Support NeoGAF

[Kdad]

For those looking for more plot holes....please join me here.
#Teamreal

 

[tommib]

I find it endearing that people make up all these scenarios in their heads so that Joel doesn’t get killed. It’s sweet.

But no cuteness survives a golf club.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I find it endearing that people make up all these scenarios in their heads so that Joel doesn’t get killed. It’s sweet.

But no cuteness survives a golf club.

I still wish he wasn't killed, but I understand it for the plot of the story and the tone they were going with in this depressing ass arch of Part 2.

 

[SLB1904]

Watched that scene 15 times, and it always is amazing that people still try and defend it. Yes, people survive gunshot wounds with immediate medical attention, trained medical staff, and proper supplies, probably need blood too. Again, anyone defending that scene is only proving that you refuse to talk sensibly about the game, and just want to defend it at all costs. It is a nonsense sequence of events, and nothing you say changes that.

i know at at least 3 people that blew their faces off without killing themselves. so you are full of shit. is more common than you think

 

[onQ123]

Sadly they locked my thread now I can't add it to the list https://www.neogaf.com/threads/who-...d-be-selling-10-15-20-million-copies.1622375/

 

[DeepSpace5D]

Where I was talking about lifetime sakes? I said the original reached 8 million in 15 months, and to a smaller userbase.

If we are going by the 15-month mark as a comparison between the two, there should probably be some consideration to the fact that the original released the Left Behind DLC 8 months after release. This is the type of thing that would renew interest and result in a nice bump to the sales after 8 months on the market.

Then at 13 months came the PS4 remastered port, which would have no doubt caused another bump in sales leading up to the 15 month mark cutoff that you’ve chosen to compare them at.

The sequel received neither of these, just a free patch for PS5 users. If the post launch support for the sequel had been the same as the original, it could only have increased the sales up to this point.

 

[Ulysses 31]

I'm not sure what else was needed. Contrivances aside its a near perfect trap, who's going to expect the armed person who's just helped you fight off and escape from a horde of infected in a blizzard to turn on you in a blink of an eye, based on the revelation of your first names alone? Not to mention them being an organized and highly motivated paramilitary unit with such a singular purpose.

More than that though, if you are going to give a pass to the contrivances in the set-up, what's the basis of your criticism? The specifics of how the ambush scene was staged, or that Joel could ever allow himself to be ambushed? Because if the former is true, its a mild complaint more about direction than writing, and if the latter I don't think that's a reasonable criticism in the context of the fiction.

In post #516 I go over re-write where the brothers avoid being surrounded when the fighting starts and Tommy doesn't reveal Joel's name. (Tommy's name still got revealed earlier to Abby when they were fighting off the horde.)

My main point of criticism is that the brothers aren't being cautious enough when facing an armed group they don't know much about and are outnumbered by. They still lose ultimately but now it's not because they make easily avoidable mistakes. They do all the right things as people in their position and experience should but the tragedy is that doing all the right things doesn't always mean a good outcome for you.

As I mentioned in a previous post, its kinda the flaw with having it as part of the cold open. There's pacing considerations due to the need to get to the point and kick off the meat of the story asap which preclude foreshadowing everything down to the tiniest detail.
I take your point and I do agree it would be desirable to more firmly shade in changes in Joel's mindset and preoccupations, but I don't find it that critical. The contrivance of the whole scenario is such that it kinda absolves the character(s) of their errors.

As written, the whole confrontation comes out-of-the-blue for all concerned (WLF group included) which is why the whole thing ends up being so sloppy and chaotic.

It still could've been fixed somewhat if later in the game we got some flashbacks of Joel where he's visibly distracted or makes small mistakes carrying out his duties, either because of Ellie or he's gotten softer or losing his survival edge.

 

[Topher]

Let's actually go over some of the complete nonsense that you've tried to argue.


Coincidences are not plot holes. You can call it far fetched, sure. But in order for it to be a plot hole, it needs to be a question that remains unanswered OR something that directly contradicts a fact previously established with no explanation or reason why this has changed.



