LET YOUR "GOOD" CHARACTERS DO BAD THINGS DAMNIT

[@Bricky]

Go to audible.com/Bricky or text "Bricky" to 500-500 especially if you want to listen to the 8th legion flay people

[@mota478]

Bricky I watched your RA3 and C&C KW review and I love it. I was hoping if you make a review of C&C Generals in the Future.

[@JJBlitz-sp3bi]

You’re reminding me of your hatred of Ashley from ME with this discussion :)

[@rorycauchi7006]

Bricky u gamer where is my gock darn review of huntshowdown

[@stevenstringfellow5371]

Very good video thank u 4 saying and speaking the truth

[@zacharysantiago6507]

Hay can we get something for people who already have memberships with Audible? Id love to support you that way.

[@NazarZh]

Bricky: "Allow the characters to do bad things." Spec Ops The Line: "Done, now try to live with it."

[@Goop_3]

I saw the title of the video and thought the same damn thing

[@Demonicnemesis]

Cpt. Sisko: So I will learn to live with it... Because I can live with it... I can live with it...

[@AHappyBlackGuy]

“Do you feel like a hero yet?”

[@thehippie3610]

I have heard of it, but don't wanna play it lol

[@Anothergingerman]

@@AHappyBlackGuy that line still sticks with me to this day, what a game.

[@Raycevick]

Thank you! I sometimes want to lose my shit when listening to people go on and on about a character's morality.

[@balintnemes6774]

Can we get a hint on the next videoessay's topic? Pretty please?

[@dscorpio1626]

Who would u say is ur personal favorite “bad” character?

[@firstlast9846]

I used to LOVE Rick Grimes in TWD Season 5-6 where he did some villainous / questionable things.. but problem is he was never pulled up on his bullshit decisions and actions.

[@MissionControl-]

@@firstlast9846 That was literally my least favorite time for Rick as a character. lol

[@GentlemensClubHolyEdition]

Honestly I think it's fun to talk about a characters morality but when people try to use their own morals to explain why a character does a thing, yeah it's really dumb

[@PulseBladeenjoyer]

“If Ellie’s operating room was centered in the Jedi temple Anakin would look like Ghandi.” I was crying for five twenty minutes straight after hearing this. Thank you.

[@Rawnblade13]

I mean, I doubt it. He's still murdering defenseless children. No amount of justification excuses that. xD

[@jehova131]

I was honestly laughing but completely agreeing

[@Diegoshadow85]

ur trded theb

[@Mightylcanis]

@@Rawnblade13 A justified homicide is by definition not murder. I'm not saying that killing children can or can't ever be justified.

[@r31n0ut]

not true. murder is an UNLAWFUL killing, not an unjustified one. So Anakin killing the younglings was technically not murder since the Jedi had been declared enemies of the state and Palpatine had ordered Anakin to do it. So it wasn't unlawful. It was very much unjustified though. Which actually makes it tricky to say if what Joel did was technically murder. Is something unlawful if there are no laws to regulate it?

[@TheXenomorphwarrior]

As both a father and a crayon eating veteran morals don’t even come into it where your kids’ literal lives are concerned as far as thought process. I both believe and understand where Joel is coming from in the last of us.

[@themostmagicskeleton273]

Based. I’m calling it based.

[@harryg9150]

Joel just saw the fact that humanity might not be worth saving if as soon as things go to shit people resort to murder and rape. It’s a perfectly reasonable and based decision that Joel made.

[@The_Sleepiest_Socialist]

@@harryg9150 if so, it was probably completely subconscious. Besides, if you want to say he thought about it, you might as well say he realized it would never even work.

[@denkerbosu3551]

@@The_Sleepiest_Socialist the entire 1st game kept the fireflies as a morally ambiguous, shady faction.

[@The_Sleepiest_Socialist]

@@denkerbosu3551 yeah, but when was that in question? I don’t think that’s the exact thought that ran through his head. Besides, most people in that universe are probably what would be considered morally ambiguous.

[@usxldcom7543]

I want Bricky to do bad things

[@ofibao8212]

Do bad things to you?

[@yannispirou101]

That's sus ඞ

[@zeekly4135]

sus

[@RyanC__]

Oh my

[@jamalisujang2712]

Drawing it would do you good.

[@GiRR007]

Just wanted to say, something being justified doesn't mean it has to be morally right.

[@ProfX501]

@Tig Black Um, no. To justify something is to show that it is simply reasonable. Not necessarily just

[@Ravenlord56]

@@ProfX501 Actually, it comes from "justus" (just) and "facere" (to make). Something can be understandable without being justified, and something can be both without being good. Is Joel understandable in his actions ? Yes. Is he justified ? In his own mind, probably. To us ? That's debatable. Is it good ? No.

[@ProfX501]

@@Ravenlord56 Etymology and modern definitions are a few thousand years removed from each other. Differences are common.

[@CorwinTheOneAndOnly]

You're all looking for the word "reasonable". Using reason (logic), it makes sense. Justified is definitely a bit more moral in connotation.

[@ProfX501]

@@CorwinTheOneAndOnly Have you ever used a dictionary in your life

[@_Devil]

Arthur Morgan is a great example. I loved him as a character and I very much often found myself rooting for him during fights and feeling bad for him when he gets melancholy, but he's still an outlaw criminal who ends up hurting innocent people sometimes. Yet despite that, I didnt find myself having super conflicted moments with some of the things Arthur did. Despite being a Bad Guy, he was still a good man.

[@orangutansoup94]

Yes

[@miniverse2002]

As important as it is to the plot the set of money lending missions at the start of the game is quite jarring for Arthur's character if you're playing him in high honor though. Maybe there's a bit of bark to it but no doubt there's a lot of bite in there too.

[@eheh3723]

Marston is this way too. The ease that Marston has with killing others being juxtaposed against his love for his son and hope that Jack never becomes the man Marston is so compelling

[@eheh3723]

@Professional Idiot just because you are "bad guy", doesn't mean you have to be bad guy

[@jordanpax9735]

@Professional Idiot I'm pretty sure ppl love this trope because we all want to believe that deep down despite the mistakes we've made we're all still good. So when we see characters like that we relate with them better

[@kip_c]

The ENTIRE arc of Joel is that he was never going to let what happened to him happen ever again.

[@lordyeetus6317]

Bang on - it's frustrating because it feels SO CLEARLY spelled out.

[@Anonymous-st3gy]

And because he didn't care he had to face the consequences in part 2 ......😔

[@TSEDLE333]

@@Anonymous-st3gy Yeah. Exactly this. When he finally was becoming human again, and not he monster/shell of a human survived his daughter he let his guard down. The last remains of monster Joel killed the fireflys at the end of TLoU...the nealy human Joel died for his choices in TLoU2.

[@quab5738]

@@Anonymous-st3gy And then they undermined the whole game by refusing to let Ellie do what makes sense, and have her inexplicably spare the one person she has every reason to want dead.

[@Italianchef26]

@@quab5738 It would've made more sense to give the player the choice to go through that last chapter or not. Just make me choose: do I go after Abby to kill her regardless of the consequences or do I leave the past behind and try to move on with my life because at the end of the day I have a wife, a kid to raise and, all things considered, a pretty decent life? I didn't want to go after Abby a second time, I didn't need those extra 2 hours to understand that. That part really made me go "Damn, I really don't feel like playing through this. This feels forced"

[@chimeraelite]

No but seriously holy shit. I loved Joel for exactly this reason. Same with most of my other fav characters

[@Kaunte]

My problem with the ending is I disagree with Joel's decision, but I'm the one who is controlling him and that creates a kind of dissonance that's hard to swallow. But if I was just passively watching the story play out in a film I would probably love it

[@denkerbosu3551]

@@Kaunte you need to understand Joel's a character of his own. Not every game has to be an RPG. Even so, the 1st game gave you plenty of reason to think the fireflies deserved the lead.

[@MrHeiska01]

@@Kaunte I like the ending of TLoU1 because it was Joels decision based on 20 years of survival history in that world. Joel knows better than the player. I also hate ending of TLoU2 because Ellei is still young and lacks Joel's knowledge and experience to make decisions over the player.

[@clintbeastwood5116]

@@Kaunte Joel did nothing wrong.

[@Kaunte]

@@denkerbosu3551 I understand his character and I get why he did what I did. Like I said I would have loved it if it was a film but it doesn't work in this interactive medium. There are games like Spec ops the line or Telltales Walking Dead that actually made me choose to morally bad things and not just force it against my will.

[@ji_ji_]

It's partly about a character living consistent with the conditions they've set for themselves. Walter White can be a good and villainous character because his condition is that: *he wants to take care of his family* . His descent from morally good to villainous, is highlighted by his life while being morally "good" ultimately fail to satisfy his condition. Joel can be a horrible persons after losing his daughter because he lost his condition; *to protect his daughter* . He later projects daughterhood onto Ellie ,the game sets up for him to regain that condition once lost ,which leads to the events he would do to never lose that condition again. Andrew Stanton has a whole TED talk about this.

[@citizenlame246]

But see....Walter White did not want to take care of his family. He wanted to be a big bad man. That was like the whole point, he was never a good guy, he was ALWAYS Heisenberg. Not that I'm disagreeing with the point you're making, just that Walter White is a bad example because he is very much meant to be the villain of his own story.

[@ji_ji_]

@@citizenlame246 I never said a character couldn't have multiple conditions , Walter being a "big shot" doesnt contradict him wanting to take care of his family , it's a balancing act. in fact some of the more well paced stories show a characters hierarchy of conditions being :questioned , reinforced or even broken as the story progresses.

