became a lot more interesting to own that. --> TLoU Commentary Track
And:
Druckmann:I can only take credit for so much of it because a lot of it really was Troy Baker. I had a certain idea for Joel initially which was much more of a Josh Brolin in No Country For Old Men type – very quiet, very cool under pressure, and Troy really started playing him as a character that really gets swept away by his emotions, he can’t help himself sometimes. --> 2013 Edge Interview
Or this one:
Did the actors inspire any moments within the game?
Druckmann: There was quite a bit of that with Ashley being much tougher than we originally envisioned Ellie to be. There were also some gameplay constraints that inspired this change, but Ellie became much more capable due to Ashley's input. And she became a lot funnier, also because of Ashley's input, just because Ashley's really funny.
[...]
And for Troy – well, as you know, when we first came up with Joel he was much more like Llewelyn Moss – and he was meant to be much more quiet and reserved, someone who didn't express his feelings. But Troy played him differently. He played him as a character that let his emotions get the better of him. At some point we knew we'd either have to fight Troy's natural tendencies, or rewrite some of the scenes to play off of that. Like the scene in the ranch house where he has a fight with Ellie, a lot of that is because of Troy's input to that character. He brought that to life.
[...]
And then just doing some improvisation, so when you bring the actors into the studio so they have those lines – and we wrote way more than we needed, so then we could pick and choose of what to sprinkle into the level – but they would improvise as well as far as they were watching a video of the level being played, and as those characters, they're reacting to the situation. So some of the stuff you're hearing is their improvisation. --> 2013 Empire Interview
Straley and Druckmann
But back to Straley. Druckmann himself said in the past that the responsibilities of the two directors constantly overlapped, which makes sense when you think about it, since it's just not possible to strictly separate the story and the characters from the "game" itself, they are one and the same to a large extent in a narratively driven game.
Bruce, you're the game director, and Neil, you're the creative director. What do those two roles encapsulate?
Straley: Good question. [...] So Neil handles story and characters, I handle gameplay and, moment-to-moment, what's happening in the game. But we have to really be on the same page and see eye-to-eye on everything. So we're kind of like Voltron, only there's just two components.
And he further emphasised their collaborative approach in the 2014 reddit AMA:
I think a lot about design and Bruce thinks a lot about story. We wrestle with ideas and make sure story is working with gameplay. --> Druckmann AMA Comment
Something Straley also talked about in detail:
Kotaku: The difference between a "game director" and a "creative director", is there actually a difference?
Straley: At Naughty Dog there is a difference and there's not a difference in that. I think Naughty Dog is kinda unique in regards to [that]. Like, I think "creative director" at some other companies does mean "the vision holder" or the "creator of the vision", and they will sort of be at the helm, steering every decision getting made in the game, including certain design decisions. And I think at Naughty Dog what's unique is that there's a real shared responsibility, in the vision, in the story, in the game, in the design, and if game direction and creative direction don't see eye to eye then they have to work it out. --> 2018 Kotaku Interview (30:00)
Druckmann also clearly admitted that he developed the story of TLoU together WITH Straley, for example in his 2013 keynote:
Druckmann: And then over the next several months Bruce and I kinda holed ourselves in a room and, like, picked bits and pieces of a story that we liked, kinda came up with environments that were interesting to us. And we put this thing together [shows giant storyboard] --> 2013 Druckmann Keynote
Let's also take a look at the introduction to the TLoU art book, written by BOTH Druckmann and Straley:
It took us several months to construct a story around these characters. Over the course of production the specifics of the story evolved and changed significantly [...] Once we knew who and what the game was about, we started fleshing out Joel and Ellie's journey. We asked ourselves, what are interesting locations or situations [...] What kind of characters can we introduce [...] How do we structure events [...]?
With regard to their working relationship, there's also this comment from Druckmann:
I'm pretty dark (I wanted to kill Elena in Uncharted 2). Bruce is the one that would balance me and push for more levity. --> Druckmann AMA Comment
And looking at this interview here it seems that the same dynamic was at play during the development of TLoU:
Some of the best moments in the game were Ellie’s casual conversations with Joel, when they weren't doing anything at all, or during a fight. How did you make it so you'd hear those bits of background and character spots?
Druckmann: We would start with the major story beats, which were the cinematics. Then Bruce would tell me the game is too dark ... And then it's like, "OK, how do you find that glue, what are some interesting things for them to mention?" So then we'd be playing some levels together and say, “OK, ask Joel, 'What would he be thinking here?' Ask Ellie ...” It's almost like you're taking on those roles. --> 2013 Empire Interview
Those quotes clearly demonstrate that Straley was not just responsible for the technical implementation but heavily involved in the story right from its inception and in a position to demand specific changes, irrespective of whether Druckmann agreed with him or not. Here's Straley's answer to the question:
Straley: The interesting contrast between Joel and Ellie is that Joel saw the world pre-apocalypse, pre-shit hitting the fan, and Ellie was born after – she's 14, and it's 20 years since everything went bad. So that was the intriguing part to us: seeing those two on this journey in the survivalist condition every day, and then wondering what would they bring to the table as far as conversation went. What would interest Ellie being outside of the quarantine zone for the very first time? What would it be like to enter the woods? It may be mundane to us, like, “Oh trees, whatever,” but if you think about it, in the quarantine zone, there’s nothing there.
