Thanks for sharing this highlight. I find it interesting how one of them believes in the needs of the many, while the other guy simply wants to save Ellie- the person who he- through Joel has bonded with and doesn't want to let die. I agree with both of their perspectives, but it's not until you really further analyze the entire situation like for example EFAP through all of their various live streams on TLOU2 that the argument should swing in favor of what Joel did. The fireflies condemned Joel to death going back outside without his weapons + apparently it's impossible to make a vaccine for a fungi + can one doctor and a small team of medical professionals really make a vaccine anyways? + surely the fireflies were just use this as leverage against all their enemies + Ellie was never asked if she'd be fine with dying to (potentially) make the cure, it was decided for her etc etc.
the fireflies are a terror ist organization, another amoral faction. Someone saving a zebra doesn't give them permission to kill an unconscious child. Cuckmann is a subpar writer compared to the real talent behind TLoU 1.
Yeah, that's exactly why I wanted to share it. Some things I'd like to adress: "The fireflies condemned Joel to death going back outside without his weapons" - Hard disagree, I think he easily would survive, this is Joel we're talking about. And this is not one of the reasons for why Joel decides to attack them, so I don't think this should be taken into consideration when determining whether he did the right thing or not. Well, maybe you could argue that it further proofs that the Fireflies are bad people and cannot be trusted with using the cure altruistically, but I don't think that was ever part of Joel's decision making when he chose to save her. He made his choice as soon as he found out that they were gonna kill Ellie to get the cure. It only takes about 3 sec. after her finds out that she's gonna die for Joel to go: "Find someone else." There wasn't even enough time for Joel to really considering how much (or little) a cure would've saved people. But with the meta-knowledge that we have; Yes, Joel did absolutely do the right thing. "apparently, it's impossible to make a vaccine for a fungi" - That's an apply to reality, and even I would accept that as a criticism, that one would be on the writers not the Fireflies. It's also impossible for Cordycepts to affect humans, and for the bodies of the infected to stay alive without food. "can one doctor and a small team of medical professionals really make a vaccine anyways?" - The game definitely thinks so and wants us to think the same, and at the end of the day this game is still science fiction. The game is telling us that the cure will work and is asking us to except that. The game does give us information that goes against this: The surgeon's recording, where (even though he sounds very confident about it.) he says: "We must *find a way* to replicate this state under laboratory conditions", meaning that it's not 100% certain that it will work. I'm not sure if the writers knew what they did by including this, it feels like a bit of a blunder to me. I think the mass-producing and distribution issues are a way bigger problem thought, and I don't think you can square that one away with it being science fiction. The second game does fix this a bit by giving the WLF huge amounts of resources and manpower, but that creates a different problem since it makes a cure seem less needed if there are factions that are thriving as much as the WLF does. "surely the fireflies were just use this as leverage against all their enemies" - Most likely, yeah. they definitely wouldn't fucking share it the military, that's for sure. However, they could use it form alliances with other factions, their main motivation is to 'put humanity back in control of it's own destiny' and if forming alliances would help with achieving that, then obviously they would do this. "Ellie was never asked if she'd be fine with dying to (potentially) make the cure" - Change 'potentially' to 'most likely' and I agree. Fucked up either way.
It's impossible to get a vaccine to fungal infections because we can't reverse engineer it for a vaccine. In TLOU there is a cure, it's inside Ellie's cells in her brain. They can absolutely reverse engineer a cure if one exists. In real life there is no Ellie.
It's also important to recognize that there are several stages of preparation before you leap into brain surgery. How do we know that it'll effectively create a vaccine or that they'll be able to continue to produce it once she's dead? They could do a spinal tap or a minor biopsy without killing her, potential start a stable culture outside of her head that could go towards further research and development of a cure. Reducing it to all or nothing gamble with such a precious specimen says to me that they're too desperate, too short sighted, to trust them with that. I understand that Naughty Dog wants us to assume that they would've succeeded, but there isn't any evidence to support their claims, and the procedure flies in the face of every medical standard. They could've let Joel see her, taken a week to get things in line, gotten her consent (or not), and if Naughty Dog really wanted to have this conundrum, discovered that they were 100% confident it'd work. But no. They're in a hurry. Sad writing, frankly.
I love the character development they had while playing. As many people pointed out: "Alright, here's Garbage." *Five hours later* "I'm gonna kill EVERYONE to save Garbage." They tried to not get the feels, but the game's just that well written.