[@citizenlame246]

@@ji_ji_ Well I more meant from the narrative's point of view, not literally Walter White's. Walter's intent might have been to take care of his family, but the story from the beginning showed that what Walter really wanted was to be the big man in charge. This is proven when he turns down his super rich friends offer to pay for all his medical expenses, something he would absolutely have accepted if all he wanted to do was take care of his family. Every choice he made was for selfish reasons.. The story wanted to show he was not a good person, and what happens when someone like that decides to do the wrong thing. Though I admit I'm probably arguing about something different from the point you're trying to make; i don't disagree that characters can be nuanced and be the "good guy" while also making morally dubious decisions, it all comes down to what the story is trying to say.

[@Breakingfasst88]

You see, that was never his “condition.” Walter was already caring for his family. He had a perfectly fine job, a great family who belittles him from time to time but respect his best trait “intelligence” and friends who would offer so much for him (Elliot and Gretchen). It was Walt’s ego that was injured with the cancer. He knew he was going to die, a high school teacher, getting a loan out from strangers and “pity job” with Gray Matter. He could have accepted all of these. But his Ego never let him. His Condition was and always will be “the one who knocks.” We just didn’t see it until it was too late. Which is what makes Breaking Bad awesome.

[@ji_ji_]

​@@Breakingfasst88 u kind of just admitted that his condition was to care for his family, just because conditions are met in some way doesnt mean they stop... its an eternal itch ,again I urge u to watch the Andrew Stanton TED Talk . your point would be stronger , if u had evidence to suggest that Walters Ego was the primary motivation for his life even before the show began, which u dont have because it doesnt exist... Walter being a teacher with a more or less manageable boring life, is evidence to my point that he puts his family before himself. but to say Walter was always an egotistical monster is again neglects the concept of character growth - it would be a boring show if someone started out egotistical and ended it egotistical, this flies in the face of the concept known as the Hero's journey, characters are meant to change.

[@JettMann8]

I am a father, and I can seriously put myself in Joel's shoes. I know it is reprehensible, but I would carve a bloody path to get my daughter if she was ever taken from me.

[@ajeje1996]

I'm not yet a parent, but I'm absolutely positive I'd do the same. I would know it's wrong, and I'd still do it in a heartbeat.

[@lucascoval828]

Joel did nothing wrong. And nobody can explain how a cure was going to work, be manufactured, who gets it, and what it does exactly.

[@olddog4090]

@@lucascoval828 This argument sucks. It’s a fictional universe, it would work whichever way the writers decided it would work if it happened. Joel doomed humanity and he deservedly took a golf club to the head for it.

[@jimmycevallos4468]

@@olddog4090 agreed.

[@jimmycevallos4468]

@@lucascoval828 who cares? They were going to make a cure and they would have figured it out.

[@yapalskippy1807]

Im sure people have pointed this out but, there's a lot of parents who do conceptually horrible things for their children. There's a good historical instance of it: Gary Plauche, who's son was molested by a family 'friend' that Gary himself tried to help through financial hardship by giving him a place to stay. When they caught the guy (who kidnapped his son sort of.), and brought him in to the airport; Plauche was awaiting there with a handgun and straight up killed the guy. Parents in the real world have set out on deadly revenge plots for their kids, so what Joel did is 100% understandable especially given his history.

[@lucascoval828]

Based Gary.

[@jager477]

Gary is a fucking chad for what he did

[@artyomsaveli9681]

Absolute mad lad, he is.

[@jager477]

So news flash! My mother told me that my biological father(who at the time had a restraining order) did in fact, kinda, kidnap me and we flew to New York where I stayed for a week! The reason I say “kinda, kidnap me…” is because my mom would have Allowed the trip IF she had known about it. In conclusion… Yeah fathers can do some crazy shit for their children!

[@cyan_wings5420]

Ah yes, the haunting words; "It's just what my Character would do...!!" *Screams in DM*

[@AbdulB]

What Joel did made perfect sense to me cos it’s what most human beings would do if they could. A world without Ellie after his experience with his daughter would be no world to live in for him.

[@zzthedon4k]

you're missing the point, the guy below you too. of course we can judge joel. what he did is fucking disgusting and reprehensible. imagine your daughter or father seeking to save humanity being massacred by this maniac and seemingly dooming humanity in the process; oh wait, that's literally what the second game is about. mind you, TLOU2 fucking sucks, but murdering 30+ ppl for one HAS CONSEQUENCES. especially when those 30 are going to "sacrifice" the 1 for the sake of potentially the world. what joel did DOESN'T make perfect sense to you. it doesn't make perfect sense to fucking anyone. even fathers in the comments WOULDN'T TAKE A FUCKING ARMADA TO 30+ MEDICS/SCIENTISTS/DOCTORS TO SAVE THEIR DAUGHTER. all of us are far too coddled and live far too decent lives to do that. the difference is, joel is a fucking no-good, backstabbing, deceptive, heartless mercenary in the post-apocalyptic world. does it justify his actions? NO; but it gives HIM reason. not you. i'm sick of seeing people saying "omg joel, so relatable! i would do the same too!" no you fucking wouldn't. NONE of us would. that's what makes it interesting.

[@Ligmaballin]

Even if he killed few innocent doctors, it's perfectly reasonable. Ellie at that point was his family, more or less a daughter like Sarah, it was either save humanity (not guaranteed) or save his daughter so he doesn't have to relive losing someone he loves again

[@AbdulB]

@@Ligmaballin From Joel’s perspective those doctors are nothing but murderers as far as he’s concerned. And that’s exactly what they were about to do

[@LovesickMisanthrope]

And it's either the ending we got or both our protagonists dead, which one would gamers like more?

[@aussieseal9979]

​@hughjaenus2235 it's reasonable, not right. It's sympathetic, not good.

[@justahotdog8430]

I loved joel because he was grounded with doing bad things. Hes human and makes mistakes and even owns up to them. If it was like some superhero angel i wouldnt enjoy his character as much.

[@denimschaffer9439]

Yeah I love characters that have moral complexities to them that’s why Arthur Morgan is my favorite character of all time he’s not a good guy and knows he will never be a good person but he isn’t a straight up evil person either ( if you do high honor play through) he does help people once and awhile, he does kill people that are way more evil than the things he did and still cares for his gang ( except Michah) around him even till the end

[@reason9750]

It is SSOOO nice to hear you tear into the stupid “fireflies were inept so it’s ok” argument. It’s a cop out argument that tries to circumvent the real core question and I’ve ALWAYS hated it

[@ajeje1996]

Finally, after 9 years (or 2, depending on your point of view) someone made a meaningful, thoughtful video about TLOU that gets the point of the ending without getting bogged down by petty rhetoric or backwards, contrived discussions about morality. Thank you.

[@nicholasaraujo1730]

Something I found interesting was that the only objective is to reach the operating room. All combat is optional and the only people who have to die are the guard escorting Joel, and the doctor. One other thing I read into the ending was the subtext that Ellie knew what Joel did, knew that everything he said was a lie, and understood his decision.

[@CarrotConsumer]

She obviously knew he lied, but I don't think she understood everything he did.

[@gustavohuehue7460]

She knew he was lying, but wasn't aware of the whole picture at all, that's why she was pissed af after.

[@nicholasaraujo1730]

@@gustavohuehue7460 (sorry in advance for the long response. I’ve just thought a lot about this) I think that was a mistake on the part of the writers for a few reasons. First of all, as I said earlier, it is entirely possible, if not difficult to complete the section with a minimal loss of life, something she had seen Joel do on countless occasions and never seemed to take issue with. The writers simply assumed that the player went on a warpath and didn’t take into consideration that this could be a major problem. Secondly, Joel was never given a chance to defend his actions. This is easily where he could have brought up the incompetence of the fireflies and the ramifications of a cure existing in the hands of a power hungry organization. It could even be implied that he is also trying to justify his own actions after the fact, coming across as insincere because that isn’t the real reason he took that course. Thirdly, this all ties into an unjustified change in Joel as a character, resulting in events and decisions that don’t ring true to the characters and create a disconnection, in my case at least, between the characters as they existed prior to the second game, the characters as I play them, and the characters as they are portrayed presently.

[@Zarathustr]

@@nicholasaraujo1730 Have you played part 2?

[@Kira_Official_]

Yup. Too bad the sequel completely fucking undermines all of it.

[@jim122]

The way I look at this choice is that they never give Ellie the choice at the end and Joel’s choice isn’t right but it’s REAL, we feel it

[@ajeje1996]

The impression I got is that Naughty Dog kind of fast forwarded the ending (probably for technical reasons, or time constraints), but it would've been the same, Ellie would've agreed to the operation. It would've been an emotional choice, but I firmly believe she still would've gone through with it, because just like with Joel, ND wrote extremely believable and consistent characters and her choice would've been in line with her character. I don't think it would've mattered or made a difference, even though it would've made more sense to an external observer like the player.

[@elitemook4234]

Ignoring the fact the fireflies are trying to do something that is realistically impossible, make a vaccine for a fungus, the subtle cues the game drops supports Joels decision. We see examples of firefly incompetence in their having to flee Boston and the hunters created by their failed revolutions. We also see evidence that Ellie did not know they intended to kill her. While at the university Ellie outright asks joel if he thinks getting the cure from her will hurt and Joel responded by saying he thinks they'll just have to draw some blood, and she was making plans for what they were going to do after they got back to Jackson. Ellie was incapacitated and the firelfies wanted to operate on her without letting her wake up, much less without letting Joel say good bye. He had every right to assume she was kicking and screaming and begging for help in the next room.

[@lavellelee5734]

@@elitemook4234 thank you !!!!