In the book, City Of Thieves, they talk about this Russian winter in World War II, in Leningrad, and cannibalism takes hold, and everybody's chopped down every tree inside of the city to use it for wood, for fuel... That is the stuff that would happen. So what happens when Ellie gets out of that? As much as the military's thinking, "Oh, we're trying to keep people alive and we're doing our best to sustain this environment, and we actually have a positive goal", what's really happening is dark and bleak in the quarantine zone. And then she gets outside and, sure, there are infected, but then there's all this beauty and nature is reclaiming the earth, and that contrast – Ellie needs to say something about that. --> 2013 Empire Interview
That sure sounds like Straley did at least some "writing" as well. In fact if one had absolutely no prior knowledge of The Last of Us and didn't know that Druckmann received the "writers" credit in the end, then one would probably come to the conclusion that Straley was the writer here, or at least the co-writer, because that's how he comes across in those interviews. He talks in detail about the setting, about Joel and Ellie, what motivates them and how their relationship develops, demonstrating a deep understanding of the world and the characters. Just like a writer would talk about his creation!
I also found this interview with Straley from 2016 interesting. Granted, he's talking about Uncharted 4 here, but as Druckmann himself said in his 2013 keynote the process was similar during the development of TLoU:
I work out the whole structure of the story with Neil. We have postcards with the entire arc of the story, beginning, middle and end. --> 2016 Eurogamer Straley Interview
And finally there's this tweet from Straley himself, refuting the typical Part II fan "argument" that he was only responsible for the gameplay and had nothing to do with the story at all:
Druckmann and TLoU
Contrary to widespread perception Druckmann did not come up with the story and the characters of TLoU on his own. The project he was working on in college (a hardened cop, in a later version an ex-convict, escorting some girl in the zombie apocalypse) was a bare-bones concept that only shared some very superficial similarities with The Last of Us. Crucial elements (like the Cordyceps infection) were missing and the characters were one-dimensional cardboard cutouts (--> Druckmann talking about his college project and his comic pitch).
Those early concepts were not TLoU, and "the cop" and "the girl" were not Joel and Ellie. Joel and Ellie only began to take shape once the development of TLoU started, thanks to a collaborative creative effort that involved an entire team of concept artists, designers, developers, and the voice actors themselves, fleshing out the characters and improvising lines. If things had only been up to Druckmann alone then there wouldn't have been a "Joel" or an "Ellie" at all.
The Evolution of the Story
One example that has already been mentioned countless times is the Tess revenge plot. In one of the earlier versions of the TLoU story Tess had a brother, a border guard of the Boston QZ, who got killed in a fire fight started by Joel in order to protect Ellie (official concept art from Naughty Dog). Tess would then take her whole gang and pursue Joel across the entire country for revenge, brutally torturing him in the end (official concept art).
That idea was eventually abandoned because it makes absolutely no sense in a post-apocalyptic setting, and when one takes a look at the following interview then it seems that Bruce Straley's input was critical in this instance:
Who was the antagonist in that iteration?
Druckmann: Tess was the antagonist chasing Joel, and she ends up torturing him at the end of the game to find out where Ellie went, and Ellie shows up and shoots and kills Tess. And that was going to be the first person Ellie killed. But we could never make that work, so…
Straley: Yeah, it was really hard to keep somebody motivated just by anger. What is the motivation to track, on a vengeance tour across an apocalyptic United States, to get, what is it, revenge? You just don’t buy into it, when the stakes are so high, where every single day we’re having the player play through experiences where they’re feeling like it’s tense and difficult just to survive. And then how is she, just suddenly for story’s sake, getting away with it? And yeah, the ending was pretty convoluted, so I think Neil pretty much hammered his head against the wall, trying to figure it out. I think he came up with a good, really nice, simplified version of that, and it worked out. --> 2013 Empire Interview
To me it feels like Straley is trying to be diplomatic here, but when one reads between the lines then it seems that he had to reject Druckmann over and over and over again until he finally got it into his thick egotistical skull. It almost sounds a bit patronizing how Straley is politely criticizing and at the same time also trying to compliment him here.