![Behind the Scenes - The Last of Us [Making of]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LH18nGoIUKo/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for sharing this highlight. I find it interesting how one of them believes in the needs of the many, while the other guy simply wants to save Ellie- the person who he- through Joel has bonded with and doesn't want to let die. I agree with both of their perspectives, but it's not until you really further analyze the entire situation like for example EFAP through all of their various live streams on TLOU2 that the argument should swing in favor of what Joel did.
The fireflies condemned Joel to death going back outside without his weapons + apparently it's impossible to make a vaccine for a fungi + can one doctor and a small team of medical professionals really make a vaccine anyways? + surely the fireflies were just use this as leverage against all their enemies + Ellie was never asked if she'd be fine with dying to (potentially) make the cure, it was decided for her etc etc.
the fireflies are a terror ist organization, another amoral faction.
Someone saving a zebra doesn't give them permission to kill an unconscious child.
Cuckmann is a subpar writer compared to the real talent behind TLoU 1.
Yeah, that's exactly why I wanted to share it.
Some things I'd like to adress:
"The fireflies condemned Joel to death going back outside without his weapons" - Hard disagree, I think he easily would survive, this is Joel we're talking about. And this is not one of the reasons for why Joel decides to attack them, so I don't think this should be taken into consideration when determining whether he did the right thing or not. Well, maybe you could argue that it further proofs that the Fireflies are bad people and cannot be trusted with using the cure altruistically, but I don't think that was ever part of Joel's decision making when he chose to save her. He made his choice as soon as he found out that they were gonna kill Ellie to get the cure. It only takes about 3 sec. after her finds out that she's gonna die for Joel to go: "Find someone else." There wasn't even enough time for Joel to really considering how much (or little) a cure would've saved people. But with the meta-knowledge that we have; Yes, Joel did absolutely do the right thing.
"apparently, it's impossible to make a vaccine for a fungi" - That's an apply to reality, and even I would accept that as a criticism, that one would be on the writers not the Fireflies. It's also impossible for Cordycepts to affect humans, and for the bodies of the infected to stay alive without food.
"can one doctor and a small team of medical professionals really make a vaccine anyways?" - The game definitely thinks so and wants us to think the same, and at the end of the day this game is still science fiction. The game is telling us that the cure will work and is asking us to except that. The game does give us information that goes against this: The surgeon's recording, where (even though he sounds very confident about it.) he says: "We must *find a way* to replicate this state under laboratory conditions", meaning that it's not 100% certain that it will work. I'm not sure if the writers knew what they did by including this, it feels like a bit of a blunder to me. I think the mass-producing and distribution issues are a way bigger problem thought, and I don't think you can square that one away with it being science fiction. The second game does fix this a bit by giving the WLF huge amounts of resources and manpower, but that creates a different problem since it makes a cure seem less needed if there are factions that are thriving as much as the WLF does.
"surely the fireflies were just use this as leverage against all their enemies" - Most likely, yeah. they definitely wouldn't fucking share it the military, that's for sure. However, they could use it form alliances with other factions, their main motivation is to 'put humanity back in control of it's own destiny' and if forming alliances would help with achieving that, then obviously they would do this.
"Ellie was never asked if she'd be fine with dying to (potentially) make the cure" - Change 'potentially' to 'most likely' and I agree. Fucked up either way.
It's impossible to get a vaccine to fungal infections because we can't reverse engineer it for a vaccine.
In TLOU there is a cure, it's inside Ellie's cells in her brain. They can absolutely reverse engineer a cure if one exists. In real life there is no Ellie.
It's also important to recognize that there are several stages of preparation before you leap into brain surgery. How do we know that it'll effectively create a vaccine or that they'll be able to continue to produce it once she's dead? They could do a spinal tap or a minor biopsy without killing her, potential start a stable culture outside of her head that could go towards further research and development of a cure. Reducing it to all or nothing gamble with such a precious specimen says to me that they're too desperate, too short sighted, to trust them with that. I understand that Naughty Dog wants us to assume that they would've succeeded, but there isn't any evidence to support their claims, and the procedure flies in the face of every medical standard. They could've let Joel see her, taken a week to get things in line, gotten her consent (or not), and if Naughty Dog really wanted to have this conundrum, discovered that they were 100% confident it'd work. But no. They're in a hurry. Sad writing, frankly.
I love the character development they had while playing. As many people pointed out: "Alright, here's Garbage." *Five hours later* "I'm gonna kill EVERYONE to save Garbage."
They tried to not get the feels, but the game's just that well written.
Joel did nothing wrong
It's neat to hear Pat have the take he does 10 years before having a kid of his own, so he's probably only doubled or tripled down on his stance here.