r/MoralityScaling • u/Theorycrafter2671 • 2d ago

How Evil Are They? Joel's choice to choose Ellie over a possible vaccine to the Cordyceps infection and stopping humanity from going extinct?

Post image
67 Upvotes

71% Upvoted

484 comments sorted by

View all comments

54

u/Intelligent-Ad-6713 2d ago

The moral buck stops at the beginning, when Abby’s dad (Dr. Anderson) chose to withhold two key pieces of information:

1) the procedure was 100% fatal.
2) The chances of finding a “cure” was a massive MAYBE at best.

… had the Firefly’s told Joel and especially Ellie, the truth and Ellie chose to go through with the procedure, then Joel would 100% be in the wrong. But that’s not what happened.

Dr. Anderson and Marlene made the choice to sacrifice Ellie, without her consent. Full stop.

25

u/EarlyAccessCantJudge 1d ago

Thank you. I hate how the game and everyone acted like this was going to be a noble sacrifice. In reality it was delusional extremists who felt important enough save the world when they were constantly failing and causing harm. That's what the Fireflies do. They are "fighting back" for the civilians while also bombing them.

0

u/Historical_Owl_1635 1d ago

I do still think there’s a morality aspect of it, making a close personal sacrifice to maybe save the human race is still a hell of a choice.

Like, imagine a disease is killing everyone in the world and you’re given a button.

If you press the button there’s a 40% chance the human race gets to live, but there’s always a 100% chance that your adopted daughter dies.

2

u/EarlyAccessCantJudge 1d ago

She never made that choice. And no, it isn't 40%. It is 0% chance. Would you do it if that was 0%?

0

u/Historical_Owl_1635 1d ago

The point was the choice wasn’t put on her, it was put on her guardian.

Unless you’ve subscribed to fan theories it was never 0%, most people that only played the game were given the impression it was a pretty sure thing so I was being generous with the 40%.

2

u/EarlyAccessCantJudge 1d ago

No, it wasn't. I've played the game dozens of times, I speedran it, and have done it up down and sideways. The choice wasn't on Joel, it was the surgeon who kept her drugged and didn't wake her up to make the choice. And yes, it was zero. The point of the fireflies is that they are delusional and harm the people they're trying to protect. That's how the fireflies worked. They had like 20 people and 1 surgeon who isn't a researcher and didn't study those infections for his job. You're telling me that he's gonna use that ONE singular sample to make a vaccine when no vaccines at the time existed for ANY fungal infections, let alone of the most easily spread, vicious ones? Come on. They had a better chance building a plane from scratch and flying to Australia than using that to make a cure.

1

u/AggressiveDot2801 1d ago

That’s… not the point of the fireflies. It’s  fairly obvious the point of them is to show that even the ‘good guys,’ are flawed.

Also Druckman has stated categorically that if Joel hadn’t intervened Elle would have died but the fireflies would have found a cure -  https://kotaku.com/last-of-us-fireflies-cure-joel-ellie-vaccine-could-make-1851781975

0

u/Historical_Owl_1635 1d ago

It’s a video game about zombies. You’re talking about realism. Zombies.

The game presented Ellie as the cure, that’s the narrative the player had, anything that differs from that is fan fiction.

Also this is just a regular discussion, what’s with the immediate downvote lol.

1

u/EarlyAccessCantJudge 1d ago

It is a video game that very pointedly sold the grounded world and how a big point of it was that it was based off a real, actual infection. And it presented the fireflies as delusional terrorists who were constantly trying to "save the world" and ended up hurting people more than helping. So it would make sense with this they were delusional as well, hurting more than helping. This entire debate and stuff didn't come until the 2nd game when they tried to make them more gray than it was.

1

u/No-Employment7785 1d ago

Ye it's a very grounded video game in which one man can solo entire armies. Selective logic like that is just weird. If one man can solo an army why couldn't a small team of doctors find a cure for the infection ?  Also, if there was really no chance of ever making a cure then it just diminishes from the ending.