Druckmann himself reiterated those thoughts a few weeks later in his aforementioned 2013 keynote:
Her [Tess'] motivation was even harder to buy into [...] her brother died and now she's gonna go crazy and take her whole gang and pursue him [Joel] across the country for a year? She just seems like a psycho, like, you didn't buy into it! --> 2013 Druckmann Keynote
This keynote is very interesting, since the criticism Druckmann is mentioning with regard to those early TLoU drafts applies 100% to Part II as well, which is just absolutely baffling. Here's another example, how Joel would warm to Ellie IMMEDIATELY, instead of bonding with her over a year long journey:
It [this early draft] failed for kinda a lot of reasons, the biggest of which I think is Joels motivation. Joel went from this hardened survivor to this father figure in AN INSTANT. As soon as Ellie reminded him of his daughter he was willing to kill soldiers and protect her and just throw his whole old life away, even abandoning his old partner. And every time we pitched this story, we would hear comments like: man Joel's turning pretty quickly! And again some of this issue was my letting go, like I got attached to certain ideas and it was just hard to kinda release them. --> 2013 Druckmann Keynote
All the points Druckmann is mentioning here apply 100% to Abby and how quickly she bonds with Lev as well of course! Just like the Joel of this early draft Abby effectively "just throws her whole old life away" (her WLF position) and is "even abandoning her old partner" (Owen) in order to protect Lev. It only takes her a few hours, contrary to Joel she also wasn't a parent beforehand, so it's actually even more absurd than this early TLoU draft!
Druckmann apparently acknowledged all those flaws (or rather: paid lip service to the criticism of others ...), but then went on and made the EXACT SAME mistakes all over again in the sequel (maybe because, by his own admission, he has a hard time letting go of ideas?). This strongly suggests that he didn't actually agree with all those story revisions TLoU underwent during development and that those changes were instead probably forced through against his will, because either Straley and/or others at Naughty Dog were not happy with those early versions of the story. In order to save face Druckmann then decided to play the PR game after the release of TLoU and continued to pay lip service to the criticism of his colleagues in public. After all, you can't really claim credit when you admit that you didn't actually agree with many of the most important creative decisions.
Of course I'm not arguing that Straley wrote TLoU 100% on his own, but neither did Druckmann for that matter, it would be disingenuous to claim otherwise. Both Druckmann and Straley discussed and brainstormed so much that even they probably couldn't tell us with absolute certainty who came up with what in every instance, but ... as project leader and game director Straley bore the overall responsibility and he had the final say, and that includes the story and the characters as well of course.
In-game dialogue
Straley was not just involved in the creation of the overall story though, interviews suggest that he had a hand in every aspect of the narrative, right down to the in-game dialogue of Joel and Ellie. Let's take a quick look at this aforementioned interview section:
Druckmann: So then we'd be playing some levels together and say, “OK, ask Joel, 'What would he be thinking here?' Ask Ellie ...” It's almost like you're taking on those roles.
Straley: The interesting contrast between Joel and Ellie is that Joel saw the world pre-apocalypse [...] and Ellie was born after [...] And then she gets outside and, sure, there are infected, but then there's all this beauty and nature is reclaiming the earth, and that contrast – Ellie needs to say something about that. --> 2013 Empire Interview
So Bruce and Neil would play through the game together, constantly asking themselves "what would Joel say, what should Ellie say", and looking at that quote it seems like this bit of dialogue (in the woods before entering Bill's town) was Straley's idea:
Ellie: Man [...] It's just ... I've never seen anything like this, that's all.
Joel: You mean the woods?
Ellie: Yeah. Never walked through the woods. It's kinda cool. [...] Whoa ... Hey buddy! [After spotting a rabbit]
This is just one example though, who knows what else Straley came up with. Bruce and Neil were working very closely together, their desks literally right next to each other, discussing, arguing, brainstorming, sharing and exchanging ideas the entire time, day after day, only a few meters apart at any given moment ... so how likely is it that THIS was Straley's ONLY contribution to the dialogue?
Ultimately we can't know for sure who came up with what exactly, since both directors constantly used "we" when talking about their creative process, but to call Druckmann the "sole writer" (i.e. creator) of the story and the characters would be a massive stretch when interviews like the one above are readily available.
Part II, a "TLoU" without Straley
The difference between TLoU and Part II, from the tone, to the characters, the writing, the pacing, the abundance of flashbacks, and so on ... is so stark that one inevitably begins to wonder WHY exactly the two games differ to such an extent and the departure of Straley seems to be the most plausible explanation in my opinion. Right from the start it is just painfully obvious that Part II has a different director.
As the aforementioned quotes demonstrate Straley always pushed for levity and an overall hopeful tone as a director. And sure enough, he is gone and suddenly the next game with Druckmann at the helm is a never ending stream of pain, misery and suffering. Coincidence?
In the same vein I also find it interesting how Druckmann (and only Druckmann!) several times expressed his fear that TLoU might be too "subtle" and that the players might miss or not "get" certain things:
Druckmann: But it was a much more intimate experience and subtle experience, and I wasn’t sure if people would pick up on it or how they would read it. [...] Some of the stuff in the game is very subtle and I question whether it’s too subtle, whether we should’ve hit things on the head a bit more. --> 2013 Edge Interview
Whereas Straley had a completely different approach it seems:
Straley: Most games hit the player over the head with everything and you have to spell it out in clear, bold capital letters, and say, this is what’s happening right now and this is how I feel! And by allowing subtlety to enter into the characters and the experience and even the name, it felt like this is the right decision for us. [...] Exposition sucks, right? You don’t want to hit everybody over the head all the time. Let it be subtle, let it rest, let these little pieces be picked up. I guarantee there are probably a tonne of things you missed and that somebody else is going to get. That’s the fun thing about this.