Inconsistency in human beings is not a plot hole. It can be a misread of the situation, a misread of character. A slip up after a stressful situations which they had just been here. There's also nothing to support this argument that Joel and Tommy would NEVER EVER give their names to anyone. Even if you were to consider all of this "unlikely", which is entirely subjective, then that STILL won't make it a plot hole because that would only be the case if it was impossible.


Again, Unlikely/low odds of happening are not plot holes. At best you could argue that its an unrealistic representation, which differs from a plot hole.


Out of all your points, I'm sorry but this is by far the dumbest one. Morality is NOT a plot hole, especially not in a game that is all about morality not being black and white.


Same as above, morality questioning is certainly not a plothole.


The rest of your post is just more "I think this is unlikely, therefore it is a plothole" which shows that have a severe lack of understanding of what a plothole really is.


I suggest you take your own advice. The fact that you think "coincidence = plothole" shows that you have an infantile understanding of literature.

What really gets me about all this is the massive amount of effort people who hate this game put into compiling every negative point they can come up with. If I really hate a game the last thing I want to do is to study the damn game ad nauseum like some in this thread. We've got a guy here admitting he watched a single scene of a guy getting shot 15 times for crying out loud. Who the hell does that?

 

[FunkMiller]

What really gets me about all this is the massive amount of effort people who hate this game put into compiling every negative point they can come up with. If I really hate a game the last thing I want to do is to study the damn game ad nauseum like some in this thread. We've got a guy here admitting he watched a single scene of a guy getting shot 15 times for crying out loud. Who the hell does that?

Well, as a stab at it, I’d have to say it’s because they disapprove of the politics in a game, but can’t talk about the politics in the game, so leans on other perceived negative aspects as a proxy for what they really want to talk about.

 

[Topher]

Well, as a stab at it, I’d have to say it’s because they disapprove of the politics in a game, but can’t talk about the politics in the game, so leans on other perceived negative aspects as a proxy for what they really want to talk about.

I agree. I think this is really all about politics.

 

[Ulysses 31]

"Plot holes" or narrative inconsistencies can DEFINITELY be a feature.

Do you have an example of this?

Closest thing I can think of is when you got an unreliable narrator but that's not the case with TLOU.

 

[elco]

Well, as a stab at it, I’d have to say it’s because they disapprove of the politics in a game, but can’t talk about the politics in the game, so leans on other perceived negative aspects as a proxy for what they really want to talk about.

Yup, as one of those people who just wants to consume a game for entertainment, I think you're probably right on the mark here.

 

[Neff]

Abby was an intentionally unlikable character. Which is fine as part of the plot.

And yet Joel gets a pass for some reason despite doing way worse stuff.

 

[Alebrije]

This imagen gives The División vives and this would be great for Factions. A big open city and surroundings with survival quests

 

[Rykan]

I agree. I think this is really all about politics.

That is really what it is. You'll see some people try to dance around the subjects by listing some other things they don't like but the post always ends up with "oh and I didn't like the SJW stuff".

This game has had a massive target on its back with an enormous hate campaign long before the game even came out when it was "leaked" that joel would be killed off by a transgendered woman. People will claim that it is "divisive" and therefore its bad but the reality is that even 2 years after its release, a TLOU2 thread will still easily hit 15 pages. The game still leads to a lot of discussion and interest in the game remains high. What other game released in 2020 can say that?

 

[assurdum]

I think TLoU2 is really a good game. But the story.... just no.no.no. Too much useless overdrama without any relevant events in his universe. I want to see a story full of interesting narrative contents not a lesson of pretestious morality.

 

[Topher]

That is really what it is. You'll see some people try to dance around the subjects by listing some other things they don't like but the post always ends up with "oh and I didn't like the SJW stuff".

This game has had a massive target on its back with an enormous hate campaign long before the game even came out when it was "leaked" that joel would be killed off by a transgendered woman. People will claim that it is "divisive" and therefore its bad but the reality is that even 2 years after its release, a TLOU2 thread will still easily hit 15 pages. The game still leads to a lot of discussion and interest in the game remains high. What other game released in 2020 can say that?

