Support NeoGAF

[San Dan Glokta]

All this, reminded me of how in the Halo universe, Master Chief could have literally saved the world if he just allowed himself to be medically examined for how he is immune to the Flood.

The game tried to make it a heroic choice that he get sent to the front lines instead and HIDDEN his Flood immunuty, when he could have just saved the world and skipped all the mass destruction by getting his body examined for a year or two. No one is even suggesting that he was going to die from the examinations either; he just wanted to be a front line soldier so bad that it was more important that we have him as a protagonist in the war that never ends, than him just ending the Flood threat entirely.

Basically "screw the world, I want what I want" is very American. it is only slightly more heroic in TloU because it was about saving someone else.

Not talking about TLOU at all--but where is it cited that MC has any sort of immunity whatsoever? I know that Sgt. Johnson has been said to have resistance/immunity as a meme since he's such a badass but thats it.

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

Not talking about TLOU at all--but where is it cited that MC has any sort of immunity whatsoever? I know that Sgt. Johnson has been said to have resistance/immunity as a meme since he's such a badass but thats it.

My recollection was watching a let's play where there was audio logs explaining things. But you can argue how canon it truly was.

 

[Itchy Tickles]

1) It wasn't his daughter. His daughter got killed at the start of the game / infection outbreak by the army guy.

2) No, he wasn't right. Again, not his daughter, but a "delivery" that was supposed to cure the infection and save the world. He made the wrong choice and caused the infection to spread, countless people die, as well as the wars and fighting of the desperate trying to survive.

3) Of course, if I had developed a bond with a kid over the course of the journey, I can't say I would've done the right thing either, but that's the point. 1 kids life vs the world's (granted the world in real life can go to fuck) is a horrible decision, but it had to be done.

4) Her death was also going to be completely painless. She was going to be put under anaesthetic, and they were gonna operate from there. So she wouldn't have had a clue that either she was dead or that she potentionally saved the world. If his daughter was actually still alive, do you think he wouldn't save her?

5) The only way Druckmann can say Joel was right, was for allowing them to make a sequel and constant remasters / ports. No cure = more games.

 

[San Dan Glokta]

My recollection was watching a let's play where there was audio logs explaining things. But you can argue how canon it truly was.

In Halo: The Flood novel the Chief nearly got infected which gave him an anxiety attack. Besides that there has never been a mention about him being immune. I thought there might be a new source or something.

ITT: I don't think most people would deny that Joel was acting selfish, but two things can be true at once. He was selfish but so were the fireflies with the way they went about with things. I'm not a dad but I have a number of Nephews/Nieces. When it comes to rescuing any of them strangers' lives will lose their value real quick if they were in my way...

 

[PauloRoberto]

1) It wasn't his daughter. His daughter got killed at the start of the game / infection outbreak by the army guy.

2) No, he wasn't right. Again, not his daughter, but a "delivery" that was supposed to cure the infection and save the world. He made the wrong choice and caused the infection to spread, countless people die, as well as the wars and fighting of the desperate trying to survive.

3) Of course, if I had developed a bond with a kid over the course of the journey, I can't say I would've done the right thing either, but that's the point. 1 kids life vs the world's (granted the world in real life can go to fuck) is a horrible decision, but it had to be done.

Hot to tell the whole world you did not 'get' the story (or dont have children, for that matter) without being direct (and it's your right of course :-D).

 

[CLW]

Basically "screw the world, I want what I want" is very American. it is only slightly more heroic in TloU because it was about saving someone else.

Actually one's feelings about Joel's actions /ending is a very good test for are you a collectivist/leftist or an individualist/libertarian.

IF one could be sacrificed for the good of the collective then 49.999999% should also be acceptable to save the 50.00000001.

It's also a good test for are you a parent or not. As a father of 2 I mowed those fuckers DOWN and enjoyed every second of it.

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

Actually one's feelings about Joel's actions /ending is a very good test for are you a collectivist/leftist or an individualist/libertarian.

IF one could be sacrificed for the good of the collective then 49.999999% should also be acceptable to save the 50.00000001.

It's also a good test for are you a parent or not. As a father of 2 I mowed those fuckers DOWN and enjoyed every second of it.

Well of course, it is perfect normal to priority your own flesh and blood over anyone else.

