Lurker > pezzicle

Honestly I'd avoid that spoiler topic

I got reamed out hard for pointing out inaccurate things in what he was saying.

I'm about 2.5 hours in. Liking it. Nothing too crazy one way or the other so far. Feels like it is just starting

---

Tribe Time!

You wanna talk about what you don't like about a game, of course.

I don't expect anyone to like the game. I'm only like 2 hours into it, I have no idea what my opinion about it is going to be

But I've now engaged with two different things this person has said that are flat out false, and that, to me, really diminishes a lot of this topic. You can disagree all you want, that's fine with me. I'll leave you all to your echo chamber

---

Tribe Time!

Leonhart4 posted...

You've been sitting and waiting to pounce on this gotcha haven't you

They're all flashback interactions which he has already said is all that happens, no interactions in the events of the game itself

No I have not. I haven't engaged with this topic since he completely ignored my last post.

And no, they aren't all flashbacks. I'm playing the game right now. They literally have an interaction in the first 15 minutes of the game

---

Tribe Time!

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

No interactions between Joel and Ellie at all in this game. Not even one.

Oh wow another false claim who'd have thought

---

Tribe Time!

Hope your sleep gets better

---

Tribe Time!

I just don't shave

---

Tribe Time!

ZaziGuado posted...

GROUP 1
2 -- Celeste
3 -- Nier

3 -- The Last of Us
2 -- Crypt of the Necrodancer

GROUP 2
3 -- Night in the Woods
2 -- God of War

0 -- Donkey Kong Country Returns
5 -- Batman: Arkham City

GROUP 3
3 -- Portal 2
2 -- Pokemon HG/SS

5 -- Dragon Quest XI: Echoes of an Elusive Age
0 -- Mario Kart 8

---

Tribe Time!

ZaziGuado posted...

+10 NieR: Automata
+9 The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
+8 Mass Effect 2
+7 Pyre
+6 Night in the Woods
+5 Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night
+4 Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance
+3 Super Meat Boy
+2 Cuphead
+1 Ori and the Blind Forest

---

Tribe Time!

sorry, my daughters name is ally i used ally instead of abby will edit

---

Tribe Time!

You want me to go back and read. Fine. Here:

• youre mad that Abby kills joel with no interaction. you are mad that Joel is hardly in the game at the start, that he doesn't really get to engage with Ellie. You are mad that Abby kills Joel after he saves her.
• calls it both bad and insane that this happens
• believes that abby is deranged and it angers you that we have to play as "some random character who kills joel for no reason"
• joel isn't the villian because he just saved abby
• its sloppy and rushed
• its dumb because this game revolved around a character who was meaningless in the first game
• "[Joel] tried to do a lot of the right things, and he had a lot of humanity to him. The ending of the game is crafted in a way to make you feel like Joel is making the right decision to save Ellie and kill the Fireflies, who are billed as very nasty people overall throughout the game. It's only now, before this game is released, that they are trying to convince us that Joel was actually in the wrong for it, to the point of retconing things"
• "I would say if Joel started killing random people and rampage against them to murder them, yes. He'd be a psychopath too. But you'd also have to contend with the fact that they killed a little girl too, which is pretty unconscionable in itself."

Bold things are things that are, in my opinion, you using the narrative of "Joel is a good guy" to explain why it is you don't like the creative decisions in this game.

We then get to "Chose one: Joel going on a murder spree to save Ellie's life after they took her without consent to crack her head open for a cure, in which they've stated they've had zero success with despite trying countless times to use immune people for the cure [...]"

Which, bolded, is not true at all and I've point that out already.

we then get an assumption about abby in the form of: "But Abby still had a giant support system with her group she's been with her whole life, currently lives in a place with electricity and air conditioning and a state of the art gym" While we actually have no idea if this is true or not and we have no idea what kind of state Joel left the Fireflies in or what happened with their base (unless i have missed some key info from LoU info dumps, which if so, correct me)

• "She is trying to hunt down and murder him, full stop."
• "Joel is saving Ellie from some people who don't give a s*** and will do whatever they can for another likely failed crack at a cure. That's the sticking point here."

"That's the sticking point here." Which I have already pointed out is not accurate. So it's not a sticking point at all actually it makes your entire argument fall apart when the "sticking point" is not true.

You go on to support your argument again that Joel is "saving Ellie from awful people trying to murder an her," when that isn't really a fair representation of the game.