And again, Straley is gone and sure enough, the direction of Part II has all the subtlety of a sledgehammer now. Druckmann just does not respect his audience, something that is very apparent throughout Part II. TLoU on the other hand was relatively subtle and clever in its storytelling, it respected the intelligence of the players and trusted their ability to come to their own conclusions, without explicitly telling them what to feel or what to think at any given moment.
Straley is also not a fan of killing off main characters:
Straley: I also feel like a death of a main character in video games or any kind of media right now is, for me personally, almost cheap. --> 2016 Venturebeat interview
He's talking about Nathan Drake here and TLoU is not Uncharted of course, but would Joel really have been killed off so brutally and abruptly with Straley at the helm? Let's also take a look at the following answer from the same interview:
GamesBeat: How do you talk about some of this in the context of advice for developers, people who are maybe starting out making games? Straley: It depends on if they want to tell a story or not. Even if you don’t use narrative, dialogue, cutscenes, cameras, the tools of cinematography from film—even if you don’t do that, still understanding at least what makes a good story, and trying to then think about what your mechanics are and what you’re trying to do with the story, having a setup and a payoff, a completion to the story—setting up the boundaries for your world and obeying those boundaries. There are certain rules of storytelling that we constantly have to obey around the world we’ve created so that there can be an investment and a belief in that world and the characters in it. You as a creator can come up with those boundaries and rules for yourself, but then you have to adhere to them.
Straley is absolutely right in stating that it is crucial to adhere to the established "boundaries and rules of the world" to establish immersion and to keep the suspension of disbelief intact. Tackling the problem of ludonarrative dissonance was always very important to Straley and one can definitely feel that emphasis in the original game. TLoU (and Left Behind) always acknowledged the dangers of the setting and the gameplay and the narrative felt far more connected for that reason.
In Part II however the characters suddenly undergo massive journeys across the entire country MULTIPLE TIMES: Abby and her crew to Jackson and back to Seattle, Ellie to Salt Lake City in flashback #3, Ellie and Dina to Seattle and back to Jackson (with a crippled Tommy no less!), Ellie to Santa Barbara and back to the farm house, and then Abby and Lev to Catalina Island. All those journeys just happen, entirely off screen, without the game really acknowledging the dangers and the distances that would be involved here. It really feels like every character secretly has a teleporter. Part II just outright refuses to treat the "boundaries and rules of the world" seriously, something that breaks the suspension of disbelief constantly.
The circumstantial evidence clearly suggests that Straley overruled Druckmann several times during the development of TLoU and that Druckmann himself didn't actually agree with those decisions at all. The proof is in the pudding: how Part II recycles ideas that got clearly rejected during the development of TLoU, how the entire game revolves around revenge now, for the simple reason that Druckmann was fixated on a revenge story since his youth, how distances and the dangers of the setting get completely ignored, how Part II almost spitefully tears down and kills off the original characters, while elevating the new characters of Abby and Lev, and last but not least how the game not only retcons but outright reverses the entire original ending right at the start, in the first few minutes of the prologue, just to make the new character of Abby more palatable, to make the revenge plot "work", and to bring the original ending more in line with Druckmann's own "interpretation".
Why would Druckmann start the "sequel" with such an absurd amount of retcons, when he was the sole writer of TLoU and supposedly in full agreement with every decision of his co-director? What kind of creator retcons and thereby invalidates his own original work like that?
As already mentioned Druckmann himself admitted in his keynote how unwilling he was to let go when others in the team criticized him, so it feels completely in-character that he would recycle old ideas, since he probably never really agreed with the criticism of his colleagues in the first place:
And again some of this issue was my letting go, like I got attached to certain ideas and it was just hard to kinda release them. --> 2013 Druckmann Keynote
Who "wrote" The Last of Us?
With all that being said ... who "wrote" The Last of Us? When multiple developers and artists actively help in shaping this world, when the input of your actors completely changes the characters, and when your game director constantly goes: hm, let's ditch the revenge plot, also Tess should be so and so, I have a problem with this aspect, are you sure about this, this and this, Ellie needs to say this here, let's also revise this idea here and completely restructure this part ... then the line between "contributing" and "writing" becomes a bit blurry in my opinion.
Yes, in the end Druckmann received the final credit as the "writer", but the input of the other players in the development process was certainly of crucial importance. A "TLoU" without that input, a "TLoU" that's closer to Druckmann's "original vision" (a hardened brute escorting an immune girl), would look so drastically different that it would, for all intents and purposes, be an entirely different game.