That works both way though. Because we ALL have our own family to worry about. And if everyone decide to think like that we wouldn't have society or even civilization. What made you feel that way is simply the lizard brain's say so. And some instincts are right, some instincts are wrong.

 

[Danjin44]

Everyone with brain can tell Fireflies's plan for "saving the world" was noting more than a pipe dream and not worth sacrificing someone's life over it.

 

[stickkidsam]

1) It wasn't his daughter. His daughter got killed at the start of the game / infection outbreak by the army guy.

2) No, he wasn't right. Again, not his daughter, but a "delivery" that was supposed to cure the infection and save the world. He made the wrong choice and caused the infection to spread, countless people die, as well as the wars and fighting of the desperate trying to survive.

3) Of course, if I had developed a bond with a kid over the course of the journey, I can't say I would've done the right thing either, but that's the point. 1 kids life vs the world's (granted the world in real life can go to fuck) is a horrible decision, but it had to be done.

4) Her death was also going to be completely painless. She was going to be put under anaesthetic, and they were gonna operate from there. So she wouldn't have had a clue that either she was dead or that she potentionally saved the world. If his daughter was actually still alive, do you think he wouldn't save her?

5) The only way Druckmann can say Joel was right, was for allowing them to make a sequel and constant remasters / ports. No cure = more games.

Just because you can save more people by killing one person doesn't make it right. Forget that this is a child for one or that Joel has essentially become a father to her. You can even ignore that the fireflies plan was swiss cheese.

To that one person their life is everything. You can't play a numbers game with that.

We look at human sacrifices as barbaric, but they would use the same logic you are. You can make whatever justification ya want but nobody has a moral claim to anyone else's life.

 

[Sharius]

cuckman probly trying to get on gamer good side for his next flop game

 

[FF:Enhanced_Reality]

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

By the way, all the "the cure wouldn't have worked anyway" people are retroactively trying to justify their preference.

Look, it is okay that you agree with Joel. The whole point of the apocalypse is that everyone is left with bad choices. You don't have to argue why you think it is wrong to sacrifice your adopted child for someone else's happiness. They have the right to try to find a cure in any way they can and you have the right to defend your own happiness against their wishes.

The whole point of the apocalypse is to generate desperation. What else is it good for?

 

[Itchy Tickles]

Just because you can save more people by killing one person doesn't make it right. Forget that this is a child for one or that Joel has essentially become a father to her. You can even ignore that the fireflies plan was swiss cheese.

To that one person their life is everything. You can't play a numbers game with that.

We look at human sacrifices as barbaric, but they would use the same logic you are. You can make whatever justification ya want but nobody has a moral claim to anyone else's life.

So in your argument you are saying this 1 child's life is worth more than all the other children's lives? How's that work? Looking at it objectively, it doesn't matter who it is or what age they are when it comes to potentionally finding a cure for everyone of all ages in such a dangerous scenario that's only getting worse.

You say "no one has a moral claim to anyone's life" but that is what Joel did. He not only stopped her death / potentional cure, by killing all the doctors there, he also condemned the rest of the world by blocking what could have been a cure. In the 2nd game there are kids with the infection too if you remember, is that fair or "morally" right?

Then, of course, a big point is that when Joel confessed to Ellie what he did, she was pissed off and said he should have let it happen. She said he was wrong. He was wrong.

Just to be clear also, this is talk about a game and a fictional world. I already stated that if it happened in real life, most of us wouldn't be able to go through with it.

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

When society broke down, there was no more laws. So the only thing left is "can i defend what I have and take from others who can't defend themselves".

Joel, by some miracle, won vs incredible odds. So he gets the spoils.

There is no society left to condemn him.

 

[bitbydeath]

So in your argument you are saying this 1 child's life is worth more than all the other children's lives? How's that work? Looking at it objectively, it doesn't matter who it is or what age they are when it comes to potentionally finding a cure for everyone of all ages in such a dangerous scenario that's only getting worse.

You say "no one has a moral claim to anyone's life" but that is what Joel did. He not only stopped her death / potentional cure, by killing all the doctors there, he also condemned the rest of the world by blocking what could have been a cure. In the 2nd game there are kids with the infection too if you remember, is that fair or "morally" right?

Then, of course, a big point is that when Joel confessed to Ellie what he did, she was pissed off and said he should have let it happen. She said he was wrong. He was wrong.