You then circle back around to it being done too quickly and without "any sort of meaningful interaction" or "nuance". There is no positive Joel and Ellie hangs, no talk of who Abby is, and you just kill Joel like he means nothing.

Which, to me, just complete ignores the fact that there is TWENTY hours left in the game, and so to make claims like that and to suggest that none of those thing ever happens in the rest of the game, is pretty disingenuous.

We then get to a point where I enter the conversation and get told my posts are trash.

I am not saying that you can't dislike the game. I'm not saying that where you end up is not where you should end up. It's art, you are allowed to like or it or you are allowed to dislike it. I have issue with how you get to your conclusion, because I think the way you get there is based on some key pieces that I think are either just flat out wrong, or interpreted incorrectly.

---

Tribe Time!

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

I'm not elaborating on them to you because I'm not repeating everything I said in this topic.

The fact that you are incapable of reading is why your posts are trash and not worth engaging with.

You are fucking lunacy with selective vision.

You are not worth talking with because of that.

So either go back and read or stop crying about how people are ignoring you and your idiotic posts that aren't grounded in any sort of logic or understanding.

jfc
you literally called my posts trash after a single post talking about the first game and a small interaction with Leon about my misrepresentation of your posts

you never once gave me the time of day so don't go riding around on your high horse like youve been totally willing to engage with me but i've been rude or inconsiderate

you literally dismissed me immediately

---

Tribe Time!

well, it seems that way to me and if you would like to elaborate on that instead of just calling all my posts trash, i'm all ears

the last 2 pages would have been widely different if you hadn't of dismissed my posts as trash in the first place because you didn't want to interact with them

---

Tribe Time!

ctesjbuvf posted...

Well, right, it was just Leon and I (at least) not finding Joel likeable. But it's really important if you think he is or not and I think that was pretty clear from the opening post.

It still doesn't change the fact that it was not the only issue presented from the start.

thats the thing. my entire point has been that the TC does think that Joel is a likeable character, and has been informing his entire stance. Yes, they have fleshed out their thought process, but the crux of their argument is that Joel is likable.

that is all ive been saying, and i've simply been pointing out ways in which his engagement with the story hasn't been fully accurate, and been asking him to flesh out these ideas more, and ive just been getting crapped on over and over again and utterly dismissed

---

Tribe Time!

Sharinnegan posted...

because the bond between Joel and Ellie was the entire point of TLOU. it all culminating in making us f*** over mankind to protect the bond we spent the whole game creating.

destroying that bond at the very start of the next game makes it all seem pointless, the whole TLOU1 experience. and it shows either a lack of respect for the legacy of TLOU1, or worse, a lack of understanding of what made it so loved.

would Joel being dead undermine the first game? Would him dieing because of zombies or because he like falls off a cliff or something undermine the first game?

I agree that the bond was the entire point of the game and the reason it is so revered as a well written game is entirely because of how it ends and what Joel does

but I dont think that his death completely diminishes that. Im wondering why this death diminishes the bond he had with Ellie

---

Tribe Time!

ctesjbuvf posted...

You've been saying most of the topic that the arguments boiled down to Joel being likeable or Abby being unlikeable, but I don't think anyone ever said the former of the two and it followed by more since before you posted in the topic. Maybe Leon hadn't said that himself, but he pointed out others had, which is true.

from the first page:

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

If I remember right, he makes a move with the scalpel to harm Joel with it too. Also, he was black in the first game but now he's white. So that's weird too. Like he's so meaningless of a character that they're willing to just change his race because they thought nobody would remember, but he's not so meaningless because the entire game revolves around his death.

I disagree with that. He tried to do a lot of the right things, and he had a lot of humanity to him. The ending of the game is crafted in a way to make you feel like Joel is making the right decision to save Ellie and kill the Fireflies, who are billed as very nasty people overall throughout the game. It's only now, before this game is released, that they are trying to convince us that Joel was actually in the wrong for it, to the point of retconing things (such as Druckmann saying if they got to crack open Ellie's brain, they absolutely would have found the cure when the game states that these scientists suck and they've had no success).

---

Tribe Time!

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

I wish I could find the screenshot of that journal entry because it was floating around months ago when people were debunking Neil Druckmann's stupid comment about Ellie 100% would have given them the cure if she was sacrificed. It would take me hours though, likely. But I absolutely remember seeing it and it explicitly stating they have failed with every single procedure and haven't gotten closer to a cure yet.

pezzicle posted...