[@Noah-Lach]

I don't think either of them game Ellie a choice. Joel and the Fireflies both wanted different things for their own selfish reasons. And neither of them has enough faith in Ellie to let her control her own fate. It's quite tragic, really.

[@jim122]

@@Noah-Lach this is a very good point actually, the fireflies were being selfish with the idea that the needs of the many outweigh the few and it meant not telling Ellie it would kill her Joel’s actions were selfish out of love

[@gregsmw]

"when is it ok for someone to act out of character" NEVER if you want someone to "act out of character", you HAVE to set up the action they are going to take as being IN character in that specific circumstance if the good character murders a man, something which would normally be horrifically out of character for them, you MUST set it up that events and circumstances have pushed them to this, that this specific murder in this specific case is something they WOULD do, it is IN character if a character does something "out of character", and this action has not been set up as actually being something they WOULD do (aka its actually IN character) then you have immediatly destroyed your own character, the audiance can no longer believe them or the actions they take, their storyline is no longer something the audiance can accept as it depends on something that the audiance doesnt believe would have happened, if i dont believe that event would happen, i dont believe anything that comes after it, my suspension of disbelief, my immersion in the story, is gone

[@mistery8363]

that's what he says too, my guy

[@tribacioustee2846]

This is more or less what Bricky intends, he just uses "out of character" as a short-hand for "seemingly contradicts his character but actually perfectly fits him in a way that gives him more depth and reinforces his core traits"

[@gregsmw]

@@mistery8363 i know, im backing it up/abridging

[@jadekaiser7840]

I would also add that it works if you do a good enough job "setting things up" after the fact. Sometimes, when a plot element in the following story is "why did they do it," it can work very well indeed. In this case the out of character act is the setup, and the motive and expansion on their character is the execution. Most of the time when writers try this, they do a bad job and it doesn't work. When it's done well however, it can work *very well* indeed.

[@LangkeeLongkee]

"it's not okay for a character to act our of character unless they're acting out of character"

[@dripstolfo2491]

Joel torturing the guy in that room to figure out where Ellie was is where he became the most interesting to me

[@chrs-wltrs]

The Fireflies' ineptitude only matters if you're considering Joel's conundrum as a technical choice- with "creating a viable vaccine" being the success condition. But it's not a technical choice. As you said, Joel would've done the exact same thing if they were an advanced alien civilization with 0% chance of failure. Because his reasoning is about whether or not Elie dies, not whether the vaccine is successful.

[@xrphoenix7194]

They aren't just inept, the fireflies are the bad guys. No one seems to get that

[@miniverse2002]

@@xrphoenix7194 They're well-intentioned extremists that became an obstacle.

[@chrs-wltrs]

@@xrphoenix7194 yeah, no one gets why the people smuggling supplies and studying a vaccine are "the bad guys." "Bad guys" and "good guys" are the kinds of moral simplicities that modern storytelling has outgrown. The Fireflies do some good things, and some bad things; that just makes them a group of people, like the player.

[@TheManBehindTheSlaughter6669]

not to mention the fact that the fireflies would never succeed, as the thing turning people into zombies was a mutated strain of cordyceps (the real life zombie fungus) making a vaccine would have done jack diddly, the proper medication to try to make would be anti-fungul meds to counteract the fungus. naughtydog even sprinkled in evidence in the game that showed that ellie was only immune to zombie bites because she was infected with the strain of cordyceps we use in already existing medications which prevented the zombie strain from possessing her.

[@BeefMeisterSupreme]

@@TheManBehindTheSlaughter6669 wasn't the idea that she was infected with a mutated strain of the mutated strain?

[@questionable6507]

12:58 Killed me. I need more edits like that.

[@lostvox7556]

I had to clip it this was hilarious

[@filipvadas7602]

I think the most important thing to keep in mind when writting morally complex characters is to always keep this in mind: What people WANT to be or do ,won't always coincide with what they ACTUALLY are or will do Basically, most people have some sort of ideology or set of morals we like to say that we try to keep to for the sake of decency or even just sanity But when the situation is really dire or when people are pushed too far by grief , anger or even love, how many of us would really be able to control ourselves from making illogical decisions? And, more importantly, what if said morals or ideals prevent you from doing something that you consider to be right? Law & Order did this a LOT, like in that one episode where a grieving father shot and killed a child psychopath who got off scott free after murdering his son. On one hand, that was absolutely horrid. But on the other hand, the guy probably saved dozens of lives by taking the only action he could to prevent the kid from growing up into a serial killer, emboldened by the fact that he got away with it once

[@2Kx0]

My mans Bricky literally reviewed an adult/hentai game and he still getting top tier sponsors, yall other youtubers dont have excuses at this point.

[@JMobster9]

Here's my argument: Was Joel morally correct in his actions? No. Was he justified in his actions? I would say yes. My primary argument for this is that Marlene and the fireflies treatment of Joel when he woke up was "idiotic" for lack of a better term. Marlene and the Fireflies thought they lost Ellie after Boston and had nearly given up hope until Joel arrives nearly a year later. Obviously in that time they would have formed some sort of connection. Joel's first question when he wakes up is about her whereabouts, and Marlene responds that she's on an operating table. Joel then ask to see her and Marlene responds that there's no point because she's going to die. Joel obviously has a negative reaction to this because of course he would and they decide the best course of action is to escort him out with orders to kill him if he tries anything. Wouldn't a better solution be to offer him the opportunity to say goodbye? It's not like they have to perform the surgery right then and there and for fucks sake Ellie at least deserves to know that she's going to die. Joel hearing from Ellie that she was fine with it might push the story into a different direction. And obviously that would also give them more time to run more test. (Doesn't matter in the grand scheme but something to keep in mind) But of course that didn't happen because they immediately antagonize the one person who couldn't care less about the world and only cared about the girl. Pair that with the fact that the initial plan was for them to kill Joel when he got there (remember, the deal was for Joel and the other girl to smuggle Ellie to them for guns and you can find tapes where Marlene says people have been telling her to kill Joel and she refuses), the fireflies specifically could have handled the entire situation better. Again, morally speaking this doesn't make Joel's actions the correct actions by any means, but it does make them more reasonable. And I find it a bit odd that people are in edge about "slaughtering 30 people in a medical facility" when you spend most of the game killing people, both as Ellie and Joel in a wide variety of environments. I understand that the context of why is different for the final level with Joel being the aggressor and all, but it's basically the same thing you've been doing the entire game, just with access to a fully automatic weapon.

[@nightly2005]

Yeah, i just dont get why people are so madje about the ending shootout when you have been shooting people who wanted to kill either of protags the whole game.

[@gustavohuehue7460]

There's a big difference between self defense and actively hunting down people.

[@reelgesh51]

@@gustavohuehue7460 pretty sure you can stealth through most of the game without killing anyone some of the boss fights require joel to make the final blow but a lot of the game can be done without killing meaning it wasn't always something that "needed" to be done and self defence tends to suggest that

[@gustavohuehue7460]

@@reelgesh51 i agree, but it's not like shit never hits the fan, someone can ever see you, and even if you try hard to not kill anyone, if its your first playthrough, shit WILL hit the fan.

[@kevinjackson7169]

@@gustavohuehue7460 Joel doesn't actively hunt down anyone in the hospital. He chooses to use violence to stop them from killing Ellie. They choose to use violence to stop him.

[@-thepatriot-9719]

4:36 that short sniper elite video where the guy shoots all four of the soldier's balls never gets old, absolute masterpiece.

[@ericdesmond3599]

Yes

[@vx8431]

Morality is in the eye of the beholder you put it beautifully when you explained Joels choice. No matter if the character is percived as good or bad doesn't matter if the character is believable. Joels reaction is perfectly normal for most people if they had his skillset. A lot of parents would murder in cold blood if it meant protecting their child.

[@miniverse2002]

The essence of protagonist centered morality. His actions make sense. But there are consequences to those actions. He did what he had to do and earned death because of it.

[@atosm8300]

No Bricky, writing isn't cool. In fact, I'd say writing fucking sucks. Speaking as a writer.

[@Some90sSlasher]

It’s insanity even with a rough outline

[@datzfatz2368]

Yeah writing sucks. Having written is a bit better tho^^

[@terrinils3165]

The pain is worth it tho.

[@samuelrichards5521]

That explains why writing has gone to shit in media recently.

[@jakubrejak1114]

@@samuelrichards5521 No, some people are just talentless. Or lazy. Or both. Writing is cool and anyone driven and creative enough can excel in it.

[@nugking2021]

The impression of Abby’s dad was pretty good lmao

[@tomsawyerpiper9412]

In the words of a man smarter than I: “You don’t want to be helpless. You may think ‘If I’m helpless, I’m good’ but that’s not true. A helpless man, a weak man is incapable of violence, and being incapable of causing harm isn’t the same thing as being virtuous. What you want is to be capable of violence but have the moral fortitude not to abuse that power. That’s what makes you virtuous. That’s what makes you good.” My personal favorite characterization is to take a good intentioned individual and force them to make a choice that has one of two outcomes: Stick to your morals but people will suffer for your unyielding convictions, OR! take an action that contradicts your moral code to the sole benefit of another. Either choice forces the true nature of the character to rise to the surface.

[@Heval_Kurd]

Having moral characters do terrible things sometimes for the people they care or for good reasons they justify it with is always so interesting since you can imagine/question what was going on in that character's mind and whether you'd do the same thing if you were in their situation

[@skonkbar]

Editing mistake at 10:40, Walter White is described as doing bad things with a backdrop of him killing nazis

[@HOTD108_]

Bricky is a Neo-nazi sympathiser confirmed. Unsubscribed.