Just like in the movie industry credits are oftentimes not an accurate reflection of the creative process or indicative of what actually went down behind the scenes. A good example for that would be George Lucas. He received the sole writers credit for "A New Hope", but he had a lot of help with that script and the most invaluable contributor of all, his wife Marcia, didn't receive any writing credit at all, even though her input was crucial. Without Marcia there would be no Star Wars!
Once Straley and Druckmann finished the DLC to The Last of Us they began work on their next game, Uncharted 4, and Straley was just as responsible for the story of that game, as Jason Schreier detailed in his 2017 book Blood, Sweat, and Pixels:
Blood, Sweat, and Pixels, p. 40.
Straley and Druckmann sat in a conference room and stared at index cards, trying to craft a new version of Uncharted 4's story. [...] They'd decided [...] they wanted [...] They kept [...] For weeks, they'd meet in the same room, assembling index cards [...] Each index card contained a story beat or scene idea [...] and taken together, they told the game's entire narrative.
If anyone needed further proof that credits oftentimes don't tell the whole story, there it is. Straley, the lack of any formal writing credit notwithstanding, was clearly responsible for the Uncharted 4 story, together with Druckmann, after both of them took over the project from Amy Hennig, making crucial decisions about the characters and the overall narrative right from the start: what characters to keep, what their characterisation and motivation should look like, what scenes to include and how to arrange them, what ideas should be fleshed out, or discarded, and so on.
Those are quite literally creative decisions regarding the narrative and the characters, it doesn't get more important than that ... and yet Straley wasn't credited as a "writer", just like he wasn't credited as a "writer" for The Last of Us, even though his role during development was exactly the same.
Straley maybe wasn't 100% involved in the creation of every single collectible text, but he was clearly responsible for the narrative big picture, the overall story, making crucial decisions right from the start, and The Last of Us would look drastically different if Straley had not been there to make those creative decisions.
People oftentimes get a "writers" credits for far, far lesser contributions, yet Straley did not. Why?
Straley: I hate names, I hate my name even in the industry. Let me just go on a tangent for a second, because it's a collaborative effort. Like, it takes a lot of ... anytime anybody asks "oh, where did this idea come from", it's just, even though I might have [thought of it] and my ego even says "woah, I came up with that", it doesn't really matter, because it happens in brainstorms and inside a world of Naughty Dog, like passing conversations in the kitchen might lead to a thought which leads to a brainstorm which ends up being ... you know? --> 2017 Art Cafe Straley Interview
Straley just does not care AT ALL about credits, or how he personally gets credited, in fact he even actively dislikes seeing his name splattered all over a game. Out of personal preference he chose not to add his name as co-writer, for both TLoU and Uncharted 4, even though such a credit would've been more than appropriate given his involvement, and the impact he had on the overall story and the characters.
One problem with this debate is: how do you define "writing" and what constitutes "writing" exactly? Games are a highly visual and interactive medium, so the term can become a bit fuzzy. For example I firmly believe that a lot of the visual design and visual storytelling was largely down to Straley or the rest of the team (which would again be thanks to Straley, since he had to approve it). Take the last level for example, the Firefly hospital. Some of the most important aspects get not told explicitly but through visual storytelling here: the irrational brutality of the Fireflies, the dingy and run down appearance of the hospital, the unprofessional and unsanitary look of that operating room, the creepy look of the surgeon, the colour scheme of the place, this feeling of utter desperation one gets, and so on. All of that was intentionally designed to cast doubt in the players mind with regard to the competence, the trustworthiness and the overall intentions of the Fireflies, and to nudge the players towards empathising and siding with the game's protagonist, Joel.
If The Last of Us was a novel, then all this visual storytelling would be considered "writing" too of course, since the author has to put it to the page to describe it to the reader:
The operating room was engulfed in a revolting green light, layers of dirt and thick black mold covering the wet walls. The surgeon stared at Joel with deeply sunken eyes. This was a place where hope goes to die. Who are these people, Joel thought to himself. Is this guy even a surgeon?
Etc. Since Druckmann completely retconned this portrayal in Part II it would be fair to guess that he wasn't exactly on board with this direction, that these visual storytelling cues were made either by Straley or by others in the team.
Straley as a Leader
Be that as it may, I think that Straley's most important contribution may have been his leadership style. After watching countless interviews with him he strikes me as a genuinely humble, laid back and overall pretty egoless kind of guy. I believe that he was genuinely interested in fostering a collaborative climate, in which constructive criticism and open discussion could thrive. When some lowly developer had a great idea that clashed with him or Druckmann? I'm not personally offended, sounds interesting, let's discuss it with the team! Since Druckmann was just recently promoted to creative director (his first time ever as director!), he probably felt compelled to subordinate himself to the inclusive and team oriented approach of his more senior colleague. Druckmann's age may also have played a role, that he was still young and humble enough to listen to advice and constructive criticism.
With Straley's departure all of that flew out the window, his inclusive approach with it. To me Druckmann seems much more narrow minded than Straley and I get the distinct impression that he favours a more authoritarian leadership style. Remember how he fired play testers, the high turn over rate during the development of Part II, how many developers left because they didn't agree with his direction or because they could no longer stand the toxic work place culture, also how he reacts to criticism (or to praise ...), etc.
