The Game Preview

Category: Exposé

  • Why The Last of Us Part II’s Ending Delivers a Worthless Narrative

    Why The Last of Us Part II’s Ending Delivers a Worthless Narrative

    Major Spoilers Ahead

    Before I begin, I want to make it explicitly clear that I never wanted The Last of Us 2 to fail. When essentially the entirety of the plot leaked online, I turned my head away and not once looked. Despite all the hate I heard it was receiving, I never wanted to find out what it was all about. I had faith in Naughty Dog, after all they earned it. From playing Jak and Daxter as a kid to growing up and maturing alongside Nathan Drake, I knew Naughty Dog would forever release quality, innovative, and quite frankly masterclass games for the rest of their years. My belief in this doctrine was only further cemented by the release of The Last of Us in 2013; a post-apocalyptic story about a broken father regaining his hope in the plague-ridden world when tasked with transporting an immune girl across the country for vaccine development, who would soon be his adopted daughter. The narrative told by the first Last of Us was near flawless, with the relationship between the main protagonists, Joel and Ellie, being the absolute brightest highlight of the entire game. When a sequel was announced, I couldn’t have been more thrilled. I waited, alongside all of you, just under seven years in eager anticipation as to what Naughty Dog would concoct this time. I was entirely confident it would be yet another masterpiece, as Uncharted 4: A Thief’s End (their previous title to TLOU2) was a downright 10/10, with one of the best narratives ever written for games, or entertainment media in general. To be completely honest, for the first half of my play through of TLOU2, I still held onto that sentiment. Even though the death of Joel was controversial to say the least, I didn’t have many issues with it at the time because it made narrative sense. Ellie needed a driving force for her revenge story, and the death of her adoptive father is as good a catalyst as any. However, when the player’s perspective is switched to Abby halfway through the game, the quality starts to drop quite a bit at a consistent pace (which is covered in my colleague Frank’s article on his views of the game as a whole), but even then the narrative was still salvageable by a large margin. However, the finale of the game, the satisfying resolution that was supposed to justify all the choices Naughty Dog made during development, was by far the most disappointing, poorly written, illogical, and at the risk of sounding unprofessional, downright stupid ending I’ve ever had the displeasure of experiencing. There are many reasons as to why this is the definitive case, too many to mention all at once in this format, but the largest sins will most certainly be addressed.

    The Unavenged Murder of Joel Miller

    Image Credit: PlayStation

    To start, I’d like to address the rampaging elephant in the room: the unnecessary and insulting murder of gaming’s favorite dad, Joel Miller. When I initially played the game, although a part of my soul cracked when I witnessed the heinous crime, I did not believe it detracted from the overall plot. Ellie needed a driving force that would allow her to seek vengeance at any cost, and the death of Joel most certainly accomplished it. However, this was the largest gamble ND took with the narrative, and gambles like this NEED to pay off. This one, regrettably, did not in the absolute slightest. After 26 and a half hours of playtime, I finally reached the coast of Santa Barbara to find a weakened Abby on death’s door. After cutting her down from the torture pillar, I was incredibly nervous. Why was Ellie letting her go, surely she didn’t take two trips across the country for nothing? But then, at the end, Ellie forces Abby to fight her, and after a grueling battle you at last have her at your mercy; viciously drowning her in the shallows of the Pacific Ocean. I was talking out loud to my TV “Yes, finally! You thought I would just forget what you did?” along with a wide variety of obscenities and insults. In this moment, I was beyond satisfied. I didn’t understand why the game got all of this “unwarranted” hate, I was witnessing the best possible ending for the story they were telling. Then, in quite possibly the worst decision in writing I’ve ever seen, Ellie gets off of her. She let’s her leave Santa Barbara. She let’s her live. Now this next sentence is addressed to Naughty Dog and more specifically the “director” Neil Druckman in particular: One, are you out of your minds and two, did you ever take a creative writing class in school? I believe the honest answers would be yes and then no, because this is the most ludicrous and forced absurdity I’ve ever seen implemented into a supposed “masterpiece” of a videogame. Abby had to die for the story to succeed, it’s that simple. She savagely murdered the main protagonist of TLOU1 (Ellie’s adoptive father), and for what? She killed Jessie (Ellie’s best friend), crippled Tommy (Ellie’s adoptive uncle), and beat a pregnant Dina (Ellie’s girlfriend and then later wife) halfway to hell…and for what? I’m supposed to believe that after everything and everyone Abby took from Ellie, the two treks across America there and back again, she just forgives her? That would be akin to Obi-Wan Kenobi saying to Emperor Palpatine “Yeah, you killed mostly everyone in my order, destroyed the foundations of everything I believe in, and have always plotted my downfall along with turning my brother to evil, but I forgive you Sheev”. It just doesn’t make any sense. Any human being, no matter how morally just, who has suffered immense loss such as Ellie at the hands of one individual would never forgive said individual, let alone allow them to live when they’re at your complete mercy. From my perspective, it seems like a genuine insult from the post-Uncharted 4 team at Naughty Dog to the fans of the original TLOU by leaving Joel unavenged. It simply does not make the slightest bit of sense, and made me feel completely unsatisfied. It doesn’t matter how fantastic a videogame, book, or movie may be, if there isn’t a satisfying resolution (especially when you make huge gambles like killing off your main character), the entirety of the story is worthless. If there’s no payoff, no fitting conclusion, then may I ask what the point of it even was? Now I know what the ND fan army is going to counter this with, “But the cycle of violence was broken, therefore it’s a fitting resolution as that was the theme of the story. You may not like it, but that’s the way the narrative was supposed to go”. Well to start, that’s verifiably false as for fifty percent of the game’s development, Abby was supposed to die. Not only that, but Abby is not a likable character, nor a good person, as she continues to perpetuate this “cycle of violence” well past her initial murder of Joel. This “grand artistic expression” of an ending is nothing more than a cheap cop out. She didn’t deserve to survive, even for Lev’s sake, as I’ll outline now.