From surgeon's Recorder:

"It states that Ellie's immunity is an anomaly that has never been seen before and that the Fireflies have experimented on other infected subjects, albeit ones without immunity to the virus."

i cant believe you havent responded to this yet

---

Tribe Time!

LeonhartFour posted...

TLOU1 actually gives you a reason to empathize with Joel even if you don't agree with what he did. I think Joel did the wrong thing, but I've at least been given time to make the connection of how much Ellie means to him. TLOU2 seems to just jump straight into Abby killing this guy. No context, no explanation, no buildup, no internal conflict on Abby's part about a guy who literally saved her life minutes before, just "hey it's Joel, oh Joel's dead." As someone else said earlier, it's just extremely heavy handed in their attempt to beat it into your head that revenge is bad.

come one man, no need to be sarcastic with the first part of that post. i was in no way rude to you until you started to post that my posts were bad over and over again.

and thank you, you never actually wrote this out in the topic. you said that joel was wrong in the end (for the first game) but never actually wrote out why you think killing him at the beginning is an issue other then that it makes Abby unlikable. That was the extent of your conversation in this topic prior to calling me out for bad posts.


---

Tribe Time!

ExThaNemesis posted...

bro you're the only one here that is being repeatedly confused by simple concepts that have now been explained multiple times by different people

at some point you have to realize you're the problem

please quote these explanations that i have been given

---

Tribe Time!

Sharinnegan posted...

the fact that bond immediately shatters in the very start of the sequel as Joel gets killed over the death of some random unnamed character that had no relevance in part 1 completely undermines the events of the first game.

Why does Joel getting killed in the first 3 hours undermine the events of the first game?


---

Tribe Time!

GavsEvans123 posted...

Joel didn't kill Abby's father in cold blood, he threatened Joel with a scalpel first. The player is given the choice of whether to kill the other doctors or let them live, because they don't attack Joel or try to kill him, whereas Abby's father did, and the world of The Last of Us has already been well established as "kill or be killed" for everyone. Joel may be the one we see killing everyone because he's the main character, but everyone else in the world is trying to kill Joel too, and same goes for off-screen characters who live in this world killing people who threaten them off-screen.

ExThaNemesis posted...

in fact I'm starting to think, with their inability to grasp simple interactions on this message board, that pezzicle was one of the writers for TLOU2.

these being back to back is freaking gold because if you actually read my post i explained entirely why saying "in cold blood" was probably HER narrative, not the actual real narrative

---

Tribe Time!

ExThaNemesis posted...

pezzicle absolutely 100% works for naughty dog

LOL

i am not even arguing that the game is good or that i like it or people should like it

i am simply trying to understand WHY people believe what they believe, and they either say something like "ummm ive already said lots of things to explain myself" when they actually have said very very little.

or they have said a whole lot, much of which is just wholly inaccurate, and when pointed out they just proceed to ignore my posts because "they are trash"

its almost comical at this point

---

Tribe Time!

LeonhartFour posted...

I shouldn't have to keep repeating myself because you apparently can't remember or didn't pay attention to what other people said. You want people to "engage" you but you don't seem to retain things very well!

Of course, no matter what I say, you say I didn't try hard enough for you, so why should I bother?

lol, again. not engaging with the conversation.

Here we go

Leon post in response to me #1: You're also oversimplifying his rationale but whatever
Leon post in response to me #2: Again, you're oversimplifying his argument and kinda misrepresenting it to make it sound invalid
Leon post in response to me #3: You posted one direct quote and misrepresented another in the way you paraphrased it to try to link them together
Leon post in response to me #4: You were talking like the issue was that he was upset they killed Joel because he's a good person when his issue has been how they actually do the deed

Hey, we've finally gotten pretty close to actually having a discourse about it. Only took 4 posts over 3 hours.

Leon post in response to me #5: You're arguing about how he presented the original game's ending, sure. You can argue that he's not looking at it right, but it still really doesn't change the issues he has with what they do with Joel in this game since I don't agree with his interpretation of the ending and I still think it's bad.

no explanation at all of why you think its bad. no discourse. just basically repeating that i'm not arguing properly even though you aren't saying anything at all to respond to what i am actually saying

Leon post in response to me #6: You actually can have issues because it's more than just emotional attachments to the characters from the first game.

what those are? no idea


---

Tribe Time!