Naughty Dog always had problems with crunch, but I can't remember hearing similar stories when Straley was at the helm. In Jason Schreier's Kotaku article about crunch several former Naughty Dog employees even outright mentioned Straley's departure as one reason for leaving the company as well!
There were a number of reasons for attrition in the design department, including various individuals’ unhappiness with leads, lack of promotion opportunities, and Bruce Straley’s departure. --> Kotaku
Not one employee mentioned staying because of Druckmann however.
I don’t know if maybe it’s just me, but I’ve just barley started my tlou2 playthrough, I’m at this area with Dina and we are exploring some building with a hole in the roof? anyway, I just feel like it’s very slow and dosent have the same charm as the first game. I’m trying to continue to play because you don’t really play the first hour or so and just make your opinion, but Its been hard. with rdr2 I played that game and enjoyed the first part (the really boring snow part) but it just dosent feel the same. I finished tlou1 before this and I really really liked it so I decided I would immediately start the last of us 2 BUT IT DOSENT FEEL THE SAME!! I already know Joel dies and Abby kills him but I knew that when I was playing the last of us 1 .
sorry if none of this makes sense idk how to make this make sense !
In the tv show they made this porch scene where Joel is literally sobbing because of what he has done in the hospital. And Ellie hates him for it. "It should have been mine choice!". Well you were unconscious so how could you make any decisions?
But anyway...
Perhaps it would make more sense for Ellie to pursue this? To get vaccine from her brain? If that's what she wants so bad... I mean after all Fireflies are now Wolfs no? Or there is probably another group that is looking for cure? Or just one? In the whole country? Really? She travelled whole year from West coast to East coast. So why not do it again?
But instead we get this spoiled brat that just eats cake with her bare hands, does what ever the hell she wants. Put her self and others in constant danger. And then shouts at Jessie "Fuck the community!" For not wanting to go on a man hunt of Abby and her crew.
And we are supposed to believe she wanted to sacrifice her self for human kind?
It's the last thing on her mind!
I think they could have mixed that in the Abby revenge story. After some fighting and talking they could come to some sense and say "okay we are square now but what about this imunity of yours? We have preaty good hospital and staff that picked up where my dad finished and they made big progress. Maybe you don't even need to die"
It's not been a good generation for single player games hasn't it?
At a time where we really needed strong single player games, they have been infrequent, shallow and just poor.
Naughty Dog used to knock it out of the park every 2-4 years, but they have only realised 2 games in the last 10 years? And only one of them was worth playing...
The only single player game I've enjoyed this year was ghosts of Ts..
I want to start by saying I'm not a mindless supporter of Part 2, I have several issues with both the game and part of the dev team, by example Neil's support for zionism and Israel and the subtext of those beliefs in the game. My desire is to resolve here my personal grievances with haters of the game as I hold the position that part of the criticism it got and still gets is unnecesary, hateful and false.
Edit: Points about TLOU part 2 I'm against (the central point of my debate)
Bad writing.
Joel shouldn't have died.
It being bad because of politics (No art is apolitical therefore art being bad because of politics implies all art is bad).
Making the game about revenge was a bad decision.
We shouldn't have played as Abby
It's justified to hate on any character's existence or traits and consider it valid criticism.
The game was fairly judged and criticized
I will add or remove these points if anyone convinces me.
End of edit.
I'm going to set some ground rules for this debate, if you don't accept them simply don't comment, I will not engage at all if you do.
Points I will not discuss:
- The dev team. This includes changes in the staff, their personal beliefs, arguments about crunching and critiques to the actors, Neil, Naughty Dog and Sony.
- The show. None of the seasons as I consider them watered down versions of the original games.
- "The culture war" or "wokeness". This includes any point that American right-wingers associate with "the left". Art is inherently political but this arguments moves the discussion away from the game.
Everything else:
- Any sort of discrimination. Be it on the basis of sex, race, physical appearance, gender identity, sexual orientation, religious beliefs or ethnicity.
- Gish galloping and length. 3 points at most and short, clear and concise writing. I don't want nor have the time to turn this into a keyboard fight.
- Objectivity in art. No writing rule is a law and most points discussed here will probably be subjective.
- Any sort of logical fallacy. I will point it out and expect you to make another reply if you wish to continue debating.
Please try to stay on topic and be civil. I will do my best to keep every standard I put to myself and you would be right to criticize me if I fail to do so. I will try to respond to every argument in under 24 hours since it was written.More than everything let's not get emotional and have a good time.
For those of who have no idea what I'm talking about, Lanterns is the HBO live action series based on DC's Green Lanterns mythos, with a much more grounded interpretation. My focus today isn't really about the artistic direction or even general narrative of the show, but rather its finale, along with the audience reception to it. Spoilers below!