[@PentagonFortress]

Joel's answer is perfectly covered in last of us 2 when Marlene aka Ellie's current mom states "the guy went across the whole united states with the girl can't you give him some time."

[@AtaYuceturk]

"let your characters do terrible things" let me just force my character to commit genocide thanks bricky (this is satirical I respect his opinion)

[@darkjackl999]

Hee hoo Spec ops the line time

[@karamarakamarama]

Etrian Odyssey moment

[@VAVORiAL]

Eren Jäger joined the chat.

[@AtaYuceturk]

@@VAVORiAL its just a little trolling

[@senritsujumpsuit6021]

Reminds me of a DND campaign am following were one the MC’s are planning genocide Yet you can’t hate him

[@gabrielplanas1033]

I feel like this topic is a perfect example of why media literacy is so important in a time that is so saturated by unchallenging entertainment purely made for safe consumerism. So many people are now conditioned to justify or rationalize actions made by protagonists due to the perpetuation of the idea that main characters should be heroes and that anyone who engages in morally questionable behaviour is a villain, it has gotten to the point where people cannot identify the awful behavious that characters they like engage in due to being unwilling to like a character that makes morally questionable decisions (or that heroes and villains are required for stories to work). I cannot tell you how many people were visibly confused when I would describe Joel as a creepy and awful person, but I still love him as a character. Frankly I am bothered by how important it is for writers or people who consume media to feel the need to constantly label characters as good or evil. I am not a moral relitavist, but to me I am not really concerned on whether Joel is a "good" person, that has no bearing on my reason for playing The Last of Us, I am interested in how the choices Joel makes are consistent with his character and how they make me invested in his story.

[@ornzman295]

Dude, i now understand why berserk is so good. Would be a good example for good writing, too because everyone is so believable! Love joel for that ending though. I was so impressed with that games ending

[@AnimeSimp234]

Attack on Titan as well.

[@flaviogarza746]

Unbelievable

[@zaneheaston8254]

I think a good example is from the original Yugioh anime series, when Kaiba threatens to kill himself if Yugi/Pharaoh doesn't give up, and due to the Yugi's grandpa being held hostage by Pegasus, the Pharaoh's response is Don't tempt me Morally it's wrong, but realistically when someone's loved one's at stake, people do drastic things in order to save them

[@QuietB4]

Good video as always Bicky! I highly recommend covering Project Wingman: it's a Ace Combat style military flight game but it really forms it's own identity and is a staggering experience. God tier Soundtrack too. Love your content Bricky, keep it up!

[@CsabaGamings]

Only thing I don't like is airplanes. And ace combat is all about it.

[@wild6545]

I can just imagine him suffering through Crimson 1’s autism, it’ll be fucking amazing

[@usxldcom7543]

Project wingman goes hard

[@Yellowpikachu1]

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha oh no

[@NayrAnur]

I hope he likes the color orange.

[@akiyama-ishida98]

As a writer moral ambiguity is the most hardest thing to do in characters, when writing a story because you need to have layers on it and how you set up the ending. Meaning some writers got burn out on doing something new on the story. But I agree with your points because it needs purpose on the character make it grounded to reality so that the person who are reading it, will scratch their heads and think about it. PS: I apologize on my english, I can't speak fluently. 😂😂 Ohh I forgot keep it up man this is a great video for writers

[@tomandjerry5491]

I'm loving your game reviews. You should do one about Metal Gear Rising for the memes, the DNA of the soul.

[@niedoanimowanyrosomak9990]

Im currently playing it, bought it yesterday and about to fight metal gear exodus or whatever it was called. Anyway, it slaps sooooo hard.

[@Hinokassaudifan1]

As much as I love memes, especially old 2009s and older memes (sparta remix, rage comics, peanut butter jelly time, pingas, etc etc) I hate how people only know about revengance from the memes it spawned. The game, unironically, has a massage in all of it. The themes of government control, and how war became profitable for some, how people see others and copy them (the memes meme) have I mentioned that it's relevant to today's society and world?

[@Volthoom]

@@Hinokassaudifan1 As i've said in numerous discussions re:MGR, people who only know MGR as a "haha funny meme game about funny meme characters saying funny meme words" are a perfect example of both Armstrong and Monsoon being correct about memes/ideas and their spread, which, incidentally, just makes the game even better.

[@Hinokassaudifan1]

@@Volthoom exactly. monkey see monkey do.

[@Murmarine]

@@Hinokassaudifan1 I am legit sad people keep qouting Monsoon half heartedly withoud actually looking into his speech. The Metal Gear series may be a mess, but goodness me is it some of the best story writing in a videogame I've seen so far.

[@kauinoa2004]

As a father I have to say that right or not I would mow down a building full of people to save my child. Full stop, and I wouldn’t even have trouble sleeping afterwards. At this point given Joel’s mindset I can completely relate.

[@kauinoa2004]

As a side note, when I first played through this, totally blind, I wasn’t even surprised or thrown by this whole section. It made sense to me

[@aprilethereal3642]

Can't believe this wasn't in this video :) So I lied, I cheated, I bribed men to cover the crimes of other men. I am an accessory to murder. But the most damning thing of all, I think I can live with it. And if I had to do it all over again, I would. Garak was right about one thing. A guilty conscience is a small price to pay for the safety of the Alpha Quadrant, so I will learn to live with it. Because I can live with it. I can live with it. Computer... erase that entire personal log.

[@TheMrSeagull]

That is such a great scene, and is one of the examples of why I love DS9 and the Dominion War arc.

[@RowdyGeek]

Let me tell y'all something. Before I became a father I had this way of thinking that in the event of my wife's life being at risk during pregnancy I would chose her life over the baby. As of my writing this my daughter is a little over two years old, and boy what a freaking moron I was for thinking the way I did, i would give everything for her and do anything in order to keep her safe. Hell yeah I believe Joel would do the things he did, no doubt. I remember playing the game years before having my daughter and I am shocked at how I was not able to connect the dots earlier.

[@firstlast9846]

*Okay I’ve been saying this for ages* I was talking about how different “Moon Knight” was from the comics - and how he’s usually “Cutting people up and hanging bodies from street lamps” and in the show - he’s a watered down version of that… somebody responded with, “But If Moon Knight did all that he’d be the bad guy / villain of the show” 🤦‍♂️ its not like that’s what he’s like originally.

[@mickram7911]

It's the opposite for venom. In the comics he was a joke bitch character who would threaten to eat people all the time but never actually did it. In one comic he bit someone's head off accidentally and he cried like a bitch and freaked out. In the first movie he eats like 3 people and it's no problem. Venom should be a neutral character or anti-hero, he should be thinking about survival and and his own wants, because that's how a sentient people eating parasite would think. Not ''Being the good guy because being good is the right thing to do'' That's boring and stupid and it doesn't fit the fucking character.

[@nathanthom8176]

Okay, Moon Knight kills a bunch of people on screen and has killed many more as the avatar of Konshu that are obviously not seen as they were in th past. The writers actively use the blackouts of Steven or of Mark himself to hide the worst of Moon Knight's acts from the viewer, because like it or not it was never going to be given an 18+ rating and complaining about that is stupid when the alternative is no Moon Knight at all; you may disagree but the majority very much consider it to be a great show with great performances from most of the cast.

[@Drake00000010]

@@nathanthom8176 Sorry but I find your arguments dishonest and lacking. Moon Knighgt is not intended to be for rating PG. Moon Knight deals with mental issues and we are not simply talking about touching the subject but Moon Knight LIVES in that world. You say either it was no Moon Knight or this dumbed down version. For me and many others. What's the difference? Moon Knight in the tv show is so different and could be called somehting else. What we got isn't Moon Knight pretty much. I love the actor and he carried the show but its not enough. Moon Knight in the show is just not compelling enough nor is he interesting enough. Seriously what's left for the character? We know Jake is a thing but what will that lead to? Marc and Steven are best friends already. The show was mixed. Not everyone loved it. I don't know why you think an 18+rating is impossible too. Daredevil is already on Disney Plus and we know Deadpool sequel is being discussing with that rating in mind at Disney/Marvel. Moon Knight and Daredevil, Deadpoopl etc could have been the start of 18+ Marvel shows.

[@nathanthom8176]

@@Drake00000010 are a trying to be a jackass? The show is 16+ and has quite a bit of violence shown (and even more implied). It is as violent as Daredevil (another 16+ show) and until a new Disney produced Deadpool film comes out you don't get to use that as a measure. The show is great and it deals with mental health issues and dissociated identity disorder and with tact and intelligence. If you don't like the show that is fine but don't gaslight me when I was only offering an opinion. Before you reply in either an overly aggressive way again or with a need to have the last laugh... don't, you have made your personality quite plain and I will wish you well and hopefully you can be more respectful and open to a measured discussion in the future; if you insist on replying then I will tell you to f%@k off now, as it will save me time later.

[@firstlast9846]

@@Drake00000010 you said it for me = thanks.

[@CarmineKar98K]

*Love is a powerful thing, it can make us do the damnedest things especially when we fear the loss of the things we hold dear.*

[@Nickewedin]

my favorite thing about the ending of TLOU is that I don't know if Joel did the right thing or no but I know that I would have done the same thing.

[@ShadedBeast]

I'm not a father, I'm a brother and father figure, I would fight till my last for any of the kids I had a hand in raising. same reason I agree with Joel, worlds not worth it if I have to lose my kids.

[@lwazinkasawe3887]

Joel was Black Air Force energy, personified, man. He was a menace.

[@germanulrich]

I don't know jack about shoe lore but I understood what you meant. Good analogy

[@denseaf1582]

I love characters that are written to accept the human truth that heroes are capable of evil and might do evil things and yet **choose** to be good and vice-versa. Not even “morally gray”, I just like seeing bad guys who aren’t sociopaths and actively make the decision to keep being awful people out of free will.