UltimaterializerX posted...

If I save your life and you turn around and literally *immediately* bludgeon me to death, youre a unlikeable jerkoff.

sure, but that is also completely ignoring that Joel murdered her father.

Like, take this from the perspective of Abby for a second. **** hits the fan five years ago where they live, and she finds out that her father was murdered in cold blood. Sure, the narrative around that isn't maybe fully accurate, but it isn't like someone i going to say to her "hey we were gonna kill this girl and it was like his daughter and we were probably gonna kill him too and he killed us instead"

the narrative would 100% be slanted in some way to be like "Joel killed your dad and Marlene in cold blood and kidnapped the immune girl." She is obviously ridiculous upset and traumatized, and it has been brewing for 5 years. We have no context around any of those things at all in relation to her story, and yes, at the time she kills Joel, we have none of that. So it probably leaves a bad taste in a lot of peoples mouths because of that.

BUT, it makes sense. She has just found the guy who killed her father, killed Marlene, probably did irreparable damage to the cause she was a part of, a cause she saw as humanities last hope of salvation (whether that was correct or not). She, in that context, isn't think "oh this guy just saved me" she is thinking "**** this dude"

does it seem like they are going WAAAY over the top in relation to how the violence is portrayed? Sure. I can get on board with that. Should they have engaged with Abby more or in a different way so that we develop a different sort of relation with her prior to killing Joel? Maybe? I can't say, I haven't played the game, nor do I know what they do in the remaining 20 hours to flesh out the ideas and character interactions that have happened in the first few hours of the game.

But to simply dismiss the game as "really bad" and saying that "Druckman is retconning the first game" is just, not really fair at all

---

Tribe Time!

LeonhartFour posted...

I'm pretty sure both ctes and I have both given reasons as people who don't like Joel that much so either you missed them or you're ignoring them. As I said before, you don't have to like Joel to have an issue with how the game approaches it.

and i keep hearing this but also continue to have silence on an explanation.

you just posted about how i was misrepresenting his argument without actually engaging with what i said. just dismissed it as "misrepresentation" and walked away.

then, like 2 posts later i was told by TC that my posts were trash and he wouldn't be responding. he doesn't even engage with what i am saying at all, nor try to explain how what i am saying is missing his point. he just calls them trash posts, dismisses them, and moves on.

then he doubles back and talks about this "document" that is 100% real he saw it with his own eyes. I then post said document, that actually shows that he is wrong and it doesn't say what he is claiming. And I get crickets on that front too


---

Tribe Time!

UltimaterializerX posted...

This man gets it. Joel dying is not the problem.

i still haven't heard an actual interesting and nuanced take on why the way that he dies is problematic that doesn't involve some level of "I like Joel"

I'm not even trolling, and every time I bring this up I just get told I'm misrepresenting people's opinions and my posts are trash and then blatantly ignored

---

Tribe Time!

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

You don't need to make it so you empathize with her.

You just need to make her not seem like an entirely terrible human being.

And this is fine with me

---

Tribe Time!

redrocket posted...

Ok, I gotta ask. Your introduction to this character has her torturing and murdering a guy in cold blood. Exactly what context or character development do you think the rest of the game is going to provide to make you think, oh yeah, that was totally justified, shes cool now?

Why does she need to be cool tho

We don't always have to play as the hero

---

Tribe Time!

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

(Psst this is why I am ignoring his posts. I don't have time to deal with people who purposefully misunderstand or misrepresent things I'm saying and I'd rather engage with people who can actually have discourse.)

LOL man. I can't even with this.

As I have said, many times. Your. Entire. Argument. Is. Based. On. Your. Interpretation. And. Understanding. Of. The. First. Game.

Which I take issue with. It is informing your entire point. You even doubled back earlier.today to talk about this apparent document that informs your opinion about the fireflies and why Joel was right. Which I have pointed out is wrong. And you never responded to, which isn't surprising.

You have issue with how Joel is treated BECAUSE of your opinion of Joel (which is informed by your incorrect engagement with prices from the first game)

You are upset with how Abby treats Joel because of WHO JOEL IS and what he means to you.

I'm not in any way saying that your end point is wrong. That you can't be upset with what you are upset about. I am saying that the way that you get there is based on "facts" you claim but aren't actually true. It taints your entire argument to start like that. If I am making an argument about something and my initial points that support said argument are just straight up incorrect, that's an issue

---

Tribe Time!