    The Abby Problem

    Image Credit: PlayStation

    As mentioned in our previous TLOU2 TGP article, the community has discovered that the original game was supposed to be played entirely as Ellie, due to concept art showing Ellie in segments of the game where you play as Abby. I just wanted to lay this groundwork to show how her character was rushed and then poorly utilized, as to give more background as to why she’s so unlikable. You play as her in an early part of the game, hunting down someone who is obviously Joel if you can pick up on the not so subtle hints Abby and Owen drop in their dialogue. Now, as someone who had no knowledge of any leaks, what came next was a brutal shock. Joel dying within the first two hours made me irreversibly hate Abby, and it was a true mistake on ND’s part for implementing that twist so early. After that, I could never sympathize with her again. There was only one instance where I came close to understanding her plight, as her father was murdered at the start of her half of the game. My father passed when I was extremely young as well, and in that moment I did feel her pain; and Naughty Dog I commend you for that. However, after that ND, you completely lost me. Not only does she kill Joel in a unnecessary and evil fashion (as he made her father’s death quick), she’s doing it out of pure revenge, whereas Joel committed his violence out of protection for someone he loved. Not only that, but if the Fireflies would have just told Ellie that she would die during surgery, she would’ve agreed to it and talked Joel down, resulting in no bloodshed and a cure. Due to this lack of understanding (pushed heavily by Abby’s father and reinforced by Abby herself), they just go for it without telling Ellie, setting Joel off. Therefore Joel’s actions, although while still wrong, is more justified than Joel’s murder. So, in a sense, Abby started the cycle of violence by seeking revenge and offensive violence first, and even continued to show that she was not a good person even after the fact. While she does save two children (only because they saved her life first), she massacres many WLF members who once fought alongside her in the process. Now, some may say it was out of self defense, but Abby (now a deserter and traitor), Lev, and Yara drew first blood by killing Isaac, the leader of the WLF, and was the provocation for them hunting Abby and her child cronies. An army doesn’t let their general go unavenged, just like a daughter shouldn’t allow her father to be, but I’ve already discussed that. There certainly were avenues to avoid that bloodshed, but Abby jumped straight to the gun. Besides her acts of unjustified violence, additionally she lacks moral fortitude. This is shown as she lies down with her ex, Owen, even though he is currently taken and expecting a child. Both parties are to blame here as it takes two to tango, but Abby is still at fault all the same. After experiencing all of this, once you reach the theater as Abby where Ellie is hiding out, they force you to fight Ellie as her, which I did not want to do whatsoever. Over the course of her story, they try to slightly turn you against Ellie in certain parts by trying to get the player to sympathize with Abby and her friends, but that never happens due to the aforementioned murder of Joel among other poor writing decisions/unconvincing dialogue. In fact, I let Ellie kill me at first because that’s the way I’d want it to go. They tried to push this new, invasive character too much, and if you never played the first game, sure it might work. But majority of people who play a direct sequel to a game have played the original, and that holds true to TLOU just like it does to anything else. To view both games as a complete story, only the first half remains quality. Abby’s character and progression of violence as a whole warrants her lack of survival, and yet they still let her live. Why, so that Lev would have someone with her? Why would Ellie care about that, regardless if she can relate to the child? It’s the same kid that put an arrow into her Uncle, leaving him crippled. And yes, Lev did tell Abby to stop before she killed a pregnant Dina (which, by the way, makes Abby a great role model and likable character, right ND? Especially since when Ellie killed Mel she had no idea of the pregnancy, and was visibly sickened when she found out. What did Abby say when she found out Dina was pregnant, with her blade to Dina’s throat? Oh yeah, that’s right: “Good.”), but Lev’s the one who led Abby to them in the first place so…yeah, I don’t have much sympathy for her either. If this was the first TLOU, this all very well could have theoretically worked. However, it’s not, and the blurry line between right and wrong that Naughty Dog tried to craft fell flat on its face and came out crystal clear. By the ending of the game, not only has Abby shown she lacks character and morality/ethics, but has already clearly painted herself as the villain by viciously killing our beloved Joel Miller with the support of all of her friends, which immediately justifies Ellie’s vengeance to the player. Mel, Owen’s pregnant girlfriend, said it best: “You’re a terrible person Abby. You always have been”.