Just to be clear also, this is talk about a game and a fictional world. I already stated that if it happened in real life, most of us wouldn't be able to go through with it.

They tried it before and killed other immune people in the process.

Remember, this is a terrorist organisation group that won't want things to go back to normal where they no longer have power.

Likely they were intentionally killing immunes to stay in power.

Taking the life of someone who is immune and can save everyone is downright stupid. That is not the way.

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

They tried it before and killed other immune people in the process.

Remember, this is a terrorist organisation group that won't want things to go back to normal where they no longer have power.

Likely they were intentionally killing immunes to stay in power.

Taking the life of someone who is immune and can save everyone is downright stupid. That is not the way.

They can't be terrorist groups because there is no government to make them terrorists.

As i said, you can agree with Joel without thinking that means you need to make the other side look bad. You can be selfish about saving your family over others and live with it, no need to treat it like you are being a saint.

 

[Puscifer]

All this, reminded me of how in the Halo universe, Master Chief could have literally saved the world if he just allowed himself to be medically examined for how he is immune to the Flood.

The game tried to make it a heroic choice that he get sent to the front lines instead and HIDDEN his Flood immunuty, when he could have just saved the world and skipped all the mass destruction by getting his body examined for a year or two. No one is even suggesting that he was going to die from the examinations either; he just wanted to be a front line soldier so bad that it was more important that we have him as a protagonist in the war that never ends, than him just ending the Flood threat entirely.

Basically "screw the world, I want what I want" is very American. it is only slightly more heroic in TloU because it was about saving someone else.

This comes across like some "Why doesn't the coyote catch the road runner" logic. I mean yeah he could do it, but honestly we wouldn't have material.

 

[PlayStaytion]

Like Eren from Attack on Titan, most people will chose death over his stupid ego.

 

[QLQ]

They tried it before and killed other immune people in the process.

They were not like Ellie.

A transcript of the Surgeon's recording:

"April 28th. Marlene was right. The girl's infection is like nothing I've ever seen. The cause of her immunity is uncertain. As we've seen in all past cases, the antigenic titers of the patient's Cordyceps remain high in both the serum and the cerebrospinal fluid. Blood cultures taken from the patient rapidly grow Cordyceps in fungal-media in the lab... however white blood cell lines, including percentages and absolute-counts, are completely normal. There is no elevation of pro-inflammatory cytokines, and an MRI of the brain shows no evidence of fungal-growth in the limbic regions, which would normally accompany the prodrome of aggression in infected patients.

We must find a way to replicate this state under laboratory conditions. We're about to hit a milestone in human history equal to the discovery of penicillin. After years of wandering in circles, we're about to come home, make a difference, and bring the human race back into control of its own destiny. All of our sacrifices and the hundreds of men and women who've bled for this cause, or worse, will not be in vain. "

 

[bitbydeath]

They can't be terrorist groups because there is no government to make them terrorists.

As i said, you can agree with Joel without thinking that means you need to make the other side look bad. You can be selfish about saving your family over others and live with it, no need to treat it like you are being a saint.

It's just a brain dead move to kill the person that holds the cure without so much as looking at them.

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

It's just a brain dead move to kill the person that holds the cure without so much as looking at them.

The story works better if we don't know if the cure could have worked or not. Because it doesn't matter either way for Joel.

However, anyone who say that the cure would never have worked, is just trying to evade responsibility for the choice they made. Own it, live it, understand it. You are a living person who is defined by the hard choices. By stating the cure was never going to work, you are averting your eyes from the moral quandary instead of facing it.

 

[stickkidsam]

So in your argument you are saying this 1 child's life is worth more than all the other children's lives? How's that work? Looking at it objectively, it doesn't matter who it is or what age they are when it comes to potentionally finding a cure for everyone of all ages in such a dangerous scenario that's only getting worse.

I said that one person's life is everything. Not that it is worth more. You can't put a value on any one person's life because it is priceless. Forcing someone to give up their life for the sake of everyone else's isn't objectively a moral good. You're just justifying taking something from them for your own gain.

Self sacrifice is one thing, but that's not what this was.

You say "no one has a moral claim to anyone's life" but that is what Joel did. He not only stopped her death / potentional cure, by killing all the doctors there, he also condemned the rest of the world by blocking what could have been a cure. In the 2nd game there are kids with the infection too if you remember, is that fair or "morally" right?