And it is weird because the SJW aspects are not even the focal point of the story. But the fact those elements merely exist are enough to get folks unhinged apparently. I just find that bizarre.

 

[3liteDragon]

Please don't be cross-gen.

Most likely will be, PS4, PS5 & PC.

 

[Lognor]

Yes, inconsistent character development and actions IS a plot hole, by definition. And anyone who pretends the Tommy getting shot in the head scene is not a plot hole is only proving their level of delusion about TLOU2.

I'm not sure if it's a plot hole and i haven't played tlou2 but what it is is bad writing, it sounds like. If you had this type of inconsistent character development in a book it would be called out as bad writing. If the creators of tlou2 want their compared to great works of fiction then they gotta tighten up that writing. Maybe it's good writing for a video game, but as a piece of media maybe not so much. I haven't played the game though. Just trying to follow the thread and the critiques.

 

[FunkMiller]

Yup, as one of those people who just wants to consume a game for entertainment, I think you're probably right on the mark here.

I think maybe you’d not be quite so bothered if the politics aligned with your own?

And I don’t mean that to sound snarky.

Strong politics in a piece of entertainment can be confrontational for anyone, across the social spectrum.

The creators of said entertainment need to appreciate this and accept it, as much as the consumer needs to accept that creator’s right to put what they want in their narrative - and to not consume it, or spend their time criticising it, purely for those elements.

 

[Dust-by-Monday]

TLOU 2 received an update on PS5. It makes no sense to remake TLOU2 already when TLOU1 will benefit much more from an upgrade. You can get away with a remake of a 9 year old game and charge 70$ for it. Not for a game that came out two years ago and already has PS5 enhancements.

Slow loading, texture pop in, no 4K mode. No adaptive triggers or haptics. No VRR, no 40Hz mode. There are lots of reasons to port it to PS5

 

[Topher]

I haven't played the game though. Just trying to follow the thread and the critiques.

 

[Rykan]

Slow loading, texture pop in, no 4K mode. No adaptive triggers or haptics. No VRR, no 40Hz mode. There are lots of reasons to port it to PS5

Sure, but there's no way that they can ask 70$ for it again, like they can with a remake of the first one which will be a much larger jump.

 

[Lupin25]

And it is weird because the SJW aspects are not even the focal point of the story. But the fact those elements merely exist are enough to get folks unhinged apparently. I just find that bizarre.

Which proves exactly why Sony will continue to develop games with those narratives in mind. Look at the attention it received.

People who hated the game, bombarded it…

Which only gave rise to more publicity and an even wider audience.

 

[elco]

I think maybe you’d not be quite so bothered if the politics aligned with your own?

And I don’t mean that to sound snarky.

Strong politics in a piece of entertainment can be confrontational for anyone, across the social spectrum.

The creators of said entertainment need to appreciate this and accept it, as much as the consumer needs to accept that creator’s right to put what they want in their narrative.

Maybe. If it was overtly political to the point it took away from the experience, whether I disagreed with the position or not, I wouldn't like it. But since everything has been politicized these days, the fact that the game includes firearms could be considered political if you reach far enough.

Personally I didn't like the obvious and overt agenda in TLOU2, and will consider that's before purchasing another ND game.

 

[Alebrije]

TLOU 2 is a good game , it's main problem are they useless lateral stories thar do not add value like the one of the kid that left the island and the last part of the game. Gameplay is great but sometimes its a long tired game. I do not care about politics or overdrama plot , it's a simple videogame not a real life situation.

 

[Rykan]

I think maybe you’d not be quite so bothered if the politics aligned with your own?

And I don’t mean that to sound snarky.

Strong politics in a piece of entertainment can be confrontational for anyone, across the social spectrum.

The creators of said entertainment need to appreciate this and accept it, as much as the consumer needs to accept that creator’s right to put what they want in their narrative - and to not consume it, or spend their time criticising it, purely for those elements.