Leonhart4 posted...

You actually can have issues because it's more than just emotional attachments to the characters from the first game.

Sure, but I haven't seen anyone in this topic having a conversation about different aspects of the game that they have issue with

---

Tribe Time!

Leonhart4 posted...

You're arguing about how he presented the original game's ending, sure. You can argue that he's not looking at it right, but it still really doesn't change the issues he has with what they do with Joel in this game since I don't agree with his interpretation of the ending and I still think it's bad.

I disagree because the way people are looking at this game is based on the first game. If you have not played the first game you won't have any sort of issue with the beats of the story because they mean nothing to you.

---

Tribe Time!

Leonhart4 posted...

I'm pretty sure I told you how. You were talking like the issue was that he was upset they killed Joel because he's a good person when his issue has been how they actually do the deed, which he elaborated on very thoroughly.

My point was that numerous points he was making were not accurate at all

The entire crux of his argument rests on the belief that:
1. The fireflies had been experimenting in other immune people to no avail
2. They were going to kill Ellie regardless of that fact
3. Joel was doing the noble thing by saving Ellie from the "evil" fireflies
4. Joel was always the hero and they have now retconned that to fit the narrative of this game

None of which is true

And when I pointed out actual text from the game to support what I am saying, I get zero response at all to that

---

Tribe Time!

NFUN posted...

i have zero stake in this game at all. I'm only here because I'm finding people's reaction interesting. You're acting like a child

I've been told that I'm misconstruing someone's argument without actually been told how.

I've been told that my comments about how someone is making claims about the first game that are infactual are "trash"

And I'm the childish one

Mmmk bud

---

Tribe Time!

I'm literally pointing out how an argument is flawed and I'm getting flack because it doesn't go with the narrative

---

Tribe Time!

NFUN posted...

don't break your promises

Grow up come the **** on

---

Tribe Time!

Emeraldegg posted...

You must have joined late but I put out in the open earlier in the topic that I've never played tlou, merely that I was invested. Please don't get so ill with me.

I wasn't but I get why it could come across like that

---

Tribe Time!

From surgeon's Recorder:

"It states that Ellie's immunity is an anomaly that has never been seen before and that the Fireflies have experimented on other infected subjects, albeit ones without immunity to the virus."

---

Tribe Time!

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

I wish I could find the screenshot of that journal entry because it was floating around months ago when people were debunking Neil Druckmann's stupid comment about Ellie 100% would have given them the cure if she was sacrificed. It would take me hours though, likely. But I absolutely remember seeing it and it explicitly stating they have failed with every single procedure and haven't gotten closer to a cure yet.

im currently looking at the text of the 4 documents that are found in that chapter

https://thelastofus.fandom.com/wiki/Surgeon%27s_Recorder
https://thelastofus.fandom.com/wiki/Marlene%27s_Journal
https://thelastofus.fandom.com/wiki/Marlene%27s_Recorder_1
https://thelastofus.fandom.com/wiki/Marlene%27s_Recorder_2

i havent finished yet tho

---

Tribe Time!

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

It's in one of the in-game journals or whatever where one of the scientists write that they've failed a ton of times before this.

I'm not responding to the rest of your posts because they're absolute trash though.

lol all i needed to know

peace board 8

---

Tribe Time!

Leonhart4 posted...

You posted one direct quote and misrepresented another in the way you paraphrased it to try to link them together so you could just say he's only mad they killed Joel at all, not that there's an issue with how it's done.

sure. i'll admit to that.

it still doesn't change the fact that he is biting into a chocolate bar, expecting a hamburger, and then getting mad that its a chocolate bar

he is playing and critiquing the game based on his own terms instead of the games terms

im certainly not saying last of us 2 is good. ive not played it. im certainly not saying im going to like the way that they do things, personally. but im also not making topics about how its "a bad game" because it doesn't have story beats that I want it to have

---

Tribe Time!

Leonhart4 posted...

Again, you're oversimplifying his argument and kinda misrepresenting it to make it sound invalid. That's not why he's saying it's bad. He has an issue with the way they do it, not that they do it at all.

i dont think i am misrepresenting anything when i am posting direct quotes but okay

---

Tribe Time!

Emeraldegg posted...