    Conclusion

    Image Credit: PlayStation

    Don’t worry, I’m not going to pull a Naughty Dog and leave you feeling empty inside, as this exposé will have a satisfying resolution. Although, there isn’t much more to say, but I just need to once again express how deeply disappointed I am with this game, as seven years of waiting amounted to no pay off whatsoever. Whether you’re writing an essay for school, a screenplay in a coffee shop, or a storyline for a videogame, you most certainly are allowed to take risks with your creation. In fact, I’d even wager that narrative gambles are necessary to capture the audience’s attention and insure they stick around for the entire time. However, in doing so, you need said risks to pay off. Without a satisfying resolution, it doesn’t matter how incredible the rest of the narrative is; the story is unfinished, the audience is unfulfilled. They feel as if their time was wasted, there was no fitting conclusion that can ease their mind to the controversial decisions made by the narrative. Honestly, I would rather have never played TLOU2, and kept the story of the first game unsoiled. Therefore, it is my argument that the narrative of The Last of Us 2 is, undoubtedly, worthless.

    Image Credit: PlayStation
  • In Defense of Resident Evil 6

    In Defense of Resident Evil 6

    When one initially thinks of what a “Resident Evil” game should entail, most fans immediately recognize that survival-horror is a key design aspect that the team over at Capcom should utilize during development. Make no mistake, I do not disagree with this philosophy. However, there have been moments throughout the series’ existence where the formula ran a bit dry for some. With Resident Evil’s 1, 2, and 3, Capcom established a clear format for the franchise, and for a lot of hardcore fans that was enough. The mainstream, on the other hand, became less invested in the franchise over time, with releases such as Code: Veronica leaving many (myself not included) tired of the “same old zombie game”. This stagnation of the player base left Capcom unsure as to where the once innovative survival-horror series should go next, if anywhere. Luckily, though, after a stint in development hell and multiple incarnations, Resident Evil 4 was released to the GameCube in 2004, and after that: everything changed. Although still adopting the classic tank-controls for player movement, RE4 catapulted the franchise into a new sub-genre; action-survival horror. This time around, Leon Kennedy could deliver roundhouse kicks to his enemies, engage in QTE knife fights, fight a gigantic lake monster, and do flips on a Jet ski while rescuing the President’s daughter from an exploding island; to name just a few plunges into over the top Hollywood action. Additionally, RE4 simply changed the gaming industry forever. Third-person shooters started to become very similar after 2004, imitating RE4’s over the shoulder perspective and evolving the genre as a whole, leading to massive successes such as the Gears of War series (and many, many to follow). This revolutionary shake-up emboldened the developers of RE to delve further down the napalm-infused rabbit hole of Hollywood action, and after five years in 2009, Resident Evil 5 was released worldwide. Capcom, to put it bluntly, struck gold. Maintaining the title of their best selling game until the release of Monster Hunter World in 2017, RE5 has sold 11.9 million units across a wide array of platforms as of December 2019. RE5 was a major financial victory for multiple reasons: the entirety of the game could be played in co-op, it offered a lot of replay-ability across numerous modes, Wesker was back, and it heavily escalated RE4’s more “explosive” tendencies. What do I mean by that? It went down to the bottom of the action rabbit-hole and exited out the other side into high octane Wonderland. Capcom now had a clear vision of where to embark unto next, wanting to construct the following iteration of RE into the “ultimate horror entertainment”. Following this mantra, Resident Evil 6 was born, and eventually released to eager players in 2012. Unfortunately for Capcom, as most know, die-hard fans resented RE6. It failed to deliver on one necessary element, one key component that earned the franchise its entire reputation: horror.