Joel's lie and Joel stopping Ellie's imposed death are seperate issues. The former came after the fact and the latter didn't happen in a vacuum. He was stopping someone from trying to take another's life and the order of events matters.

Whether or not it is fair for those kids to be infected is irrelevant. Do you think if something is unfair then that means you should offload all of that on to one person, their willingness be damned? How is that fair? How is that moral?

Then, of course, a big point is that when Joel confessed to Ellie what he did, she was pissed off and said he should have let it happen. She said he was wrong. He was wrong.

Just to be clear also, this is talk about a game and a fictional world. I already stated that if it happened in real life, most of us wouldn't be able to go through with it.

Whether Ellie would have done it doesn't matter, because she was never actually given that choice. Not by Joel or the Fireflies. Joel was wrong to lie to her and she was right to be angry with him for that. Her blaming him for not letting them do it however, while ignoring the context, shows her lack of maturity.

Yeah though, I don't think most would let their child be killed for the world either. I wouldn't. It's cool getting to break it down and discuss the philosophy of it though, even if it's all just hypothetical

 

[[Tact]]

All this, reminded me of how in the Halo universe, Master Chief could have literally saved the world if he just allowed himself to be medically examined for how he is immune to the Flood.

The game tried to make it a heroic choice that he get sent to the front lines instead and HIDDEN his Flood immunuty, when he could have just saved the world and skipped all the mass destruction by getting his body examined for a year or two. No one is even suggesting that he was going to die from the examinations either; he just wanted to be a front line soldier so bad that it was more important that we have him as a protagonist in the war that never ends, than him just ending the Flood threat entirely.

Basically "screw the world, I want what I want" is very American. it is only slightly more heroic in TloU because it was about saving someone else.

Is this 343 lore? Chief isn't immune to the Flood.

 

[Robot Carnival]

 

[bitbydeath]

The story works better if we don't know if the cure could have worked or not. Because it doesn't matter either way for Joel.

However, anyone who say that the cure would never have worked, is just trying to evade responsibility for the choice they made. Own it, live it, understand it. You are a living person who is defined by the hard choices. By stating the cure was never going to work, you are averting your eyes from the moral quandary instead of facing it.

It wouldn't have worked.
We know this as the Fireflies were a ragtag team of deadbeats, they weren't a scientific group or anyone to take serious. Just a bunch of lowlifes killing people for power.

That is how the game portrayed them.
Why you see them as more I will never understand.

 

[realcool]

That was to protect Ellie by trying to tell her she wasn't the only one. It was very much a selfish act because of his bond with her, but that's the point - it can be both the right action as a father figure and still selfish.

Ellie was unconscious, so she couldn't know what was true or false. No matter what Joel said when she woke up, she could still be skeptical, meaning the conflict could have been achieved without trivializing Joel's character. Instead, Ellie was unnecessarily victimized by Joel, and both characters unnecessarily victimized by poor writing.

 

[Shambalakan]

He probably would, shit I would and even I agree with Joels actions...

You can agree with someone's actions from their perspective and still understand why someone else disagrees with him enough to murder him.

So I would do Joel worse if he killed my father, we would be in that basement for days lol Tommy would get it, Ellie would get it just before being there lol

Exactly. That's a simple thing to understand, but some people...
It's interesting to see people still think Druckmann hated Joel and killed him in TLoU2 because of that. Maybe they still haven't played the game after about 5 years and just saw some spoilers and YouTube videos, because game made Joel even a more lovable character and this scene was made to show he was right (in his perspective):

Joel was right, Abby was right too and it was all about perspective. Not a simple black and white story. It was indicated in the game, but still some people say: "Oh Druckmann! You finally admitted that we were right!" lol

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

It wouldn't have worked.
We know this as the Fireflies were a ragtag team of deadbeats, they weren't a scientific group or anyone to take serious. Just a bunch of lowlifes killing people for power.

That is how the game portrayed them.
Why you see them as more I will never understand.

How Joel sees them is not how they see themselves.

I can't stop you from making any kind of justification to suit yourself. But if the end of the first game was that black and white then it would be a far worse ending.

 

[bitbydeath]

How Joel sees them is not how they see themselves.

I can't stop you from making any kind of justification to suit yourself. But if the end of the first game was that black and white then it would be a far worse ending.

