The first game built something beautiful, and, as if scared of being judged for relying on that, the second strays about as far away from it as possible. There is a world within which they could’ve pulled this off, but they haven’t, which makes this overly ambitious leap into new territory feel nothing short of disrespectful to the masterpiece that came before.
Story concept: 4
Story execution: 5
Immersion through gameplay: 9 (If played non-lethally, those nonchalently killing will experience dissonance with the themes of the story).
Satisfaction through gameplay: 8
World: 9.5
— Spoilers—
The biggest point of contention is the way we play as Abby. It epitomises the exact reckless ambition that has undermined the sequel. The plan is clear – have the player’s sympathies switch from Ellie to Abby*, in one part, such that when we return to the standoff, we’re suddenly bashing ourselves for being so biased. The problem is that this failed, not just for me, but for almost everyone who played the game – showing us that Abby had friendships to lose and a motive to kill is no revelation, since both have already been demonstrated in her introduction, where she interacts with Owen and insinuates that Joel should know who she is, meaning this drawn-out stretch of gameplay does little to progress her character. So what are we left with? Our most beloved character is being held at gunpoint, whilst we’re stuck playing as someone who we cannot emotionally or morally identify with in regard to the core issue. Emotionally, we’re too invested in what Joel and Ellie had. Morally, whilst she shows signs of guilt, the truth of Abby’s character the game never seems to face is the fact that the cycle of violence we’re consistently positioned against is on her: it was with Abby that the objective became to kill, rather than to save, so Joel might’ve killed more people, and even thrown away a chance at saving the world, but his focus was on saving his daughter-figure, and there was no way he wasn’t going to do that after everything that happened through the first game. Abby’s focus was rather to avenge her father, despite this resulting in her killing a figure identical to her father – it might make a point, but it’s not one which makes Abby deserving of the empathy the game seems to expect from us.
The objective moral disparity between Ellie and Abby is fleshed out further following the main review.
*If the general narrative structure isn’t proof enough, the fact that we play as Abbie rather than Ellie when they fight makes it very clear that our allegiance is expected to have shifted.
If Joel is to be removed, and the game is to live up to its predecessor, he needs worthy replacements. Ellie and Dina’s relationship is clearly meant to fill the void, and for the most part it is executed quite well: Eugene’s ‘farm’, the dance, and the ‘Take on me’ scenes are all strong, and yet because they are in place of Joel, rather than alongside him, they have to build more of a connection than the whole fourteen hours did in the first game to feel satisfactory, which again speaks for the impossibility of what this game tried to do. When Dina left Ellie in the epilogue, I felt almost nothing, despite the fact that it was clearly meant to be impactful (it is implemented such that it works as another ‘revenj baad’ device). Whilst you could argue that since Ellie’s drive for her actions comes from Joel his part is far more substantial than I suggest, the fact that the drama of their relationship is not known to the player throughout the journey means that whilst it may be the case for the character, we never really feel it. For the player, this information is injected in bursts for effective emotional impact, long after it could’ve heightened our alignment with the present journey. So despite the father-daughter relationship leaving the game early, and taking a backseat to the other themes and characters, it remains by far the strongest part of the experience, which surely signifies failure.
To summarise, there is a lot of good here, but it is rendered futile, because whilst the game can command emotion, it disposes of it’s greatest asset in a gamble that feels careless and disrespectful, never comes close to matching that asset, and then expects us to empathise with the character responsible, despite providing them with inadequate rationale.
— things worthy of addressing —
An idea that has been pushed – most notably by ‘Girlfriend reviews’ on youtube – is the idea that our feelings towards Abby are dependant on our subjective ability to see beyond otherness – the idea that the more rational players will find their hatred dissipates as parallels are drawn with Ellie, and we realise that they are identical characters. The issue with that is that whilst Abby and Ellie are constantly compared through their shared love of nature exhibits, among other traits, they are not actually moral parallels:
- Abby sees that Joel killed to save his daughter, and decides to hunt him. When she is successful, Ellie sees that Abby killed to avenge, and attempts to repay this. The point is, Abby wished death upon someone whose focus was to save another, whilst Ellie wished death upon someone whose focus was to avenge. This doesn’t make Ellie’s revenge right, but it does make it objectively more reasonable.
- Abby chose to torture, not just kill. At first glance this could be attributed to the fact that Joel potentially damned humanity, however that doesn’t actually work: Joel and Abby’s father are identical , because they are willing to dismiss wider humanity to save their family (the surgeon insinuates without ambiguity that he would not sacrifice Abby for a vaccine). With this in mind, Abby cannot seek to avenge her father, and punish someone for making a decision she knew her father would make simultaeneously. Ellie torturing Nora is then used to mirror this, except later dialogue explains that Ellie tortured for information, which is clearly better than torturing for purpose of wallowing in another’s pain.
- Abby’s determination to kill has lasted for five years, meaning she should be beyond the point where recency should sway her to be overly impulsive – whilst Ellie scrambles for revenge in a frantic effort to feel she has done justice, Abby spent years thinking this through before killing, so even in spite of the psychological turmoil should’ve had a much greater understanding of the potential repercussions).
- Ellie killing Abby’s friends loses weight when we consider the fact that, every time, she approached them for information, and then they forced her hand – Nora, Owen and Mel all escalate the situations such that only one party can survive, so Ellie was choosing to survive, not to murder, once again making her more amenable. (It is notable that I played the game non-lethally everywhere possible, which avoided the ludonarrative dissonance experienced by many others in this regard). Whilst this was likely done to villify the cycle of violence instead of the characters, the fact that Abby didn’t have this same lack of control over her kills separates the women.
Many suggest that we are not supposed to have a revolutionary change of heart to favour Abby (which would be quite impressive if they had managed it), that we’re not supposed to take her side, and that the story is solely about revenge cycles, at least up to the absolute end of Seattle. If this is the case, I truly believe said story is even worse: as a concept, taking away things we love to fuel a revenge cycle narrative, without the intention of making any profound or meaningful points, means the writers simply chose to deliver an unpleasant experience, in the place of a pleasant one, without making it worthwhile – I could be biased, but I simply don’t see anyone contesting the idea that revenge is bad, or that empathy is good – in this scenario, the game is an unpleasant process to prove two plus two equals four.
The gameplay was very good – the general critique it has received is that it hasn’t changed much, but I simply don’t take issue with this. It’s brutal, it emphasises the scarcity of supplies, and it successfully creates suspense when intended. I also believe the improved graphics do a lot for the gameplay: when the goal is to rub your face in horrific things, a seven-year step forward in graphical fidelity does a lot. It’s perfect to play second-fiddle to the story.
Likewise, the acting is flawless.
I played the game one day after replaying the original, having avoided all spoilers. I gave it the benefit of the doubt after they took away Joel, and even when they made Abby the playable character, because those decisions did not stop the game from potentially being great.
Gamedy 