But the thing is that the last of us 2 isn't really a political game. It can be considered "progressive" in the sense that it has a wider representation of characters, but it's not the focus of the game and the game doesn't really make a political statement about any of it.

 

[The Fartist]

Post-appocalyptic SF 'bout to go CRAZY!

 

[Majormaxxx]

-- Joel, explaining to the fireflies why he is blasting their skulls

TEAM JOEL AND ELLIE VS THE WORLD

 

[Topher]

I think maybe you’d not be quite so bothered if the politics aligned with your own?

And I don’t mean that to sound snarky.

Strong politics in a piece of entertainment can be confrontational for anyone, across the social spectrum.

The creators of said entertainment need to appreciate this and accept it, as much as the consumer needs to accept that creator’s right to put what they want in their narrative - and to not consume it, or spend their time criticising it, purely for those elements.

I think it really depends on how the controversial topics are handled. Personally, if any story has a heavy-handed preachy message with tons of cringe hyperbole then I'm not going to be interested in it at all regardless of what side of the political spectrum it originates from. My personal politics don't really line up with the SJW crowd, but I didn't find myself being offended by those elements in TLOU 2. It wasn't the crux of the story nor was it constantly in my face. If I felt I was being bombarded with rhetoric I would not have finished the game. Bottom line, imo, is that people need to realize that enjoying a game does not require endorsing whatever message the game has.

 

[Neff]

And it is weird because the SJW aspects are not even the focal point of the story.

Pretty much. The game exists in Druckmann's political world but isn't driven by it. And what's more, to his credit he doesn't preach. He's perfectly happy to show the failings of his characters who are on the side of political correctness and portray them as unpleasant, flawed people who are held accountable for their actions, sometimes disastrously.

And yet, you still have guys out there fighting the war from their remote trenches, seemingly unaware that Abby isn't even trans, or that Lev doesn't kill his mom because she's transphobic. The fact that people are more willing to buy into rumour than make up their own minds based on objective fact is telling.

And anyone who pretends the Tommy getting shot in the head scene is not a plot hole is only proving their level of delusion about TLOU2.

Look up Phineas Gage. The human body can take some shit.

 

[Wohc]

They don't on the Playstation Store, that's the point, they're all still full price now even after over a year since release in the case of Returnal and Ratchet. Every now and then there is a sale.

In terms of physical sales Amazon still sells way more copies than these little retailers. It's not about cleverness, it's about reach.

Physical sales are on the decline and Covid has just sped that up. Even in the year or so since since that article was released I bet a higher proportion of games have been sold digitally, because physical releases and sales are becoming more niche (Sony's 2020 fiscal year results showed a majority of PlayStation full game sales were coming as digital downloads).

We're going in circles, i leave it like that.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I think it really depends on how the controversial topics are handled. Personally, if any story has a heavy-handed preachy message with tons of cringe hyperbole then I'm not going to be interested in it at all regardless of what side of the political spectrum it originates from. My personal politics don't really line up with the SJW crowd, but I didn't find myself being offended by those elements in TLOU 2. It wasn't the crux of the story nor was it constantly in my face. If I felt I was being bombarded with rhetoric I would not have finished the game. Bottom line, imo, is that people need to realize that enjoying a game does not require endorsing whatever message the game has.

 

[Topher]

Nautilus dude.......you are going nuts with the emojis....

 

[VinnyMac]

Lol at next year no thanks

 

[skit_data]

I really wonder when Factions will release, I was under the assumption it would be part of the TLOU P1 Remake because it would’ve been a compelling argument for the $70 pricetag.

 

[EruditeHobo]

Do you have an example of this?

Closest thing I can think of is when you got an unreliable narrator but that's not the case with TLOU.

It was brought up in this exact thread already, or at least alluded to... Jurassic Park is one of the best popcorn movies ever made, but it has a number of direct "issues" by the definitions being used here. It in fact has directly contradictory geography in the T-Rex paddock in the rain scene; it features a completely, and for no explained/"logical" reason, disappearing level ground on the other side of the fence.