It should be black and white to not kill the person who can save humanity.

 

[San Dan Glokta]

Its a trap guys. Don't touch anything that has anything to do with this guy. Boycott him to oblivion.
He knows he really fucked up and now that he's realizing how much he is hated even ~5 years after TLOU2, and how even the show is tainted because of him. He's trying to backpedal and butter us over. Don't fall for his bullshit. Let him and ND crash and burn.

 

[struggler_guts]

 

[Ulysses 31]

Joel was right, Abby was right too and it was all about perspective. Not a simple black and white story. It was indicated in the game, but still some people say: "Oh Druckmann! You finally admitted that we were right!" lol

What muddies the water for me when it comes to Abby is that this butcher she had in mind when hunting him came to her help without knowing anything about her. That shows something positive of him and yet it gave her no pause at all and she went on to torture him anyway.

 

[HoodWinked]

this is like a comedian explaining their joke.

 

[Melchiah]

Abby did nothing wrong.

Other than persuading her doubting father to go along with Ellie's dissection, and by doing so being the one who started the cycle of violence.

Let alone, that the files and recordings Joel comes across in the Fireflies' base, that were removed from the sequel and the show, clearly showed the cure wasn't certain. And that there was a power struggle within the group, which made Marlene go along with the procedure post-haste despite of its uncertainty to maintain her position.

They could have at least tried to explain the situation to Joel, instead of kicking him away at gunpoint, and give Ellie a choice instead of stripping away her agency.

With all that in mind, Joel did nothing wrong.

 

[JaxarGT]

cuckman probly trying to get on gamer good side for his next flop game

Has Druckmann had flops?

 

[Negotiator101]

What muddies the water for me when it comes to Abby is that this butcher she had in mind when hunting him came to her help without knowing anything about her. That shows something positive of him and yet it gave her no pause at all and she went on to torture him anyway.

Well that's a compelling argument to make but because the story went that direction and the course of events that followed are intrinsically tied to Joel's demise it puts into question the longevity of the series. Is anyone silly enough to think the series can be carried by Bella Ramsey?

 

[calico]

Now he just has to confirm "Abby was wrong"

 

[Negotiator101]

Has Druckmann had flops?

Should you count cancellations as flops? If not then no I don't think he has but one thing is for certain their next game should have been TLOU3.

 

[samoilaaa]

he said that to ease the boycott on intergalactic

 

[Pedro Motta]

Should you count cancellations as flops? If not then no I don't think he has but one thing is for certain their next game should have been TLOU3.

lol shut the fuck up.

 

[Bartski]

 

[JaxarGT]

Should you count cancellations as flops?

I don't think so. Games get cancelled all the time, it's just that we usually don't know about it, and I wouldn't call that a flop.

Games like Redfall should have been cancelled. It did more harm then good being released.

 

[RJMacready73]

Has it actually been confirmed that Joel is getting 9 iron'd in the HBO series? I mean, if I was HBO and they are making bank on this series, the last thing I'd want is to kill of the main star at the end of S2, I'd want to be keeping Pedro around as long as Pedro wants to stay which would mean rewriting the series moving forward and instead having Abby become a major protagonist coming after the two of them instead of trying the game route and switching out Joel for Abby as the shows main character, I honestly can't see that working

 

[RJMacready73]

1) It wasn't his daughter. His daughter got killed at the start of the game / infection outbreak by the army guy.

2) No, he wasn't right. Again, not his daughter, but a "delivery" that was supposed to cure the infection and save the world. He made the wrong choice and caused the infection to spread, countless people die, as well as the wars and fighting of the desperate trying to survive.

3) Of course, if I had developed a bond with a kid over the course of the journey, I can't say I would've done the right thing either, but that's the point. 1 kids life vs the world's (granted the world in real life can go to fuck) is a horrible decision, but it had to be done.

4) Her death was also going to be completely painless. She was going to be put under anaesthetic, and they were gonna operate from there. So she wouldn't have had a clue that either she was dead or that she potentionally saved the world. If his daughter was actually still alive, do you think he wouldn't save her?

5) The only way Druckmann can say Joel was right, was for allowing them to make a sequel and constant remasters / ports. No cure = more games.

Mate you either don't have kids nor understand the lengths a parent would go, I have a daughter, if I lost my daughter and then formed that same connection to another child I'd burn the world before I'd let her die, so I completely understand Joel's choice

 

[Liopleurodon]

...