[@ebonarez7734]

This right here is why Paarthunax is one of my favorite support characters in fiction. In a universe where dragons have a canonical psychological need to enslave, destroy, and dominate everything; Paarthunax overcame his desires through what comes down to isolation and meditation on a philosophical basis regarding his people's language. He doesn't delude himself into thinking he cannot do harm and understands the apprehension others feel towards him, and why I cannot bring myself to ever kill him. "What is better; to be born good, or to overcome your evil nature with great effort?" ~ Paarthunax

[@phantomwraith1984]

I've spent the last few years writing a Scifi. One scene involves my main character luring a swarm of space bugs to a populated civilan world in order to buy time for his armies to regroup. The bugs invade in force but then rather than let the civilians die slow painful deaths, he blows the planet up with most of the bug swarm planetside. Another point has him abandon his wife and unborn child, but he does it to save them. They reunite later on, but after many years of war. The story isn't like warhammer where "There are no good guys", there is a defined good vs bad but sometimes the good character make questionable choices.

[@MattHatter360]

Dude if you become famous and I end up buying your book and you just spoiled it for me, I will be pissed.

[@the_jailsu5936]

Key word to what I think you're going over here. Decisions made by a character need to have consequences. Bad decisions, good decisions. The further on the spectrum a character is pushed the more consequence they should face. The more successful they are in their decisions, the more they should feel justified and stick to their guns for better or worse.

[@_frostii]

In the operating room, I'm pretty sure you didn't need to kill all the doctors there, just the first one. But hey, you do you Bricky

[@elitemook4234]

the game forces you to kill him.

[@tockidy4283]

Having it be conveniently justified is definitely annoying, no moral dilemma, no conversation to be had, just a “don’t worry everything’s fine and it all worked out”

[@lucascoval828]

Joel's death?

[@ultimaT]

6:00 Tony Stark is Sundowner: Thanos:"I am inevitable..." Tony Stark:"...and i am FUCKING INVINCIBLE!" *snap* *AUDIO BLARRING* "WHEN THE AIR BLOWS THROUGH, IN THE BRISK ATTACK, THE REPTILE TAIL RIPPED FROM IT'S BACK! WHEN THE SUN SETS, WE WILL NOT FORGET THE RED SUN OVER PARADIIIIIISE!"

[@RingStudios]

Before I was a dad I was like jesus Joel, you should have been honest. Now I am a dad... Nah right move. The moment I laid eyes on my daughter I was like I will kill this hospital if it meant she would smile.

[@Aznboy1der]

In my experience, my friends who are parents understand Joel’s choice and love the ending, while my friends who aren’t parents tend to not understand and think Joel should have chosen to “save the world,” or defer to the ineptitude of the Fireflies.

[@Pockets868]

These kind of stories, the ones that explore character choice, are important. To self insert to relatable concepts, in this case parental protection, to then ask the could I do this? Would I? Stories help us grow as people without having to actually experience these hardships, or help us when these hardships do come along. Thanks for the vid, Bricky

[@lasarousi]

People tends to dislike media that reminds them that real life is not black and white and that THEY probably are as bad as the characters in the story. Last of Us 2 is hated because it's a reminder that the entirety of Lou 1 was a pov of a human, with human flaws and human feelings and that actions have consequences. Even if the message is jamfisted, the message still stands "you are shit gamer, because you are human". And people despise being reminded they're the norm not the exception.

[@skyyswaggstudios2934]

Man. Superman isn’t boring because he does good things in the comics, he’s actually really cool. In fact a lot of characters are like that in comics, you just need a good writer

[@moritzschuler4941]

Babe wake up, new Bricky video

[@100nodog]

Damn

[@aquapb893]

“It could have been an orphanage of puppies and kittens and [Joel] would have gone around declawing with a fucking M4” -Bricky From an outside perspective it’s easy to criticize the fireflies. But I don’t think it should be done with a mindset to justify Joel’s slaughter. It discredits the man and who he is. Joel. Did not. Care. He just wanted to save his new daughter

[@InheritorHD]

I feel like I got second hand catharsis from this video from how good you felt actually getting to talk about this.

[@SJ-hz9uq]

I am not a father but I asked all the fathers that I know including my own dad and all of there answers were the same here is their answers summarized into one: "There is no choice let alone an easy one, you don't go thru the thought process of what is morally right or wrong. As I said there is no choice to make it is simply what you do, it is a straight path of your literal child's life being in danger and you must kill whatever stands in your way. It is what must be done""

[@CyrusL]

Ellie’s emotionally loaded okay at the end of the first game was such a beautiful ending it made you think didn’t give a clear answer it was fucking beautiful and amazing man that game is so fucking good

[@jinxthatsme2317]

I wish they kept it that way. Not every game needs a sequel. Some are better off as standalone titles.

[@lasarousi]

@@jinxthatsme2317 and miss the point of the game that your actions have consequences? That's the entire purpose of the second game, bringing the player to the realization that Joel is just as bad as every single person in that world, except Ellie who is the one who doesn't have a revenge and is left mutilated. And people get mad Ellie doesn't continue the cycle. Gamers are full retardos

[@SebLeCaribou]

Good points being raised, and I agree with them. The only two limits that I see here, are player's morality up to that point and player agency in general: -I think one of the reasons why people want to argue that what Joel did was "justified", "morally right" or however you want call it, is that emotionnally it can feel justify. In the context of the how numb to violence videogames make us in general, this last section can feel like "just another corridor shooting gallery". What I mean is, TLOU, even if it's trying to not be a carefree TPS already contains a lot of murder up to that point, and also doesn't exist in a vacuum, but allongside a lot of other shooters. It can end up in the hands of players who have been shooting at polygonal shapes for decades. So the attrocity of the killing doesn't matter much, neither in the context of the game or for the general audience that is going to interact with it. After several hours of doing it without putting much morallity on it, your moral compass is not about to be especially going the pacifist route. It means that your emotions may align with Joel, because the thing you care about is Ellie, not 35 fireflies soldiers. And if you align morally with a murderer, you can be tempted to explain why by means of fact checking the fireflies. And...I don't know how much Naughty Dog thought about that or not. Judging by the poor state of the story in Part 2, I'd say that they had another "happy accident" to quote your video. Or they had less of a graspe on their characters in the second game. That being said, and being a player for decades with lots of bodies on my virtual conscience, I still think Joel was wrong, but as you said, in this moment it's not really about what I want, and I think the game pulls that off pretty well. -The other thing that can be problematic with this kind of "bad action" from "good character", is player agency, and how much of the burden of morallity the developers seem to put on the player's shoulder at that moment. In TLOU, I don't feel like I'm doing something wrong in the end, because I'm playing Joel, the character has been well defined, and the gameplay resorts to violence almost at every turn when a problem needs solving. And I feel like the game is not really asking me to question how good or bad my actions are, it's about Joel's. The game couldn't have that ending if you could act like a pacifist during gameplay. You can to some extend, but it's more about picking your battles and being clever when engaging with a threat, so you survive the next room, than about not wanting to kill. The second game though...I ran towards door more than half of the situation, constantly meeting long press interactions to force my character into a bad situation that would force me to be violent. And I found myself at complete odds with Ellie, every decision feeling like the devs forcing the drama and the anger and the bitterness just to justify a violent and game, for the sake of making you participate in their torture porn...I didn't like it at all. And not because Ellie was morally wrong (I mean she is full stop) but because she's not that character, not in the first game, and not in the second either. She's lost yes, but look at her face everytime she kills someone in self defense because of bad circumstances; and then look at how stupid the Nora scene is in that context, especially with the developers asking for the player's participation, as if it was their decision too. And I know the idea is to bring some "nuance" to the revenge quest, but it's so poorly executed, especially when the game let's me bypass every encounter without firing a shot and then blocks with a triangle icon because I wasn't enough of a bad person in that room. Basically, it needs to feel right that the character is wrong, and you need not to be at complete odds with them between gameplay and cutscenes.

[@absentserotonin]

no way you used mos as an example of a perfect character when he’s literally the only on screen superman that acts like a human being

[@sceti118]

Another example would be Assassin's Creed Valhalla where you get desynchronized for killing peasants. LIKE THATS WHAT VIKINGS DID!