But it doesn't actually matter other than picking nits... because having correct geography makes the scene less exciting, puts the characters in less danger, and is less cinematically dynamic. This wasn't a "mistake"... it was a deliberate choice by story tellers to service the story they were telling in that moment, and "fixing" this "mistake" would make their story not better, but worse. That is a "plot hole" that services the story, improves it, and is purposeful.

What always gets lost in these dumb discussions is the reality that the only thing that truly matters is purpose of a narrative. All stories are contrived, especially genre stories like what we're talking about here. Ignoring the overall context of a scene and saying "Joel & Tommy shouldn't have told the group their names!" is willful ignorance of the context and entire POINT of the story up to that point.

And that's just not a "plot hole" worth mentioning. It's you having some weird ax to grind and not taking the story for what it is. Just like your whole point in one of these threads about how hard it would be for the fireflies to get a large-scale vaccine into production and distributed... it literally doesn't matter. You thinking it matters doesn't make it so, the game/story is telling you that. But you've chosen to not listen. Which is your right! But trying to frame that as an objective narrative mistake is just incorrect.

 

[EruditeHobo]

This imagen gives The División vives and this would be great for Factions. A big open city and surroundings with survival quests

A Division-esque game, with TLOU-style infected as PVE enemies & bosses, and making sure that is infused with ND's storytelling nous, would be the dream... That would probably threaten to be one of my favorite games of all time. Hopefully that's what they are going for.

 

[ksdixon]

I shoulda read your take skelterz before I wrote mine. All we've gotten about this game is conflicting info. First it's a bundle in with the new remaster, next its a seriously ambitious multi player game that will have story elements.

Then it's a standalone game that's gonna be small in scope. Like wtf is going on. I don't play a ton of multi player games and the slow pace and action of this game is up my alley.

Sucks gotta wait another year. How about you don't remake the game that was just remastered? Just so you can have it ready for the show? which is also scant on info

I almost feel like they've retro fitted it into a co-op story game the way they're going on. It wont be simillar to Factions 1 anymore, unless those game modes/rulesets are dedicated joinable missions in the PVE overworld, like Division?

 

[lughnasadh123]

I wish I could fail as spectacularly as TLOU II has.

 

[Ulysses 31]

It was brought up in this exact thread already, or at least alluded to... Jurassic Park is one of the best popcorn movies ever made, but it has a number of direct "issues" by the definitions being used here. It in fact has a directly contradictory geography in the T-Rex paddock in the rain scene. But it doesn't actually matter other than picking nits, because having correct geography makes the scene less exciting, puts the characters in less danger, and is less cinematically dynamic. This wasn't a "mistake", it was a deliberate choice by story tellers to service the story they were telling. And "fixing" this "mistake" would make their story not better, but worse.

That seems more like a stylistic issue. You say it yourself that it's a nitpick so it's something small and doesn't affect the plot.

What always gets lost in these dumb discussions is the reality that the only thing that truly matters is purpose of a narrative. All stories are contrived, especially genre stories like what we're talking about here. Ignoring the overall context of a scene and saying "Joel & Tommy shouldn't have told the group their names!" is willful ignorance of the context and entire POINT of the story up to that point.

IMO it undermines/distracts from the point of the narrative if you have characters act out of character to move the plot in a certain direction, and here Tommy and Joel revealing their names has huge consequences for the plot so it's not a nitpick.

And that's just not a "plot hole" worth mentioning. It's you having some weird ax to grind and not taking the story for what it is. Just like your whole point in one of these threads about how hard it would be for the fireflies to get a large-scale vaccine into production and distributed... it literally doesn't matter. You thinking it matters doesn't make it so, the game/story is telling you that. But you've chosen to not listen. Which is your right! But trying to frame that as an objective narrative mistake is just incorrect.

That one should be worth mentioning, it's the basis for one of the characters dying.(big effect on the plot)

The game story teller has a narrative he wants to sell to the players and in order to do that more effectively, things like plots holes, bad/sloppy writing and character inconsistencies should be avoided. Otherwise players might have trouble buying what being sold.