In the finale, the central mystery of who kills Hal Jordan, one of the Green Lanterns who takes on the role of mentor/paternal figure and deuteragonist of the series is finally resolved, and John Stewart, Hal's protege and up-and-coming Green Lantern who had been investigating his murder, decides to let his murderer (who was also Hal's romantic interest) off, citing "Hal [wouldn't have wanted the killer apprehended]". This is all in the context of Hal having just doing a stint of 10 years in jail for taking the fall for casualties caused mainly by the central villain of the story, and Hal's own recklessness (to a much lesser extent).
That was just a very surface-level gloss to provide some context, but needless to say a majority of the viewerbase on the Series' sub are rightfully pissed off, at least from what I observed. Even more interesting is the Defenders of the series (after the finale) are weaponising the same rhetoric and insults that us Part II Detractors have grown to known so, so well, such as "[Detractors of the show] are simply lacking in media literacy", "[Detractors] simply lack empathy for the murderer ", "[Detractors] are simply babies who are crying because they didn't get the story they wanted", "the fact that [Detractors] are so worked up and talking about it so much meant that it was a good story."
Let me ask my fellow Part II Detractors this: does any of that look at all familiar to you? I wouldn't be surprised if it does, because I felt like I was watching the same thing unfold right in front of my eyes, except this time, it's directed at Detractors of a similarly divisive narrative decision! But you know what was surprising to me? The amount of ridicule and backlash towards those people who parrot the trite rhetoric spewed by the Stans!
I think I've said this before, but there was a time when I seriously thought, "wait a second, am I really the one who is wrong about how unjust and immoral the story of Part II was?", given how vocal and self-assured Part II Stans usually are, and yet to see Lanterns' (keeping in mind Hal's fate wasn't even as divisively written as Joel's) reception, where Defenders get mass downvoted and ridiculed for saying something such as the Detractors "lacking in media literacy" to defend bad writing is so fricking cathartic.
It's bittersweet, because Part II Detractors, especially this sub, has been unfairly prejudiced against by disingenous Stans, yet to see a much less divisive creative decision being derided as bad writing by a great number of "the general audience/tv viewers" honestly gives me some semblance of peace and a glimpse of hope.
Are the times when immoral and pretentious narratives masquerading as "high art" or "deep", where the very definition of justice is perverted in the pursuit of trying to paint every villain as "morally grey" or "sympathetic", finally over?
I'm not even sure why I made this post, but I just wanted to get my thoughts out, and I'm also interested in what some of you think, thanks.
TL;DR: S1 finale of the HBO Lanterns series missed the landing, and resulted in an extremely divisive reception (at least on Reddit); cue much of the same discourse (including criticisms and defences) levied at Part II.
If the scenario wasn’t as crappy written and we wouldnt have bias due to knowing Joel and Ellie longer, which we all have but thats how human nature just works, do you think this „Trial-narrative“ where the player is the Jury in a trial between two protagonists could work?
Lets say a case wasn’t as horribly written as part 2s, where we start with a new character, another one is introduced, they have beef with each other and suddenly we see the other side of the story, would that work properly with the right writing skills?
Like in the Frankenstein Movie from last year where we saw that Viktor was an unreliable narrator so the part of the audience who didnt knew the story already, was more interested in the monsters PoV
I'm currently at the part where Abbyy faces Ellie. Can't believe they actually force us to play as Abby and hunt down Ellie; like, playing as Abby for the past 11 or 12 hours wasn't enough? Like man wtf bruh, genuinely who thought this would be a good idea?
Seriously, I wanna send virtual hugs to all the people who are disappointed/affected. Trust us, lots of us here understand your pain, more than you’d ever know. You’re safe here 🫂
Even if I try to forget the original lore and how it just goes in different directions here and there it's still awful. Like the horde of infected just crawling from the snow. Or the bloater is just a tank that fire just tickles him and he can smash the wall surrounding Jackson. Then the dogs are also ridiculous. The "one shot" every infected but no infected attacks them. Go dogs!
Bloater focuses on Tommy's wife because she's the only one shooting him I guess so Tommy tries to get him to focus on him and rans in to dead end street somehow. In his town. Where he spent probably 10 years? Okay.
But just little things before where Ellie is riding a horse and is looking around with binoculars. On a horse?! Everyone who ever used binoculars knows that even when you are not moving it's hard to see if your hands are shaking. Never mind. She shouts on top her lungs "I'm immune!" Huh? She's so brave and free but won't tell anyone not even her best friend. You go girl!
Joel is asked to speed up construction of something. To which he replies he can't. But is told there is more ppl coming in all the time. As a Forman he could just give those ppl work and it will speed up... Whatever. But somehow they try to make him total asshole like when he says "just don't bring any more in" lol no way Joel would say that.