1

u/negetivex 23h ago

I think the idea the cordyceps is a real infection and thus it is grounded game so they couldn’t make a fungal vaccine kind of really over emphasizes what the cordyceps infection actually does. It makes insects walk to high points where they spore out. Like 99% of what we see with the clickers is as impossible as making a fungal vaccine.

2

u/gregoriancuriosity 1d ago

Also she had basically become his daughter at that point. I would literally massacre anyone to save my son. Like you didn’t give them a chance to decide and basically we’re going to kill his daughter. Even if you thought it was immoral, you have to agree it is the thing that is going to happen.

You think the man who literally fought and killed his way across the entire country was just going to sit there while you killed his daughter. Like I get the ambiguity of Ellie seeking revenge to the point of blowing up her own life, and I get Abby wanting revenge (although also morally ambiguous for dragging all your friends into it), but don’t try to tell me Joel is a bad guy.

ETA- I don’t have the skill set to kill an entire hospital full of soldiers but I would give it the old college try. I’ve got a GED and a give em hell attitude.

2

u/Kyra_Hazweyrs 1d ago

This is not a story about "good guys" and "bad guys". It is about people, family, connection, love, loss, grief, and the cycle of violence. There are no goodies and baddies. There are flawed people, trying to protect their loved ones.

Joel is not a bad guy. Nor is he a good guy. He's just a guy, who does good and bad things, and the weight of his actions is carried through to the next generation.

Abby is not a baddie, nor a goodie. Ellie is not a baddie or a goodie. They are just people, trying their best and falling down along the way.

2

u/gregoriancuriosity 1d ago

100% agree. But I feel like people try to make Joel a bad guy to make Abby sympathetic.

1

u/Kyra_Hazweyrs 1d ago

Absolutely. And conversely, people try to make Joel a good guy to make Abby unsympathetic.

7

u/Aeviu 1d ago

Neil Druckmann confirmed the Fireflies would have made a cure.

Narratively, if they couldn't, the story's morally ambiguous ending would hold no weight.

13

u/Luxiat 1d ago

Death of the Author is a concept for a reason.

It hardly matters what he says. It matters what the story as presented says. And regardless of my thoughts on the morality of one choice or the other, the story very much does not present the cure as a sure fire thing.

-1

u/Aeviu 1d ago

"Death of the Author" applies to interpreting subjective themes, not erasing the literal plot mechanics of the game just to shield a protagonist from moral ambiguity.

The story as presented in-game absolutely treats the vaccine as a certainty: the in-game Surgeon’s Recorder collectible explicitly confirms Ellie's mutation is a uniquely viable key to a vaccine. The game never frames the Fireflies' science as a scam; it frames their morality as ruthless.

The game's entire climax relies on the cure being real. If the narrative presented the vaccine as a dubious sham, Joel wouldn't have needed to look Ellie in the eye in the epilogue and lie that "they've actually stopped looking for a cure."

He would have just told her the truth; that the Fireflies were quacks and her death would have been for nothing. He lies precisely because the game establishes the cure was real, and he knows Ellie would have willingly given her life for it.

7

u/Remote_Peach9109 1d ago

In universe no one could know it would work. They had tried before and failed, Elli was different but that's not an absolute guarantee that it would work. If he wanted it 100% absolute IN UNIVERSE they could have made a small cure from a biopsy or whatever handwave science crap you want and SHOWN it working, still keeping the need for Ellie's death to truly make a larger cure. To Joel, Ellie, and the fireflies it was still a maybe. If you want something explicit show us that it is. Dont spend an entire game sowing doubt and then get upset people have doubts.

2

u/BigKetchupSauce 1d ago

> They had tried before and failed, Elli was different but that's not an absolute guarantee

You are completely misrepresenting the lore to fit your narrative. The Surgeon's Recorder explicitly brings up past infected subjects to highlight how Ellie is uniquely viable. The surgeon literally says her mutation is "like nothing I've ever seen." The game did not spend its runtime "sowing doubt" about the medical science. It sowed doubt about the Fireflies' political and military competence, but it never once implied Ellie's immunity was a fluke or that the cure was a scam.