[@tribacioustee2846]

This is a great video - BUT I strongly disagree with your final example. You can't cut out the Fireflies from Joel's decision, because you can't divorce an action from its context. The context _always_ matters. Because if there was another way that avoids the moral qualms, then jumping to the morally dubious action anyway raises another issue. I wouldn't think Joel was making an active choice about humanity if the Fireflies and him were more agreeable - I'd think they're all idiots. I wouldn't give this game a second glance afterwards. And even if you take out the Fireflies' incompetence, there's a load of other issues that I'm not sure the writers thought about. For example: - Ellie never consents. Yes, we know Ellie tied her worth as a person to her immunity, so there's a good chance she'd have agreed. Doesn't matter. They still have to ask. And yes you can tie this back to the Fireflies' dubiousness in that they never ask. - Who controls the vaccine. Are Joel and Ellie saving humanity? Or are they giving a chaotic organisation a massive political tool? The Fireflies won't give it freely to everyone, they'll give it to whoever cozies up to them. This is all assuming they can mass-produce it, too. - Is the vaccine actually enough? It's good, but the game has made it clear humanity has become its own worst enemy. The world will not magically get better. Most of the major conflicts in TLOU2 would still happen. Ellie and the Fireflies would be incredibly optimistic to think it's enough. But Bricky, don't think I didn't hear the point you're trying to make. What you're getting at in this video - Joel's actions and motivations - are the heart of the dilemma. Would he still do this even if none of these factors existed, and everything was going perfectly? Would he not resort to anything else? They're what we're meant to think about. So let's say he would - we are now telling a _completely_ different story. The spirit of TLOU1's story is that perhaps it's not worth sacrificing what makes us human for the sake of survival. This is a theme heavily foreshadowed throughout the game. Joel goes from a kind father to a brutal pragmatist, and while he survives, his life is hollower. His brother Tommy says it "wasn't worth" surviving because of what they did. Saving Ellie isn't just him reconnecting with his fatherly side - it's him saying that he's done with clear-cut survivalism. That's part of why the two of them go back to Tommy's settlement, to settle down in a place less cutthroat. That's why he tells Ellie at the end that it's okay to just live a humble life, to find something new worth living for. That's why him saving Ellie makes sense. That's why his entire character is being tested in any way here, it's not just his parental love for Ellie. A truly selfish Joel like who we see at the start would probably be okay with the vaccine since he can get one himself. This Joel knows he'd rather risk being infected than live another day like he did in Boston. If you have Joel shoot up a bunch of goodie-two-shoes, you take ALL of that out. You could not do this in TLOU1 and then call it a good story, because it'd be an entirely different story to the one that TLOU1 carefully built up. It would have come out of left field, it would have contradicted a lot of the setup and thus been an underwhelming payoff. It would have been empty shock-and-awe. We would have learned nothing. But he didn't. He killed people from an organisation that is much morally greyer - in a situation that is much morally greyer - to save one life. And so, be he right or wrong, we have an ending we are still talking about actively almost ten years after its release. Weighing his cons and his pros. Because of everything that informs this story. TL;DR context is critical for every moral dilemma and it influences the stories we make. For a good character making bad decisions to work, the external pieces must be there, not just the arc. The Fireflies matter.

[@RYANtheBYAN]

You perfectly encapsulated the moral ambiguity of Joel’s actions within the context of the story, which you aptly pointed out is crucial and cannot be divorced from Joel’s actions. It’s that extra context and moral grey area you mentioned regarding consent, control of the vaccine, and if the world would truly be better off with a vaccine that I wish could have been explored in the TLOU2. It drives me nuts that all of that goes completely unmentioned in the sequel and the moral ambiguity of Joel’s choices gets boiled down to JoEl BaD gUy WhO dID bAd ThInGs. I find it hard to agree with Bricky’s perspective that Joel would have slaughtered anyone to prevent Ellie from dying no matter what. I can see a scenario where had the Fireflies let Ellie and Joel at least talk to each other before the operation things could have gone completely different. Ellie most definitely would have consented to the operation, and Joel most definitely would have protested to it and would have tried to convince her not to do it. In the end, she would very likely still choose to go through with it. “It can’t all be for nothing” would be Ellie’s prevailing reasoning. Now where things would go from there in this scenario is up for debate. Maybe Joel would respect Ellie’s decision and leave peacefully after a very difficult goodbye. Or maybe he would wait for her to be put under anesthesia and what we see play out in the game happens in about the same way with Joel killing everyone and getting Ellie out of there (albeit now it would be much harder for him to come up with a believable lie to tell Ellie, and this would be a far more monstrous action by Joel). I’d like to believe in this scenario Joel would choose the former and respect Ellie enough to let her go through the operation considering he would have witnessed Ellie giving her consent to do it. I find it very hard to believe he would still up and kill everyone in this scenario. But that’s what makes the ending of TLOU so amazing is that my scenario I suggested doesn’t play out (nor would I want it to). But it’s what also makes TLOU2 so disappointing imo because the moral ambiguity of Joel’s actions gets completely thrown out the window. In TLOU 2 Ellie has the gall to be mad at Joel and tell him “You took that from me!” (regarding her choice to die for a non-guaranteed cure) when it was THE FIREFLIES who robbed her of that decision in the first place when they never gave her the choice to consent to the operation and say goodbye to Joel. If Ellie’s gonna be mad at Joel, she ought to be mad at the Fireflies as well with the morally grey (and arguable morally wrong) way they went about trying to obtain a cure. TL;DR Context matters. Joel may have made different choices had the Fireflies obtained consent from Ellie. TLOU is brilliant due to how it handles and portrays the moral ambiguity of its characters. TLOU2 is disappointing due to how it undermines and sidesteps the moral ambiguity of the choices made by the characters from the original game (namely Joel and the Fireflies).

[@olddog4090]

@@RYANtheBYAN Honestly, it seems like you’re imposing your personal bias on how the characters should act. Of course Ellie would be mad at Joel. No matter how you slice it, he took her out of the hospital and lied about what happened. And as far as Ellie being mad at the fireflies she would not have been. In the ending of the first game she blatantly expressed that she would have been ready and willing to die for a cure. I mean were you paying attention at all? She has survivors guilt and a savior complex. That’s what makes the ending so compelling. Joel redeems himself by saving his “daughter” at the expense of the heroic sacrifice that Ellie wanted for herself. Their relationship after that was never going to be the same.

[@lavellelee5734]

💯💯💯💯💯💯

[@jacobchristopher211]

Flawed characters make the best characters

[@kaleoarnold3709]

Joel was such a good character, damnit I’m still upset about last of us 2

[@Bricky]

I'm definitely of the mindset that after what he's done, Joel dying is an acceptable outcome. But it's HOW they went about doing it and the subsequent story telling that really rubs me the wrong way.

[@giorgitevdoradze8758]

For all the flaws TLOU2 has, the way the ending mirrors the ending of the first game is very dope.

[@AngelicBeatdown]

@@giorgitevdoradze8758 Joel doesnt let Ellie go tho like how Ellie lets Abbie go. What?

[@mattdamon9326]

During playtesting on Tlou2 they had the choice of killing Abbie at the end. It was removed because every single one chose to kill Abbie. Screw ND for that.

[@AzraelSoulHunter]

@@Bricky Someone made a good point on you TLOU2 video that it actually would be better if he lived and had to live with his sins because in a way that's far more cruel than any death and would make for a much better story. Also I heard a great suggestion about Joel's answer to Ellie's "I wanted a meaningful death". Joel should have replied "I wanted you to have meaningful life" That is if you ignore the fact that Ellie had really no choice in the matter which makes that scene pointless and nonsensical either way no matter how it would go.

[@shiiche]

Ya know you'd be surprised, I study and live with a lot of writers and artists, and the vast majority usually end up writing morally unquestionable people. It's not as “writing 101” as you think and that's kinda scary...

[@lucascoval828]

Send them to Marvel and DC. It's what those companies want.

[@TheMrSeagull]

Here is why I think Joel was justified: They didn't give Ellie a choice. They could have asked her, but they refused to consider any alternative than to take her life for a chance for a cure. They also were going to kill Joel if it wasn't for Marlene rejecting it. They could have waited to give Ellie the chance to understand what is happening, and even let Joel be involved so he could understand her choice. Heck, if they could have done this and still forced it if she refused - they were already willing to kill her anyway. This just tells me that not only are they willing to do anything to accomplish their goals, that they *prefer* the quick and bloody path. I do not see Fireflies as a "morally good" organization because of this, and I see Joel as justified in saving her. Honestly, the whole thing felt a bit hamfisted, the fact that the fireflies jumped right to killing Ellie without even considering an alternative feels like an attempt to make it seem "morally grey" without putting effort into it.

[@crazyinsane500]

Yeah but there's one core problem with all that: That is information from the first game. People who say they like the second game *must* disregard the first, acting like they've never played it. That's the only way it makes sense.

[@omas1178]

You just ignored the entire point of the dam video

[@Planewalker1999]

Mr. Freeze is a good example of this. He’s a villian, but he’s not a bad guy. He’s just trying to save his wife. The way he achieves that goal is morally grey, which is why he’s so interesting and even relatable.

[@bogged810]

Bricky, the only reason people discuss how inept the fireflies are is because it makes a debate on if it was morally acceptable or not. Yes, Joel would’ve done it even if it was to the most noble people on earth at the time, but that would’ve been a much more unredeemable act. The fact that the fireflies were as big of idiots as they were shown in the game, makes Joel’s decision a lot more forgivable in my eyes, even it didn’t matter in the slightest to him. They also threatened to kill him if he didn’t leave and he didn’t even get the stash of weapons he was owed for the job, which imo is reason enough for his anger considering the world they’re in.

[@JZStudiosonline]

It is kind of a pointless video. I don't think that many people contested whether Joel was a protagonist or antagonist, it was just a discussion about how justified he was in doing it. This video misses the point that the rationale and conclusions people lead to effects their perspective on him as a character, and even puts them in his shoes in a sense while justifying his actions. Had Joel murdered an entire orphanage it would have been irreprehensible, and no one would justify his actions. Whether or not they believe his actions wasn't ever a question. It's also never hidden that Joel doesn't like the Fireflies.

[@felixrogers9569]

@@JZStudiosonline nah the point he makes isn’t that people would still defend Joel if he killed an orphanage it’s that it didn’t matter to Joel who he had to kill to save Ellie

[@cameronjohnson918]

But the point was never how justified Joel was. I'm a firm believer that the Fireflies would have found a cure from Ellie, or at least that Joel believed they would have. Joel made a choice to doom the chances of a cure, possibly the last the world would ever see, because he couldn't bear to see Ellie die. THAT is why Joel is interesting, because he does something entirely understandable, but completely irrational

[@seniorsterling1064]

@@cameronjohnson918 except the cure isn’t worth it, not 20 years after the apocalypse and especially after what tLou 2 shows us about the infected and their very lack of presence.