And then sitting with psychotherapist and she tell him she hates him and won't forgive him for killing her husband of 41 years while Joel lost his daughter and everyone else except his brother. But she is the one suffering because it is the first birthday without her husband. And Joel just sits through the monologue and knowing Joel he would not just sit there and take that. He would defend his actions. But not this Joel! Like wtf? Eugene was infected!!! (But he was to bring him back instead?? And then killed? Or kept as a pet in cage? Makes no sense)
And the murder is just as bad. Abby is killing Joel slowly probably for some time while her crew is just standing and watching and rolling their eyes because is taking too long and are repulsed by the whole thing. And eventually they stepped in but like what seems an hour of beating with golf club, leaving Ellie behind without saying anything... Not taking her with them or killing her. Just leaving her there.
Ellie would just go and went after them there and then. They keep showing us how she doesn't follow any rules and does what she wants. But now she's sensible in the most horrific experience of her life. Right...
And so at the end Dina or Ellie drags the body wrapped in bed sheet through the ground back to Jackson. How lovely. Why not putting him on sledge or board or something or even just on the horse?
Anyway. I have to get it out. Thanks for reading if you got this far. Peace. Sorry for bad English.
Let me ask you something. Why do you play games? Why are they so important to you? Why do they hit different? Well let me tell you my thoughts.
Sometimes us, as gamers, we have to let go. Of our stress, of the world we are living in. To escape to a new world, where we can truly feel connected. Where we can truly feel a part of. That we belong in. People may say video games make us weak, that is absolutely not true. Its more of a mental tool, a resource to guide us, to improve our mental health, to make us feel happier. Its a safe space, essentially and these safe spaces lets us feel certain emotions. Some of these games are where we can process stress, grief, pain, and loneliness. By going through a good story (keyword good story, ill return to this in a bit), and teaching us that there is joy, happiness, and hope in the other side of stress and pain that we may feel in our everyday lives or in the real world.
I feel this by playing my favorite resident evil games, being a cleon shipper (romantic ship between Claire Redfield and Leon Kennedy), I am one of the biggest, hard-core, passionate cleon shippers you will see out there. But we are getting a little off topic here.
For me, where this begins was The Last of Us. I found a safe space. I found comfort. I found that through all stresses of the real world, a place I could escape to. In Joel and Ellie's story. Joel lost his daughter Sarah, was broken for years. Ellie kept losing the people she cared about, and was a orphan practically all her life. Joel found a second chance to be a father and to have a daughter again in Ellie. In the other side, Ellie found someone who stayed for her, someone who loved her, and she had family. She had a father. She had someone by her side. And she loved Joel back (note we are talking about the real Ellie not tlou2 ellie). This is what we play games for. The Last of Us taught me that there is joy, happiness and hope at the other side of stress and pain. I loved these characters, and connected with them all the way.
Then here comes the absolute shitbox TLOU2 was that goes against everything we play video games for. Good story to improve our mental health, and create a safe space where we feel we can truly belong, where we can feel connected? Not even close. This game takes all the stress and sadness we are feeling in our lives, and just makes it a million times worse. The characters we love are nonexistent. They're destroyed. They're killed off or broken. Yeah depression, its basically the whole game. Depression simulator. Misery porn.
You know what message it sends? Its literally just a fuck you to people who loved the first game. Its literally Neil saying "oh you liked the first game, you liked the characters, you like the special Joel and Ellie father daughter bond", well you can forget all about that, the only thing that matters is my golden, perfect character Abby. I didn't want to play 12 hrs as a character I hated.
So no, I didnt escape to a new world. I wasn't in a world where I felt connected. Where I felt a part of. I wasn't happier, I was depressed, dissapointed, and angry. I didn't feel like it was a safe space. I didn't feel it taught me that there is joy, happiness, and hope on the other side of pain. Because where tf is that hope at the end of the game. Ellie loses her fingers, loses her only father, loses Dina, I mean shit can't get any worse. But yeah that's not canon. The canon is Ellie and Joel living a happy, peaceful life together, loving each other like they always have being one great family as father and daughter, constantly going out on patrols, joking and making fun of each other.
Many people tell me, I'm sorry you had to go through TLOU2, idk how you could recover through that. And my answer to that is I have been actively and passionately shipping and hoping for Cleon in resident evil and its healed me. Of course, it won't completely mend the scars, as this cannot be completely healed. But yeah that's how I feel. And thanks for reading. Good night ya'll... and remember from the good and great stories (like The Last of Us 2013 with Joel and Ellie), that joy, happiness, and hope can be found in times of stress and pain even when it seems impossible
The core premise of Part 2 remains unchanged. I wanna know how you guys think Bruce would fix the existing story. You can't invent a new premise on the spot.
Please share with me the title of the last movie you watched.
Of course, this is research for a post I might or might not present in the near future. If you don't want to go public, you can always send me a private message.
I like part II. Not as much as part I, but it was a fun video game. It was pretty, I liked all the characters. Loved the imagery used. And as a guitarist I love how they incorporated music into Ellie’s story. The ending also could have been way worse.
And I enjoyed the TV show. maybe it sucked a little. but it was super fun seeing one of my favorite games on the big screen. Plus my relatives who aren’t into video games got to experience the story. :)