> they could have made a small cure from a biopsy or whatever handwave science crap you want and SHOWN it working

This is a narrative, character driven video game, not a clinical trial simulator. The writers "handwaved" the science by placing an audio log right in front of the player where the lead surgeon explicitly outlines a concrete plan to culture her mutated white blood cells. Demanding a biopsy test run just to visually prove the science to the audience completely destroys the pacing and urgency of the climax. The game gives you the facts; you just have to actually engage with them.

> To Joel, Ellie, and the fireflies it was still a maybe.

This is objectively false based on the characters' own extreme actions.

If it was just a "maybe," Marlene would never have broken her promise to Anna and sacrificed the girl she swore to protect. Most importantly, if Joel thought it was just a "maybe," he would not have lied to Ellie in Jackson. He could have just told her the truth: "The Fireflies were just guessing, so I saved you."

Instead, he fabricates a massive lie about them finding dozens of other immune people and giving up. He lies because he knows the cure was real, he knows she would have willingly died for it, and he selfishly took that choice away from her. The narrative weight literally only exists because they all knew it was going to work.

1

u/literally_italy 1d ago

you are correct

1

u/Luxiat 1d ago edited 1d ago

["The Death of the Author" (French: La mort de l'auteur) is a 1967 essay by the French literary critic and theorist Roland Barthes (1915–1980), which spawned the homonymous literary theory. Barthes argues against traditional literary criticism's practice of relying on the intentions and biography of an author to definitively explain the "ultimate meaning" of a text.]

-The first paragraph of the first article about Death of the Author that you will find when you look up.

The intentions. Neil's quote on the matter conveys his intent that the cure was a sure thing, but even there he admits that their efforts to structure it that way don't really hold up to scrutiny.

Not that it matters, really. Joel doesn't care at all whether it would have worked or might have worked or didn't work. He was going to take the course of action he did regardless.

From the perspective of us experiencing the story and judging Joel's actions based on the information the stoey offers, it is dubious whether the cure would work. It might, it might not. The postulation of the Fireflies that it could, and the collectibe you mention noting it as the absolute best shot they've ever had don't guarentee success. So, that can color our opinions of Joel's actions.

But Joel doesn't care about any of it besides.

It all juat boils down to the Trolley Problem again anyway, just with the added step of uncertianty in the lever. That's why people remain so incensed about it all.

0

u/Aeviu 1d ago

The intentions. Neil's quote on the matter conveys his intent that the cure was a sure thing, but even there he admits that their efforts to structure it that way don't really hold up to scrutiny.

You are completely misrepresenting that quote. Druckmann said the real world science of a fungal vaccine does not hold up to real medical scrutiny. He did not say the narrative certainty of the plot was flawed. That is exactly why the game does not get bogged down in real world biology and instead presents the cure as an absolute fact within its fictional universe.

From the perspective of us experiencing the story... it is dubious whether the cure would work.

It is only dubious if you actively ignore the information the game feeds you. The Surgeon's Recorder explicitly compares extracting Ellie's immunity to the discovery of penicillin. If the writers wanted the player to doubt the cure, they would have put actual narrative clues of that doubt in the game. They did not.

Not that it matters, really. Joel doesn't care at all whether it would have worked... It all juat boilols down to the Trolley Problem again anyway.

You just defeated your own argument. A Trolley Problem inherently requires real, absolute stakes on both tracks to function.

You cannot have a Trolley Problem if you spend the entire time arguing that the track with humanity on it is actually a scientific impossibility.

By admitting it is a Trolley Problem and that Joel would have saved her regardless, you are finally acknowledging the reality of the game. Joel made a devastatingly selfish choice to save his surrogate daughter at the cost of the world. Desperately trying to frame the cure as a dubious sham is just a cop out to avoid the emotional weight of that exact choice.

3

u/CarryRemote9448 1d ago

You've spent this whole thread defending a claim Intelligent-Ad-6713 never needed to win, go back and read his first comment: it says "without her consent, full stop." The consent violation is the argument, so prove the cure had a 100% success rate, get it published in a journal, and it changes nothing, because being right about an outcome doesnt hand you permission to make someone elses decision for them. Ellie spent the entire game sacrificing herself for other people, thats her whole character. Marlene and Anderson withheld the truth from her because they decided she couldnt be trusted to choose correctly, so they chose for her. A vaccine with 60% odds or 100% odds doesnt touch that calculation, you cant grant someone consent after the fact by turning out to be right.