[@trevorsignorini6809]

@@seniorsterling1064 Knowledge none of the characters had so its pointless to this discussion, just because something works out doesn't mean it was the right choice. For a real life example look at the usage of atomic bombs against Japan, just because it worked in getting Japan to surrender didn't make it a correct, or even justifiable choice.

[@Bannschwert]

I think the very important thing about "protagonist does bad things" is, that the medium has to acknowledge it in any way. It has to be understood, that murdering a hospital full of people is fucked up. It has to be understood, that becoming a drug baron because your ego is too big, is fucked up. Morality is important, but it also needs more finesse in writing. Writing a game about "breaking the cycle of revenge" is difficult, if you mow down hundreds of people during this game and then want to talk about *one* murder in particular. What about the others?

[@krasmasov6852]

What about the others? They were wrong too.

[@DLAlucard]

Now while I agree with you on some of this Bricky. The actions of the Fireflies have to be taken into consideration. If they were written to be good people, then they wouldn't be framed so badly in the story. A good faction trying to actually help the world wouldn't put Joel in that position in the first place. They'd have brought Joel in on the decision. Waited till Ellie had woken up to give her consent and make it clear what was going to happen. They'd also absolutely take the time to collect as much data as they could. Especially when they've already pointlessly killed other people while looking for a cure like the Fireflies had in the story. If they'd been written like that then Joel's decision would absolutely be grey or even immoral, but they are not. So them being terrorist thugs in a rundown shithole hospital about to hack open another innocent person for no good reason, given the evidence, is exactly what makes this a morally good or bad choice for Joel. 'Context is king' as they say. Whats the context for Joel making this decision? Is he cutting down people that'll actually help humanity or just another group of murders hiding behind the claim they are 'saving the world' to justify their actions? Because I can tell you about other doctors that pointlessly mutilated and murdered children believing they were saving the world with their research. Look at it this way. Was killing David's group bad? What about David himself? Him and his people were just another group trying to survive that were going to use Ellie to do it. I mean if you want to divorce what the Fireflies are from the equation of morality. Then you must agree that Joel slaughtering David's group was just as morally grey as killing the Fireflies, right? After all it doesn't matter they were cannibals or what they'd do to Ellie. Joel made the exact same decision to slaughter them and torture their people to save her. Oh on that note. Interesting how weirdly the Fireflies with their lofty ideals and righteous speeches so neatly align with David's group in their actions. I wonder if that was on purpose and might have informed Joel's decision.

[@dorkangel1076]

They hadn't killed any other immune people, they'd killed other infected people (who would have died anyway) trying to make a cure. That's what made Ellie so important, she was unique and the only one they knew of who was immune. So no, they weren't going to just hack her up for no good reason. It was the missing piece they needed to make a cure. Calling them terrorists is pretty meaningless too since the country was being run by a military dictatorship where they were shooting people dead in the streets. You could equally call them patriots using their 2nd amendment rights to fight against tyranny since their other stated objective was the return of the democratic institutions. Context matters. Yup, Ellie should have been asked (though it could be argued that waking her up just to tell her she had to die was cruel too) but to the Fireflies, Joel was just the dodgy smuggler and killer whom Marlene hired to bring her there. Marlene was Ellies guardian and she only told Joel out of courtesy. He later murdered her in cold blood as she lay bleeding on the floor pleading for her life. Joel murdered them solely because he couldn't lose Ellie. If that doctor had been waving a signed consent form for Ellie when Joel walked into that surgery, he would would have choked him with it and taken her anyway. You can argue context and details after the fact and come up with a big picture of your choosing but Joel's morality is judged by what he knew and what he did based on it. Just because it's understandable doesn't make it objectively right. Did he drive Ellie away, then sit her down and explain she needed to die to make a cure and ask if she was willing? No, he had no more interest in giving her a choice than the doctor did. The doctor was scared she'd say no, and he was scared she'd say yes. The doctor and Joel were two people on opposite sides of a terrible shitty choice with no good outcome. Cure and no Ellie or Ellie and no cure. That's what made the story so good and why it stays with you for so long. Trying to water it down by changing that balance does it a disservice.

[@dragonsrule20201]

The title of this video is "let good characters do bad things" for a reason. The fireflies dont have to make all good decisions for them to still be, as a whole, pursuing the greater good. Does that mean I agree with them? Absolutely not, but their decision to sacrifice one person for the whole of humanity isnt an evil thought process. Joel is not exempt from the things David's group did either. "No matter what, you keep finding something to fight for" sounds pretty similar to them excusing their actions by saying it's necessary for survival imo. Joel has also admitted to being a hunter who killed and looted innocent people when he said hes "been on both sides" and Ellie bluntly asks about it. Theres also 20 years of mourning that we dont see, but we know Tommy describes as bad enough to give him nightmares and says surviving wasnt worth it to do what they did. I dont say any of that to demonize Joel, I say it because acting like he was a good guy in this situation is reductive and cheapens his character. Joel is, on a whole, not a very good person. However, he is a good father, and I think that's what matters to most of us. Ignoring his faults and complexities is the direct opposite of enjoying his character I think, and it also trivializes a lot of understandable reactions Ellie has to him. Also, they werent framed to be good because these games dont exist to dole out karmic justice or judge their characters; they just portray people struggling to find hope in extremely difficult circumstances. However, they did set up the fireflies as a group that could introduce a cure to the world. People can argue the actual logistics of this, but this is a video game, and this plot point was to create conflict in Joel, it never shows them as killing Ellie for fun, and Marlene evidently struggles with it. Most importantly though is that Joel has no information aside from the fact that they are capable of producing a cure, but at the cost of Ellie's life. I think it's more accurate to judge Joel by the circumstances he sees himself in and what choices he makes based on that, rather than our speculation about the Fireflies. Joel made the decision to doom humanity by saving Ellie, and he is at peace with that. There are repercussions to this action, but the end of the game doesnt exist to say whether or not he made a bad choice, it's just a choice a character we've come to known has made, and we understand why he did it because of the journey we went on with him. (David's group, in any case, is a whole other can of worms I think. Yes, David claims that they're just surviving, but he then gets a very obvious sadistic glee from hunting Ellie and treats it like a game, not to mention the whole, keeping a 14 year old in a cage and then coming on to her. None of that helps the survival of anyone. He is also established as their leader, and the way the men who Joel interrogate refer to Ellie as a "pet" means that at least a large portion knows about these things and enables it. The Fireflies portray themselves as better than they are, but Marlene sees Ellie's death as a sad but necessary sacrifice they have to make, and not something she enjoys or wishes to draw out. I think asking a child to save the world is unfair and immoral, but it's not illogical, and they're already working within pretty skewed parameters of morality.)

[@danialyousaf6456]

@@dragonsrule20201 the thing is, the fireflies had killed many immune people up to this point. What reason does Joel have to believe that killing another one will somehow save the world ?

[@denkerbosu3551]

So much THIS. I swear, people shitting on Joel literally forgot the 1st game and didn't bother replaying it before the 2nd one came out.

[@denkerbosu3551]

@@dragonsrule20201 "but their decision to sacrifice one person for the whole of humanity isnt an evil thought process" You just did precisely what OP says the guy in the video did, which is ignoring context. The fireflies already killed innocent immune people before Ellie, so why tf should we agree that they're good? They even have terms like "Mala praxis" in the medical world for this. They're dangerously stupid, to the point their "good intentions" are to be ignored.

[@powerfist1340]

something specific about TLOU1 that even TLOU2 seems to forget: The cure for the Cordiceps that the Fireflies were trying to get while killing Ellie wasn't a sure thing. They are specifically noted as this not being the first person they had done this operation with and they still didnt have the cure. For all we know they can't make the cure, and the best option is just letting these people naturally spread the immunity by having kids. Which is, y'know, a bit hard for them to do if they're fuckin' dead.

[@dankbeluga9636]

That isn't true, they never say anything about Ellie not being the first, and one of the recordings even says her immunity is unlike anything they've ever seen.

[@rageface6667]

Tlou1: choosing between blind fate and a glimpse of hope in the dark Tlou2: lmao moral superiority my beloved

[@moonmoon2479]

Lol, hit the nail on the head.

[@RECTALBURRITO]

As a Dad, probably not much of a decision to be thought about.

[@knowledgeanddefense1054]

Also the "ineptitude of the fireflies" has less to do with the fireflies themselves and more to do with the settings, seeing as how literally everyone in this world get their asses kicked

[@JZStudiosonline]

It's established through gameplay, story, and character interactions that the Fireflies are losing and dwindling, meanwhile Tommy's community was building and even the military zone was doing reasonably well.

[@knowledgeanddefense1054]

@@JZStudiosonline Except the military zone was wiped out in the second game by an organization that itself also got wiped out at the end, and Tommy's community was attacked by hunters and infected (and was doing better than most because it focused entirely on defense)

[@knowledgeanddefense1054]

@@scandalouspanda7489 Yes, "terrorist attacks" against the fascist FEDRA that Joel, Tess and Ellie also hated and sided with the fireflies against, lol. What's next, are you gonna call the rebel alliance in Star Wars terrorists? Except for the part where the fireflies regroup at the end despite SOME of them regretting their service because they were forced to do horrific things in order to survive (again, like every single other character did, Tess saw herself as a terrible person, Tommy said surviving thanks to Joel's way "wasn't even worth it") "If they were serious about saving the world, they would have handed ellie over to FEDRA."-weren't the militia against developing a cure, though?