    Credit: metro.co.uk

    Before I start my defense in favor of the “Island of Misfit Toys” of RE games, I need to address why I had to establish a basic outline of the series’ history. There are some who would argue that RE6 and the absurdity that came along with it simply appeared out of nowhere with no justification in sight, but that is not the case whatsoever. Capcom was fearful before the release of RE4, being pinned into the back of a corner so small that they had to reinvent the core gameplay of their beloved horror IP in order for it to survive. What they saw after that and post RE5 lead them to the assumption that more action was necessary to stay out of that corner; i.e. increased sales from RE4 to RE5. Unfortunately and unintentionally, Capcom jumped the shark for most if not all long-time RE fans as a result of this endeavor. Negative opinions of the game flourished, the following of which I concur with. To start plainly, horror itself was absent for the overwhelming majority of the experience. The gameplay had been neutered in terms of difficulty, even by RE4 standards, leaving any tension prevalent in previous titles to the wayside. Co-op play made a return to the stage, but this time heavily influencing the game design and its mechanics as a whole. The action on display surpassed Michael Bay levels of insanity, with set pieces running amok in all four campaigns. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention, there’s four campaigns: all with different play-styles. Some might view the distinct campaigns as a positive, but I can’t help but view it as a crippling hindrance. The multiple play-styles leaves an all around disjointed feeling when viewing the campaigns as a singular story or playing them back to back, featuring stark contrasts among them and an all around inconsistent experience. Majority of fans ripped RE6 into mangled shreds for those reasons, and in terms of what a Resident Evil game should be, justifiably so (in my opinion). However, when taken out of the context of what a mainline Resident Evil release should look and play like, is Resident Evil 6 a bad game? My answer is a resounding no.

    Credit: Valve, Capcom

    First off, I would like to readdress the complaint I mentioned about the co-op integration. In terms of a Resident Evil release, as previously stated, yes co-op helps mold the game into something that it shouldn’t technically be. However, when viewed outside of that lens, co-op in RE6 with a friend as your counterpart instead of the partner AI is honestly a hysterical good time. I’ve played through all four campaigns three times each, and every single one of those playthroughs I did with a good friend, if for nothing but to laugh at the chaotic nature of what we were playing. But with the great and expansive movement/dodge system, the co-op QTE’s where we had to trust in and rely on one another to survive, and the high-octane boss battles; the co-op play on offer is some of the best you can achieve in a third-person shooter. Even during lackluster campaign’s such as Chris’ and Ada’s, there is always fun to be had with a brother in arms at your side. It’s undeniable that this is the intended way for RE6 to be played, and although that holds true, there is still enjoyment to be found in the content offered even while in single player. Set pieces such as boss fights with the Ustanak in Jake’s campaign are so ludicrously insane and out of the realm of reality that no other word but “hardcore” can define it . In particular, the final hand to hand brawl with the Nemesis copy-cat is incredibly cinematic. You confront the menace on an unstable low-hanging beam above scorching lava, disarmed and outmatched, with only your bare hands as a means of defense. The demented-face ghoul looks at you, overcome with an intense and destructive rage that he’s been saving for release unto one person and one person only: the player. He charges at you with inhuman fury and determination, knowing that this is the end, the last time you two ever face each other. I won’t spoil won’t comes next in case anyone reading has yet to play RE6, but rest assured that the fight that ensues is from the realms of blockbusters such as Mission Impossible and Clash of the Titans, which makes it so entertaining. If you have accepted what the game is at this point, have acknowledged that it is not true Resident Evil, and have viewed it as it’s own game and not an innovative continuation of it’s franchise, then the set pieces such as the one I have just described will be as rewarding for you as they were for me. Granted, not all have as much payoff as Jake’s final boss fight, but they do make you feel as if you are truly an over the top action hero and part of one of the most explosive Hollywood blockbusters to date. Is RE6, namesake aside, a Resident Evil game? No, but I don’t believe RE5 to be either, and in full transparency RE4 comes close to veering far from its series’ foundations as well. But does that necessarily have to mean they are subpar, inadequate games in their own right? Absolutely, definitively not. Whatever you may think of RE6 and my opinions on it, it is certainly the case that it was one of the best things to happen to the Resident Evil IP as a whole. In order to prove this claim, I ask you to recall the corner Capcom put themselves into with the original mainline RE games. Well, history often repeats itself when the lessons of the past are forgotten, and that philosophy does not exclude business or the videogame industry. After immense burnout and disinterest was expressed by the fandom post RE6, the team at Capcom had to once again reinvent their beloved “horror” IP. This second dire quest for innovation, in my opinion, and therefore RE6 by association, was the catalyst that launched Resident Evil into a new era: the most terrifying and greatest it has ever been.