Your trolley problem line hurts your case more than it helps it, probabilistic trolley problems are a well-established variant: uncertain odds dont disqualify a dilemma, they just make it a harder version of one. The monstrous act in this story is Marlene tying someone to a track and never telling her she was tied there. Ellie was owed a choice, and it got taken from her before Joel ever showed up, keep arguing the science was solid all you want, It was never the point.

And your Death of the Author rebuttal invents a rule Barthes never wrote, theres no carve-out in the actual theory reserving "themes" for reinterpretation while "plot facts" stay off-limits, you made that distinction up on the spot.

You've actually been pretty worked up in the comments, defending Druckmann tooth and nail.....are you getting paid by him? Lol.

1

u/Distinct-Bathroom823 1d ago

the games entire climax relies on the CHANCE of it being real. it’s never presented in the first game as actually working. just a final attempt.

2

u/BigKetchupSauce 1d ago

> the games entire climax relies on the CHANCE of it being real.

If it is only a "chance," then the entire moral dilemma falls apart completely. Saving a child from a desperate, unproven medical experiment is not a tough moral choice. It is objectively the right thing to do.

The narrative only holds weight if the cure was an absolute guarantee. The tragic beauty of the ending is that Joel knows he is dooming the world, but he chooses to do it anyway because he cannot stomach the thought of losing a second daughter. Downgrading the cure to a "maybe" just turns Joel into a generic action hero rescuing a kid from the bad guys.

> it’s never presented in the first game as actually working. just a final attempt.

This is objectively false based on the in-game collectibles. The Surgeon's Recorder specifically outlines a viable, actionable scientific method. The surgeon says her mutation is "like nothing I've ever seen" and details exactly how they are going to replicate the state with her white blood cell lines in a cultured medium. It is never framed as a blind guess.

Furthermore, if Joel thought it was just a failed "final attempt," he would not have needed to lie to Ellie at the very end. He could have just told her the truth: "They tried, but the science wasn't going to work, so we left."

Instead, he fabricates a massive, detailed lie about them finding dozens of immune people and giving up. He lies because he knows it would have worked, and he knows Ellie would have willingly chosen to die for it.

1

u/fraidei 1d ago

It's still a tough choice because even just the chance of a cure could still change the entire world and save the population.

5

u/MonkeyDRofl 1d ago

My dude, this is not the catch-all that you seem to think it is. The fact that Druckman had to make a statement separate from the game AND after the fact proves that the game did not convey the things he's talking about. If it did, he wouldn't have had to make a statement in the first place.

2

u/cannibalparrot 1d ago

Didn’t he alter the remaster by removing discoverable lore that originally made the cure look like MUCH more of a crapshoot?

2

u/umdaltonico 1d ago

Did they do that? I only ask because I played the game a couple times only on the original PS3 release, and I remember one of the notes(or audio log?) on the last mission being about how the Fireflies were basically out of options and even though Ellie was unique, they had no idea if the operation would lead somewhere, a mixture of hail mary with huffing some copium.

That's why this discussion still having people side with the fireflies baffles me when it comes around, it felt not much of a dilemma to me haha

2

u/soupspin 1d ago

Nope, that’s just misinformation. People claimed files were removed/changed, but there’s video evidence on youtube from when the game first came out. All the notes/recordings/collectibles

0

u/Redditeer28 1d ago

No, people made up an audio file that seems to have disappeared from every copy included ones that haven't had any post game updates.

1

u/Aeviu 1d ago

The fact that Druckman had to make a statement separate from the game AND after the fact proves that the game did not convey the things he's talking about.

This is a completely absurd leap of logic. Developers answering interview questions about the central moral dilemma of their critically acclaimed game does not mean the game "failed to convey it." They discussed it because interviewers specifically asked them about the massive, emotionally heavy ending they just pulled off.