[@knowledgeanddefense1054]

@@scandalouspanda7489 Are you... seriously siding with the people we were first introduced to by killing Joel's biological daughter over Joel, Tess and Ellie? The fireflies didn't take chances with them because they didn't know who he was. If you haven't noticed this is the kind of world where a scenario like this could be bait for a hunter trap ("he ain't even hurt") "Also, joel did not side with the fireflies at any point. He worked with them because he wanted their guns, but at several points he mocks Marlene and he clearly does not support their cause."-Good job completely ignoring an entire chunk of his character arc, like him wanting to honor Tess' final wish to believe that they could make a cure, something that by the point he reached Tommy he fully believed in ("I bring you the cure for mankind and you want to play the pissy little brother?") if Joel was honestly THIS skeptical of the fireflies' odds why would he not try to bring up the kind of arguments you people do in front of Marlene? Also, I like how you bring up the guns, which highlights how the fireflies did not in fact kidnap anyone but rather took their part of the deal (and would have gave him the guns if he didn't make it clear he would use them to gun them all down)

[@knowledgeanddefense1054]

@@scandalouspanda7489 FEDRA was created from the remnants of that same military force, lol - doesn't take a detective to figure out that this is what's implied with the "martial law" monologue after the prologue. Let me guess, FEDRA killing Tess, that's also grasping at straws? By the way, could you care to explain why people are infinitely less miserable when living in Jackson compared to in Boston, where you get shot on sight just for breaking a curfew? At least when fireflies die it's largely because of enemy forces, not because of their own people butchering them. " In comparison, there is lots of evidence that the fireflies are terrable. Remember Pittsburgh? Remember how the fireflies strung up soldiers until the government collapsed, and then completely failed to gain control of the region, leading to the only residents of Pittsburgh being 'human hunters'?"-no, I don't remember this strawman you created (so if I'm hearing this right, fireflies losing to hunters makes them evil, somehow, but FEDRA losing to the WLF doesn't make them bad because... huh...) Ellie was only in that orphanage because Marlene had to put her there for the sake of her safety, since if she was a known supporter of the fireflies FEDRA probably would have killed her (very democratic and totally not fascistic, that - especially when we find notes in the second game that explain that they essentially created the WLF by being massive douchebags that everyone hated until the people they abused had enough and overthrew them... and I bet they created the fireflies for the same reason, too. Who knew that a group that originated from the US army would not have everyone be their biggest fan? /s)

[@havelyntherockelyn1576]

So I'm not a father but I am a legal guardian over my little half-brother and sister. I can say without certainty that I would kill to keep them safe from any harm until either: A. I succeeded or B. I was somehow unable to continue. And with that said I believe more traditionally conservative family man father types would slaughter an entire neighborhood if they were told "yeah were killing your kid tonight for (insert reason here)" in a fucking heartbeat. Joel was mostly in the right imo. Not because hes the main character. Not because I like Ellie as a character. Not because the story dynamic... but because Joel, like any father would, chose to protect Ellie at all costs.

[@BorderlandsBoy0]

I love games that give multiple choices that make you think of the characters in different ways, Tales of the Borderlands comes to mind!

[@Xaxp]

I wouldn't care about the loss of life if my own kid's life was on the line, that would be MY daughter figure on the chopping block and everyone in my way is a threat. I don't think what Joel did was wrong because he was protecting his own. We can debate about how evil it was in the grand scheme of things but Joel acting the way he did to save Ellie's life is what solidified him in my mind as one of my favorite characters; Ellie was the one person who made him human again and that was the only thing that mattered to him. The murder spree he goes on to get to the operating room was cathartic as hell.

[@MrTelboy]

Joel (and Ellie) is one of my all time favorite characters. His actions at the end of the game are selfish, brutal and yet completely understandable.

[@flaviogarza746]

No his actions were selfish, brutal, and nonsensical. He has no right inervening in something he didn't do and he didn't think about others and Ellie is not his daughter.

[@lucascoval828]

@@flaviogarza746 Do you admit the Fireflies actions and intentions were nonsensical? The incompetence of their surgeon and the vaccine that would do nothing to save the human race even if it worked?

[@lucascoval828]

Based.

[@Noah-Lach]

@@flaviogarza746 The Fireflies didn't give her a choice either. Neither party did the "right" thing, and decided her fate based on their own selfish reasons.

[@Channel-23s]

Superman was about balancing control and not knowing one’s true self think you’d need to see it recently to decide on it

[@WMan37]

I think both of these statements can exist at the same time: *1:* Joel is a morally unjust murderer who would have done it no matter what *2:* The fireflies are a bunch of incompetent assholes who would not have been able to roll out the vaccine to as many people who would have needed it if they even managed to synthesize one at all, and assuming they did, they'd get overrun by bandits/the military in the first week of announcing a cure; Probably would have even acted in a Mad Max Fury Road tier fashion the same way the antagonist of that movie did over water even if they did survive that kind of onslaught of interest, so Ellie would have died for nothing. They are like if Kenny from Telltale's The Walking Dead was a group instead of a person. Either way, I'm in full agreement that protagonists should be allowed to do bad things.

[@moonmoon2479]

Which makes Joel the Travis Bickle of video games. Wait, that actually sounds cool.

[@Hayden_Lummus]

Joel is the Mandalorian, Ellie is Baby Yoda, and Fireflies are the Stormtroopers. Definitely not sorry about that last one

[@AgentSkidZ]

If the Fireflies somehow managed to create a vaccine for the virus, did they really think that everyone would just suddenly get along with each other? It’s not like the bandits are just going to lay down their weapons and listen to what the Fireflies have to say.

[@ajeje1996]

Couldn't agree more, especially the part about the consequences to an actual vaccine.

[@Truck_Kun_Driver]

Uh, don't you know the doctor saved zebras and shit? He may wanna kill children without their consent with his comrades but he saved zebra and shit.

[@mythriljojo]

I really liked the video. I'm fully on board with Joel's motivations being what's most important in the writing since it's what drives his actions. I just personally think morality is a fun little discussion topic that can add ambiguity to a story and it adds layers to what the story is trying to tell. Should we risk the survival of mankind on the death of the only person immune to the zombie infection or do we protect the person most likely condemning humanity because it's not a guarantee a cure could be made? Both sides have their values but also can be seen as morally wrong. It's also why I love the game Lost Judgment cause it also has a really good theme about justice and how the right answer is not that simple. I would be stoked to see videos from you in the future about the Yakuza or Judgment games. They're some of my favorite games to come out of Japan.

[@ExternalDialogue]

This exact point drives me up the wall with Father in Fallout 4! A bunch of people criticize the writing cause Father is... kinda stupid and aimless. But literally the entire point of Shaun's character and the institute as a whole is that they are a group of scientists too obsessed with questions of 'how' that they dont question the 'why'. Their entire hierarchy is built on how well you are able to APPEAR smart to everyone else, which is why Shaun is saying you wouldn't understand the goals of the institute WHILE KNOWING he is about to die and YOU are gonna be his successor. Because HE never knew either, but saying he doesn't know is political suicide in this kind of community he lives in, its been hammered into him his whole life that showing a shred of intellectual weakness is the worst thing you can do. I fully believe this character would act like this. He has been stuck in a bubble of people intellectually posturing to get ahead, having a down to earth normal person start asking normal person questions is NOT something he is prepared for in the slightest, its completely alien to him, which is why he comes off as a hypocritical idiot, cause that's what he is! Character being stupid doesn't mean the writing is stupid. It doesn't matter that he has intellectual deficiencies, cause its believable that he does have them.

[@CommissarMitch]

I am not a father. However my partner have kids from before. Would I have done what Joel did in that situation, even though they are not technically my kids? Probably. Would I have tried to do what Joel did? In a heartbeat.

[@lucascoval828]

Based.

[@LoganSearles]

That’s why I really like the Punisher and the Red hood because they do morally bad things for the right reasons. And if saving the world means sacrificing one child. Then It would be better to let the world end. (Don’t remember we’re the last one is from but it’s a quote from something)

[@dualwieldroxas358]

Remember, Luke is arguably guilty of killing almost half a million innocents. Normal people worked on the Death Star. There were shopping malls, civilian housing, daycares, and hospitals on the Death Star, it really was like a small nation. Luke likely knew this after he fired the torpedos, having felt the impact on the Force from thatmany lives lost at once. It is the horror of war and a necessary sacrafice to protect billions, but it is pretty morally dubious, regardless.

[@pianospawn1]

I wouldn’t like to see what happens if somebody threatens my cat to be honest.

[@DualWieldedEggrolls]

No, no I don't think I will - The Writers probably

[@MightyFahl]

Father here. What Joel did was horrible and fucked up and I would make the same decision in a heartbeat.

[@deltahalo241]

I feel Telltale's Walking Dead series was pretty good at this; Lee, Clem and Javi can all do pretty terrible things but it never really feels out of character when they do

[@senritsujumpsuit6021]

I still recall a guy getting killed by a college bell 🔔

[@deltahalo241]

@@senritsujumpsuit6021 I think that's Ben in the first Season, someone got hung from a bell and as the group was exiting the bell tower, the walker grabbed Ben and pulled him over the edge. Then Lee had the choice to pull him back up or drop him.

[@senritsujumpsuit6021]

@@deltahalo241 that's about right those games had a hard on for choose you gets dead how many innocent people did we unalive hot damn

[@Kaunte]

And it usually gives you a choice and when you do those bad things you are agreeing to do it. Last of us gives you no choice and just forces you to do what it wants.

[@TheGallantDrake]

Man, nothing makes me angrier than people who try to argue that a villain was right because they... had a motivation. Thanks for reminding us that bad actions have very understandable motives behind them.

[@Macapta]

I wish I could have experienced The Last of Us for myself. By the time i played it I was fully aware of the ending and many of the big emotional beats.