Why do I have that feeling that Neil Druckmann is really just a normal, "boring" human person IRL, and 99% stuff about him is exaggerated, and blown out of proportions online simply based on the games he makes...

 

[REDRZA MWS]

Source: https://www.ign.com/articles/the-la...r-whether-or-not-joel-was-right-to-save-ellie

"I believe Joel was right," Druckmann admits. "If I were in Joel's position, I hope I would be able to do what he did to save my daughter."


Another rare victory

Instead he chose to go full liberal regressive woke and have a lesbian kill off the main masculine character. Fuck drukman.

 

[RJMacready73]

Instead he chose to go full liberal regressive woke and have a lesbian kill off the main masculine character. Fuck drukman.

Abby wasn't a lesbian, she was a hard as nails gal out for revenge and got it, Jesus man youse all need to get over it, Joel had to die in order to tell the story that ND wanted to tell, repeat after me.. ITS....A....VIDEOGAME

 

[mayham2199]

The problem never was about establishing if he was right. Some people will say he was (especially those with their own children and understanding how it could feel like to lose a kid and potentially lose another), some that he wasn't. Problem was how Druckmann thought that more people would want to play as Abby immediately after Joel's scene and learn and accept her reasoning. And how awfully some scenes and story bits were handled.

Also - a similar idea for the twist and the revenge story might have worked in some indie series, not when the sequel to an AAA game is supposed to reach millions of customers (who were also already attached to Joel after the first game).

I'm not sure if Druckmann though more people want to play as Abby or didn't care and just made the game he wanted to make. I never had the game spoiler for me but if I did I would be annoyed by the route they took. Luckily I just played it and loved every minute of that game.

The idea worked as far as I'm concerned even in this AAA game. I know tons of people were pissed off but I don't really care. They took a chance and I wish more devs would take chances like this in the AAA space. We can't just leave it to indies to take all the chances just cause their games are cheaper to make. I understand sometimes it wont always work and maybe the next time I'll be annoyed with some AAA game taking chances and ruining a game but I still want them to try.

 

[DForce]

Ellie and Abby expressed remorse over their decision... Joel did not.

JOEL

"If somehow the Lord gave me a second chance at that moment...I would do it all over again."

After finding out why Abby and her friends killed Joel, things begin to change..

ELLIE

Ellie's Journal - Seattle​

"Should I tell Dina & Jessee about this? No. They can't know what Joel did. They won't understand. Do I understand?"​

"I feel like I'm betraying him if I leave. Is it even about him anymore? He'd want me to leave. He'd put the people he loves first."​

Santa Barbara - Ellie​

"I miss Dina. I miss Potato. What am I doing here?"​

ABBY

Before​

Owen - "Isaac's never going to let that many people go off base."
Abby - "He already did
Owen - "Bullshit."
Abby - "Who's more about justice than Isaac?"

​

Abby- "You don't think Joel deserved what he got?"
Mel - "I think he deserved worse, I just...I just wish I didn't take part in it.
Abby - "I get it. What kind of person can do that, right?"

After
​

Lev - "Then what are you doing here? Why did you come back for us?"
Abby - "Guilt."
Lev - "Of what? You don't owe us anything"
Abby - "I just...needed to lighten the load a bit."

Lev - "I hear he tortures people."
Abby - "Let's not talk about this now."
Lev - "Okay."
Lev - "Have you ever tortured people?"
Abby - "Lev. Let's focus on getting out of here."

Yara - "I don't know how to thank you
Abby - "You don't need to. I did it for me."

Yara - "Me's wrong, you know. You're a good person."
Abby - "You don't know me."

Yara - "Abby? Why are you helping us?"
Abby - "Lev asked me the same thing. I guess...You don't deserve this. But also...I needed to. I had to."

This was confirmed by Neil.

Finally protecting Lev and Yara. That becomes her life purpose, that becomes her live purpose. Now she's actually doing something meaningful again where she thought she couldn't, and that's she goes in a very similar arc to Joel which is like a redemption arc of like can you come back from committing such a horrific act.

 

[calico]

Joel might have done things he needs to feel remorse / seek redemption for, but killing a kidnapper in the course of rescuing Ellie isn't one of them.

Abby is right to feel remorse for murdering him for that.