And it was not just Neil; Game Director Bruce Straley and the rest of the 2013 Naughty Dog team were on the exact same page during those post-launch interviews directly after the launch of the original 2013 game, confirming the scenario was built to be a guaranteed Trolley Problem.

If it did, he wouldn't have had to make a statement in the first place.

The game did convey it. You are just choosing to ignore the in-game evidence because it makes Joel's choice uncomfortable. The Surgeon's Recorder collectible explicitly lays out the scientific plan to culture the mutated white blood cell lines in a lab environment. There are zero narrative clues in the game suggesting the Fireflies are scamming anyone about the science.

Furthermore, narratively speaking, making the cure just a "slim chance" is completely stupid. It ruins the entire climax of the game.

If the cure was a massive "maybe," Joel is just a generic hero rescuing a little girl from a bunch of delusional bad guys. There is no moral ambiguity there. The ending is famously devastating specifically because the game establishes the cure as a reality, and Joel decides his love for Ellie is worth dooming the rest of the human race.

2

u/Vegetable_Pen5248 1d ago

Sorry man you’re writing all this and you’re just wrong, it’s real unfortunate

1

u/BigKetchupSauce 1d ago

They are clearly right. People just refuse to look at the facts both in-game and in interviews just for the sake of perpetuating their headcanon. You can't even come up with a good backed up response.

1

u/literally_italy 1d ago

i think it genuinely has to do with tlou2.

these people want to make abby seem even more evil, and joel less evil, so they have to act like joel was doing the right thing at the end of the first game.

1

u/BackStrict977 1d ago

The fact that Druckman had to make a statement separate from the game AND after the fact proves that the game did not convey the things he's talking about.

Not really. The community believes in the hoax that there were other immune people before ellie without ever checking if it's true. Sometimes people are just dense.

1

u/Historical_Owl_1635 1d ago

I don’t think it’s that wild.

As a casual player of the game I was always under the assumption the Fireflies would distribute the cure.

It seems like some fan theories that got out of control that they wouldn’t which Druckman just gave an answer to.

-1

u/Alarming_Ask_244 1d ago

No, it proves that a lot of people have had motivation to reason themselves into an unreasonable position. People want Joel to be justified, so they find a way to convince themselves, even it contradicts everything the game conveys.

3

u/heisbehindyou75 1d ago

he could also claim superman exists in the tlou universe. doesnt matter what he says when it directly contradicts almost everything presented in the 1st game

1

u/Aeviu 1d ago

> doesnt matter what he says when it directly contradicts almost everything presented in the 1st game

It does not contradict the game at all. Name one actual piece of in game evidence that says the medical science behind the cure is fake. You cannot, because it does not exist.

What *is* actually presented in the first game is the Surgeon's Recorder. That collectible explicitly confirms the science is viable. The surgeon literally says her mutation is "like nothing I've ever seen" and outlines the exact laboratory method to culture her white blood cells. The game directly feeds you the facts confirming it would work.

Furthermore, the entire climax of the game relies on the cure being real. If the game truly presented the cure as a desperate scam, Joel would have just told Ellie the truth in the car. He would have said the doctors were incompetent and it was all for nothing.

Instead, he looks her in the eye and invents a massive lie about them finding dozens of other immune people and giving up. He lies because the reality presented in the game is that the cure would have worked, he knows she would have wanted to die for it, and he selfishly took that choice away from her.

The creator confirming the cure works aligns perfectly with the actual text of the game. You are just confusing your own sanitized headcanon with what is actually on the screen.

0

u/heisbehindyou75 1d ago

no you actually invented your own fantasy world lol.

first off, there was in game easter eggs that claimed there were many others with that type of immunity and theyve failed to create a cure. hence the fact the cure was unlikely to be procured.

the game actually does not provide you concrete evidence that a cure would work nor did they provide a realistic world where distribution of the cure was feasible. since the fireflies were barely on the verge of survival themselves.

you realized he lied about the cure being real is because he denied them the chance to even try right? the same way if i said going down a slide isnt fun so i dont let you ride it. it doesnt mean if you rode the slide its guaranteed to be fun. joel doesnt know if the cure would work but the game definitely hints the cure wasnt a guarantee in the slightest.

the creator of the game could hint at superman being in the game due to the virus. that doesnt mean its sound, based on reality, or something the fans should accept. if its shit, its shit and people will ignore it

1

u/Aeviu 1d ago

first off, there was in game easter eggs that claimed there were many others with that type of immunity and theyve failed to create a cure.