Sure you can say the game is trying to present different world views that come into conflict and is the price worth paying for the side you prefer but for me that is quickly resolved with how one side behaves and what's been shown of them so far.

The fireflies may or may not have the means to cure the world and it may not be the main story point to you, they would've demanded Ellie's death. Players usually don't like protagonists dying for nothing so the fact that we don't know if the Fireflies can come through is a big issue if you want to present their side as another "valid/relatable" point of view.

 

[Maxwell Jacob Friedman]

Human beings.You know, the ones you work and live with. Not aliens and green people like Druckmann.

Dude thinks his sources have credibility but he dont have any himself, back to the bushes for you. Homie cant even link a youtube video or credible source that says the game is bad lol

Insert, look it up yourself text here

 

[Maxwell Jacob Friedman]

Sony probably wants to distance themselves from TLOU 2 as much as possible, and want people to focus on TLOU which was universally loved.

Distance themselves from a 10 million plus seller, boy Id hate you to be the leader of a major company and distance from a product that has over 10 million units sold

 

[Exede]

I wonder how many of this 10 million will buy Tlou 3...

 

[Varteras]

And yet Joel gets a pass for some reason despite doing way worse stuff.

A little late but SPOILERS for TLOU, TLOU 2, and God of War in this post for anyone wanting to avoid them.

As players, we felt for Joel because we watched him interacting with his daughter lovingly mere minutes before she was shot and died right in his arms. That was our very first introduction to Joel. We saw him fight to keep a little girl safe throughout an entire game who, in many ways, was slowly becoming his own daughter. Then at the end, we watched him make the decision to save her life instead of be killed just for a chance at a cure. Something a father or someone who loves her wouldn't be able to just let happen, no matter what the reason. We watched him attempt to befriend two brothers despite his lack of trust in people. We also liked Ellie, who clearly loved Joel. So, as players and people who had many hours of experiences with them, we were emotionally invested in them and their success. An attachment was developed. Which was intentional.

Then in this second game we're introduced to Abby. She's shown to have a chip on her shoulder and risk her own friends and comrades for a shot at revenge. Revenge against a man that many players endeared themselves to and just watched trying to interact with the teenage girl he loves as a father. A man who risked everything to protect and save her. That was our introduction to Abby. Sure, we know who her dad is. And we don't care. Because he was a nobody to us in that original story. He was some doctor who was going to carve a healthy young girl up for a chance at a cure. We were given very little reason to attach ourselves to Abby and her own feelings. Her desires. And we were forced to play as her knowing her goal was to kill someone we liked. For anyone with an emotional investment in Joel and Ellie, which was many people, we grudgingly watched ourselves help her achieve her goal and do so right in front of Ellie, the girl he saved. Dislike of her would be compounded for every shitty thing she did, including fucking her friend's man.

Human beings are not robots. We don't act or react on cold logic. We develop attachments and become emotionally invested in things. And yes, that means we give passes to people for doing shitty things depending on how much we like them. If my sister hit and killed someone with her car on accident, I would find every excuse to defend her, regardless of the truth. I would hope that she just gets off as lightly as possible. If someone I don't know killed my sister the same way, I wouldn't be anywhere near as forgiving. That's human nature. Imagine, for some reason, I'm forced to help this person drive to where my sister is and watch as they run her over, even accidentally. Whatever force made me do that will have my ire and disgust and I'm still not going to be fond of the person who was behind the wheel.

Just like in God of War. We know what Kratos did was, ultimately, the right call. Killing Baldur not only spared Freya's life, who was Baldur's own mother, but it also meant Baldur wouldn't continue attacking them ever again. To us, that not only made sense but we were emotionally invested in Kratos and Atreus, so even if one could argue that we should have just respected Freya's wishes instead of killing her son in front of her, we didn't care. Baldur was a threat to characters we had more experiences with and grew more fond of, and he was clearly twisted and out of his mind. Kratos has done many shitty things too, but we just spent tens of hours watching him try to be a better man and a good father. Freya, now, wants to kill Kratos and, in her grief, who knows if she'll try to kill Atreus just to hurt Kratos the way he hurt her. Even though Atreus wasn't responsible and the moment he made Baldur vulnerable again was in self-defense.