So I'm curious. The dilemma here seems to be that Abby acted out irrationally, not even asking Joel why he did what he did and going above and beyond what he seems to have "deserved," and for that she is being labeled as a psychopath. Would Joel have done the same thing if someone had actually killed Ellie? Would he have gone on a rampage against anyone involved, or would he have listened to their reasoning, especially if it was for "the good of the world"?

Basically I'm asking if joel were in abby's shoes, and ellie died in place of abby's father, woudl joel have acted the same way?

HE DOES GO ON A RAMPAGE

he literally murders like 20 Fireflies at the thought of them killing Ellie. Of course if she had died in another context he would have done the same

---

Tribe Time!

they also aren't treating joel as a villian this game. they are treating joel as a villian TO ABBY

that is very different

---

Tribe Time!

Leonhart4 posted...

Opinions can't be valid arguments, you heard it here first

(You're also oversimplifying his rationale but whatever)

not really. his argument boils down to "allie kills joel and thats mean because joel is a good person"

he explicitly states "The ending of the game is crafted in a way to make you feel like Joel is making the right decision to save Ellie and kill the Fireflies, who are billed as very nasty people overall throughout the game. It's only now, before this game is released, that they are trying to convince us that Joel was actually in the wrong for it, to the point of retconing things " which is just factually wrong

---

Tribe Time!

It's not tho. People posting here are trying to convince people that their belief is valid and that last of us part 2 is bad. They are having a debate.

If someone wants to say "I don't like Last of Us part 2" that's fine but to say "Last of Us 2 is bad" you need to actually make an argument to support your belief. "I like Joel and him dieing is dumb" supports "I don't like last of us" not "last of us is bad"


---

Tribe Time!

Saying "last of us 2" is crap because Joel dies at the start and "that's dumb he was the main character in the first game and I liked him and I wanted more Joel and Ellie times" is not a valid argument

It's your own opinion

---

Tribe Time!

It's also the ENTIRE plot of the game. The ending isn't "oh man maybe a vaccine can't be made after all."

The entire journey of the game, the entire reason that Joel and Ellie become as close as they do and develop the kind of love and connection that they do is precisely because of the vaccine. It's the entire crux of the game

The game.is about how far Joel will go to keep Ellie in his life. Not only does he murder a bunch of fireflies who were trying to find a cure (which, although she doesn't explicitly state she would have gone thru with, you can infer by multiple conversations and.how she reacts to things that Ellie WOULD have sacrificed herself for that), he then lies to Ellie about it, sacrificing his own relationship with her to keep her in his life. She was what was keeping him alive, that is why he did what he did. She was all he had left.

But Joel is no hero, and to the children of those murdered by him at the hospital, he is vile. He is some dude who murdered their entire medical wing as a group, and their leader. Anyone would be pissed, and it isn't a stretch that someone has sworn revenge

You may not like that that is the direction the story goes, but that doesn't mean it doesn't make sense

---

Tribe Time!

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

So let me ask this then. This isn't a gotcha, but more just to see what you think. If the game stopped and let you decide between:

Joel going on a murder spree to save Ellie's life after they took her without consent to crack her head open for a cure, in which they've stated they've had zero success with despite trying countless times to use immune people for the cure

or

Joel letting Ellie die for a very slim chance of a cure being made, without Ellie's consent

What do you choose?

Might be way behind but I do not in any way remember the fireflies indicating that they have tried to create a cure with immune people before. I am 95% sure that is not an accurate explanation of what happens in the game

---

Tribe Time!

TheArkOfTurus posted...

+10 Fallout: New Vegas
+9 Nier
+8 Horizon Zero Dawn
+7 Shovel Knight
+6 Super Smash Bros. For 3DS/Wii U
+5 Jackbox Party Pack 3
+4 DOOM
+3 Tales of Berseria
+2 Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker
+1 Yoshi's Crafted World

---

Tribe Time!

Ya that's tight as all hell

---

Tribe Time!

I also think it's important to state that I'm a clinical psychologist and so looking at this conversation thru a completely different lens then maybe others are

However, it is important to discern between the difference between "feel this way" and "feel bad about yourself"

Making a video game that is purposefully trying to get you to feel a specific way is emotional manipulation. As stated about by KP, lots of media is emotionally manipulative.

Making a video game that is emotionally manipulative AMD makes you do something then berates and chastises and attempts to shame you for doing said action when you have no option is gaslighting

---

Tribe Time!