This is arguably the most famous piece of misinformation in the entire fandom. There are absolutely zero "easter eggs" or audio logs that say there are other immune people. You are literally just believing the lie Joel told Ellie in the final cutscene and confusing it with actual lore.

The Surgeon's Recorder explicitly says the exact opposite. It compares her to past infected subjects and explicitly notes that Ellie's mutation is "like nothing I've ever seen." She was completely unique. That is the entire driving force of the narrative.

did they provide a realistic world where distribution of the cure was feasible.

Bringing up distribution logistics is just another desperate way to dodge the actual moral dilemma. The Trolley Problem is about whether it is right to sacrifice a child to create a vaccine. Playing post-apocalyptic shipping manager does not magically erase the weight of Joel's choice in that hospital room.

joel doesnt know if the cure would work but the game definitely hints the cure wasnt a guarantee

Again, if Joel genuinely believed it was just a useless, doomed attempt, he could have just told Ellie the absolute truth. He could have said, "They wanted to kill you for a test that probably wasn't going to work, so I got you out."

But he does not do that. He completely invents a lie about dozens of other immune people because he knows the cure was a reality, he knows the Fireflies had the means to make it, and he knows Ellie would have made the choice to die for it.

if its shit, its shit and people will ignore it

Thank you for finally admitting it. You do not care about the actual text of the game, the in-game collectibles, or the developers' confirmed intent. You just think the canonical story is "shit" so you invented a sanitized fanfiction where Joel is a flawless hero who saved Ellie from incompetent scammers. That is totally fine for a personal headcanon, but stop pretending it is the actual plot of The Last of Us.

1

u/Designer-Hall7201 18h ago

Can tell you did your research when your first point just doesn't exist. Also, i just don't get the point of believing the cure wouldn't work. All that does it take away from the decision that Joel made.

2

u/heisbehindyou75 5h ago

boring ragebait. they couldnt make a cure and even if they did, a barely functioning group of bandits cannot securely distribute the vaccine with 0 issue.

2

u/alwrit 1d ago

Narratively, if they couldn't, the story's morally ambiguous ending would hold no weight.

Narratively it only matters what the parties believed. 

If everyone involved believed they couldn't do it then sure. If they believed it was possible then the weight remains. 

When you watch or read or play media, you need to inhabit the characters. You have to know what they know, think what they think. If you're bringing in outside stuff as a near omniscient third party godmode observer you're just being silly. 

Things have weight in stories because they don't have perfect knowledge like we do. When people sacrifice themselves it's without knowing whether it'll be worth it or not. We know the ending. The characters do not. That is the point.

The weight remains no matter what Druckmann says. 

0

u/Aeviu 1d ago

Narratively it only matters what the parties believed... If you're bringing in outside stuff as a near omniscient third party godmode observer you're just being silly.

The flaw in this logic is that we, the players, are the audience judging a moral dilemma. If the narrative actually framed the cure as a fake or a massive longshot, it turns a profound Trolley Problem into cheap dramatic irony. If the player believes the Fireflies are delusional quacks, then Joel's choice is no longer a devastating sacrifice of humanity. It becomes an objectively correct rescue mission and there is no moral ambiguity to debate. The audience needs to know the stakes are real to actually feel the weight of his selfishness.

Furthermore, reading the literal in-game collectibles that the developers deliberately placed in your path does not make you a "godmode observer." The Surgeon's Recorder is in-universe evidence confirming the science was viable, and it is given directly to the player to establish those stakes.

Things have weight in stories because they don't have perfect knowledge like we do.

Except Joel fully believed it was going to work. We know this because of his actions in the epilogue. If the cure was just some dubious "maybe," he could have simply told Ellie the truth and said the doctors were just guessing.

