>>715578625I recall a lot of people expressed the sentiment that they felt they were being admonished for an act that the game essentially forced them to do. With the previous game, I remember people not necessarily agreeing with Joel killing those doctors, but since it was literally the only way to progress there wasn't much of a choice. Now the second game is all "But that doctor was a good guy with a daughter who saved animals, and you killed him you monster!" And for some, I guess it felt like the game was insulting them or something.
This sort of issue is present in a lot of games that don't provide the player with much agency. Games are, first and foremost, an interactive medium, and I think this is one of the reasons certain storytellers are attracted to it, but those storytellers don't always necessarily take full advantage of what it offers. Story-driven games with an emphasis on placing the player in the shoes of the protagonist often try to make the player complicit in the player's actions, and will try to make the player feel a sense of guilt in order to sell their story. But this guilt doesn't really work if the player has no agency. Literally no one is going to feel guilty for doing something a hyper-linear game forced them into doing, but if you criticize the player for being "short-sighted" or "not realizing that the doctor was a human being with his own life and family", it comes off as disingenuous. But at the same time, TLoU2 literally does not work if the player has any degree of agency. Subsequently, it's a story game that completely fails to take advantage of its medium.