    Credit: Valve, Capcom

    In the search of transformation and reconciliation, Capcom fell back on something they’d forgotten, yet still something solid: their roots. After the disastrous effect that RE6 had on the community, the developers needed to go back to what Resident Evil was at its core; survival-horror. Not only did they deliver, but they exceeded all expectations of the disenfranchised fandom. In January of 2017, Resident Evil 7 was released to universal critical and commercial praise. My personal favorite of the series, this new iteration went back to a mansion setting (originally popularized by RE1), and delved deeper into survival-horror than ever before. The atmosphere wasn’t just creepy, the enemies weren’t just scary, and the bosses weren’t just intimidating. The Baker family introduced a level of sadism to RE that was never present before, and as a horror fanatic in and outside of gaming, I was thrilled. Whether it be the grotesque torture that Ethan endures and perseveres through, the mysterious and malevolent villain in Eveline, or the all new up close and personal first person perspective; Resident Evil 7 fired on all cylinders to deliver a near flawless masterpiece of horror, regardless of medium or art form. This wasn’t Capcom’s only accomplishment, though, with RE7’s success not only revitalizing RE itself, but ushering in a new age for the franchise. Survival-horror was the name of the game again, with following releases such as RE2 Remake and RE3 Remake adopting the same general play style, apart from the first person perspective (although this is not the definitive case with mods) and more sadistic nature of RE7. With Resident Evil 8’s announcement supposedly looming and a RE4 Remake hinted to be in development, Capcom has finally returned to its sweet home.

    Credit: Game Informer

    Resident Evil 6 set out to accomplish many things, and to it’s credit achieved many of them. Although it did technically deliver on the “ultimate horror entertainment” sentiment, the horror element was certainly the most absent variable of that equation. Even with as entertaining as it was, it sacrificed its identity to achieve the level of action the team at Capcom wanted to reach. As a result, one of the best, most ridiculously fun, arcade co-op third-person shooters was made. Unfortunately, it was at the cost of the hardcore fans who stuck with the franchise since day one. However, I do believe that most would agree that the long term pay off of RE6’s existence, in hindsight, outweighs the betrayal fans felt at release. Due to it’s monumental failure, Resident Evil’s core philosophies were forced to go underground and reflect, coming out more twisted, horrific, and better than it ever was before. None of this would have occurred if Resident Evil 6 hadn’t released and bombed, making one wonder what the franchise would look like today if it wasn’t for that historic debacle. One thing is for sure, though; without RE6, Resident Evil wouldn’t be in the position it maintains in the horror genre today, which was the same it held back in the late 90’s and early 2000’s: number one. Plus, we got an entertaining, high-octane fueled thrill ride of a game to experience alongside a local S.T.A.R.S officer near you (or maybe just a friend over the mic instead).

    Credit: Valve, Capcom