We understand Freya's motivations for wanting to kill Kratos. A mother watched her son get killed in front of her by people she helped. But we don't care. We're not nearly as attached to her and the call Kratos made was just as much to protect themselves as it was to protect her. We know this. If we're forced to play as Freya and kill Kratos or Atreus in the next game, you can expect backlash from that as well. And that's even considering that Freya was made way more likable from the start and only became the way she is now at the very end of the game. A stark contrast to how we were introduced to Abby. Though that also means it won't be nearly the same because we were actually made to like Freya early on.

I'm not saying the game was bad or undeserving of its success. Just that there are psychological reasons why many people hated playing as Abby and they're reasons that very much line up with human nature. If it was the developers' intention to make us feel this way, which it sounds like it very much was, then they succeeded in spades. That also comes with a price, unfortunately. But at the end of the day, that price doesn't seem to be high enough at all because the game sold very well and discussions of this game happen in heated ways years later. It's a success, through and through. You can't look at the awards, critical reception, sales, and ongoing discourse surrounding it and think otherwise without looking like you simply refuse to accept reality.

 

[DForce]

Watched that scene 15 times, and it always is amazing that people still try and defend it. Yes, people survive gunshot wounds with immediate medical attention, trained medical staff, and proper supplies, probably need blood too. Again, anyone defending that scene is only proving that you refuse to talk sensibly about the game, and just want to defend it at all costs. It is a nonsense sequence of events, and nothing you say changes that.

You watched this scene 15 times and you didn't know he was NOT shot in the back of his head?


Zygomatic Bone
"the bone that forms the prominent part of the cheek and the outer side of the eye socket."


Losing an eye doesn't mean you need expert medical attention, nor does it mean that you need blood. If this were true, then every single story before the 18th century would have plot holes. They didn't have the medical attention that we have today, which throws your entire argument out of the window.

Again, anyone defending that scene is only proving that you refuse to talk sensibly about the game

You keep saying, "anyone who defends that."

You don't have a good understanding of the story and that's your main problem. You're unable to accept any other explanation because you want to believe that it has bad writing.

 

[Ulysses 31]

You watched this scene 15 times and you didn't know he was NOT shot in the back of his head?


Zygomatic Bone
"the bone that forms the prominent part of the cheek and the outer side of the eye socket."


Losing an eye doesn't mean you need expert medical attention, nor does it mean that you need blood. If this were true, then every single story before the 18th century would have plot holes. They didn't have the medical attention that we have today, which throws your entire argument out of the window.

Bro, look at how much blood he's lost in just a fraction of a second, the dude needs medical attention.

 

[EruditeHobo]

That seems more like a stylistic issue. You say it yourself that it's a nitpick so it's something small and doesn't affect the plot.

LOL no, it's not a "stylistic issue". It's a direct logical negation regarding what was quite clearly presented as the geography of the paddock. That in and of itself -- the unambiguousness with which the contradiction is displayed in the movie -- is much "worse" than anything you're talking about re: the vaccine, or what the other guy says about Joel & Tommy not being suspicious enough to protect their identities.

Someone not understanding the characters over multiple posts about this game speaks for itself, so many of the critics are in no credible position to try to call out someone "acting out of character". Some of the other criticisms I have outright agreed with, like the game's pacing for one thing... but I'm not going round and round with you on this, because we have already done that quite a bit in past threads. So please revisit our previous arguments if you want. Other than that we will have to agree to very much disagree.

 

[shaddam]

I really hope the executions will be even more goreful then in the factions dlc. The shotgun makes me happy every time

 

[Hezekiah]

We're going in circles, i leave it like that.

Lol, it's think it's pretty clear - sales figures are meaningful if the majority of sales are concluded at full price, or close to full price which tends to be the case for Sony games, and all well-received titles.

That's really it.