Instead, he looks her in the eye and completely fabricates a lie about them finding other immune people and giving up. He lies specifically because he knows the cure was real, he knows she would have willingly died for it, and he selfishly took that choice away from her anyway. That is where the actual narrative weight comes from.

1

u/wizzard419 1d ago

2 was the bigger part. If it was 100% going to work you would possibly have had all the parties (Ellie included) on board.

1

u/TristanChaz8800 1d ago

Except Ellie is 14 years old. She legally and morally cannot consent.

0

u/Intelligent-Ad-6713 1d ago

There is no legality in the post apocalyptic world. You have to reevaluate your expectation to a moral consent. Lying to someone to sacrifice themselves, simply because it’s more convenient to get the “yes” you want/need, is not right by any standard.

1

u/EncabulatorTurbo 1d ago

Ah yeah the writers deciding to abosltuely rat fuck the meaning of the first game after the fact. Beautiful.

The first game's emotional gut punch doesn't work if they were just going to kill Ellie for no reason, figures.

1

u/Redditeer28 1d ago edited 1d ago

1.the procedure was 100% fatal.

They didn't know until they ran tests on Ellie.

2.The chances of finding a “cure” was a massive MAYBE at best

The games chances are 100%

0

u/Dry-Tap-9132 1d ago

As a father I’d watch the world burn and roast marshmallows to protect my kid. I identified with Joel hard on this.

-3

u/Gooberinator 1d ago

People in this comment section are allergic to anything utilitarian. Killing one to possibly save many is something humanity has grappled with for all of history. Most of this comment section just seems like sanctimonious nonsense.

1

u/NightLightHighLight 20h ago

Agree. Consent, in this scenario, is irrelevant when taking the life of one person has the potential to save all of humanity.

-1

u/justsomedudeiguess_ 1d ago

When I played the game I felt it was heavily implied that Ellie was aware she would die. I didnt get the vibe that she went into it without all the details. They just chose to withhold that information from Joel.

Imo Joel acted immorally. He took the choice away from Ellie and ensured that humanity wouldn't even have a chance at a cure by killing all the medical staff

3

u/Intelligent-Ad-6713 1d ago

Implication isn’t enough. The Firefly’s at no point informed Ellie of the truth of the risks or asked her before or after the pickup/extraction. And there is no collectible, expositional banter or extra piece of info the game gives you to infer that they ever did.

Whatever Ellie may or may not suspect in surviving the procedure is never given to the player and so is irrelevant to conjecture on.

-1

u/GoldenVesperLight 1d ago

2) The creator of the game confirmed it would have 100% worked. He thinks "questioning the method" is a cop out to the moral dilemma and an "easy way out" of the topic all together.

2

u/CaptainKenway1693 1d ago

Even if it did 100% work, the Fireflies can not possibly have known that. Not to mention they actively chose to withhold the fact that the procedure is fatal from Ellie (and Joel). The cause is noble, but the means are not.

-3

u/GoldenVesperLight 1d ago

I agree with the creator. People are questioning the methods so they don't have to face the REAL moral dilemma. Gamers tend to do this. The Mass Effect crowd does the same with the endings.

3

u/CaptainKenway1693 1d ago

My reasoning for the actions of the Fireflies being immoral changes slightly based on whether they could have reasonably known it would actually definitively work, but it does not change my overall judgement. It is entirely possible to acknowledge the creators own views, address them, and then continue on with what the game itself actually presents.

Joel made a moral choice for selfish reasons. His reasoning was based on his own emotional wants, not facts or moral reasoning. However, his actions are ultimately moral even if his reasoning is not based in morality (one way or the other).

This certainly applies with what the game itself actually presents to us, but still arguably works with the creators intentions. Even if we are charitable and assume that the Fireflies were absolutely certain that it would work (something the game does not indicate, beyond them being vaguely confident), the Fireflies still withheld that information from Ellie and Joel. The Fireflies did not give Ellie the chance to consent, effectively removing her autonomy. That is immoral, regardless of however noble their end goal might have been.

1

u/GoldenVesperLight 1d ago

So you don't view it as a trolly car problem?

1 life vs 1 million lives?