u/-GreyFox

I don't know if I've said this before, but the more works you read by the same author, the more you understand their vision of the world, their philosophy, and who they are.

Sadly, Neil is quite the weasel, so you can't listen to him in interviews and believe everything he's saying, but if you understand the context, you can read the subtext, right?

But there's something no writer can do, not even me when I write a post, and certainly not Neil: he can't hide from his work. Once the work is presented, Neil is exposed as a "philosopher," as a person, and as an "author." He is laid bare for the scrutiny of anyone with a sufficient understanding of the craft.

A Second Chance at Sarah

Thanks to Gabriel Betancourt's interview, I discovered that a young Neil wrote a graphic novel called "A Second Chance at Sarah". And of course, I was simply super excited to read Neil's work. My expectations were quite low, which I admit helped a lot in motivating me to finish reading it. It's bad, no doubt about it. And I love these kinds of stories almost as much as I love zombie stories, no matter how bad they are.

That way you can't offer a thorough critique because these stories don't usually have depth. The purpose leans more towards entertainment than education. But what really caught my attention were the similarities to Part 2.

A Second Chance at Sarah vs The Last of Us: Part II

As I explained in my previous presentation, Neil introduces characters in a way that makes them relevant to the story, only to later discard them. This is a classic problem for a young writer: introducing many characters and then not knowing what to do with them. There are numerous examples in Part 2: Leah, Jordan, Nick, Whitney, Manny's father, Isaac, etc.

Cheap subversion of expectations

But the most important part is the ending, which is also defined by a decision and a sudden change of heart from one of its protagonists.

After Johnny's sacrifice, and believing his story about time travel, Sarah tells him that her sister's life is more important than the life of a future child she doesn't yet know, or even her own. Determined, she heads to the hospital only to reappear moments later, saying she changed her mind after having a vision of her future baby.

When you put the whole story together, it doesn't make sense. In the case of "A Second Chance at Sarah," everything points to the fact that you can't defeat the demon inhabiting the talisman, but Sarah, seemingly out of nowhere, changes her mind, saving the day. The whole story is heading towards a dark ending, the one Neil likes as we know, but it seems Neil changes his mind at the last minute for some reason. If you ask me, it must be his editor's advice, but this is just a hunch.

Gabriel Betancourt

Gabriel was an artist in charge of lighting during the development of The Last of Us (2013), he talks about other works and studios he worked in, not just Naughty Dog. And he also worked for a few months on Part 2 before leaving.

There are many things to take away, but I tried to share the most important/striking ones. You see, you can tell an artist to do their best work, and they will. But what happens if, instead, you show them the story they're working on, and what happens if you explain what you're trying to highlight? Now the artist's work has a focus. And every effort, every decision they make will be in service of your story.

That's the director's job, right? He stands before the “orchestra” and guides all the “instruments” toward the goal. These instruments includes the writer, of course.

Gabriel's first day at work

Then Gabriel tells us how, on their first day of work, Bruce and Neil prepared a 1 hour presentation for the entire team. By the end of the presentation, everyone knew what the story was about. Bruce and Neil were pitching a story to the team.

I shared some videos a while ago where Bruce explained that concept artists shouldn't just draw, but also play the game during development. So this point isn’t new to me, but the idea of ​​Bruce and Neil explaining the story to the team it is; and I will love to put my hands on that presentation.

Gabriel raising his concerns about the plot of Part 2 with Neil

And it is this understanding, even if incomplete, that led him to express his doubts to Neil about the direction of Part 2. Because every story, upon its conclusion, has an implicit, tacit, organic sequel. And Neil's response, to shake off a pointed question posed by Gabriel (I suppose), is to invent the idea of ​​a village/community full of immune people.

The Tacit Sequel / Ellie's immunity

I don't know what movies you've been spending your time on, so I'm betting on a classic: Rocky and Rocky II, knowing that "I Play Rocky" will soon be released in theaters.

Rocky's story begins with his gradual process of convincing himself that he's worthless. To such an extent that when opportunity knocks, he refuses it. He eventually accepts the opportunity. The deal he's set for himself is to last 15 rounds with the world champion. If he manages it, he'll prove to everyone, including himself, that he's worth something. Rocky endures all 15 rounds but loses the fight.

Now, what is the “tacit”/organic sequel to this story? Should it be someone who kills his girlfriend Adrian, and a Rocky going out for revenge?

This is the problem that Gabriel points out to Neil.

Balance

Gabriel previously discusses the appropriate team size for achieving a good result. He talks about the problems that lead to a game's failure.

In Part 2, Gabriel explains that the team was so large that the contribution they relied on in the first story was no longer possible, disrupting the balance between darkness (Neil) and light, between bitterness and sweetness.

Now you don't need Gabriel to understand that Neil likes darkness, the visceral; you just need to play Part II, or read any of Neil's works. But it does help you understand Neil's flaws and weaknesses, which are intrinsically present in all his works, or that Neil originally wanted to kill Elena in Uncharted 2, which shows that Neil has trouble understanding the tone (or genre) of the story being told.

Robert McKee

This is truly striking when Gabriel explains that Neil and Bruce attended Robert McKee's seminars, seminars in which McKee emphasizes the need for positive and negative energy in every beat for your story to come alive. Bruce and Neil attended the same seminar and left with different understandings.

This doesn't surprise me, as I've encountered a similar case in this sub where a user quoted McKee without understanding the text or the exception being referenced.

Benson Russell

From there we jump to Benson Russell, who was in charge of combat against the infected during the development of The Last of Us (2013). And I don't know how familiar you are with the technical aspects of video game development, but the PlayStation 5 has 16 GB of RAM, and they were only working with just 256 MB on the PlayStation 3. "RAM was our most precious resource," someone says in some of the interviews in the "Grounded" video. It was really scarce and made working difficult. The Last of Us (2013) is an incredible programming achievement for its time.

Take pride in your craft

So when all the work was scrapped to present Part I as "The Definitive Way to Play The Last of Us," I can understand Mr. Benson's anger with Neil. At the very least, you should include the original work with this pack, because without it, there would be no "Part I," or even "Part II."

Working with Neil

Listening to Bensons speak makes it clear that there was a lot of friction between him and Neil. Of course, we all know that Neil is capable of insulting even his fans if the reviews of his work are negative, right? So you quickly get an idea of ​​the atmosphere Benson (and Bruce) was working in if it came to opposing Neil.

We all have a co-worker we don't get along with, but this doesn't make us/them bad people, as Russell explains, it's just that when it comes to Neil it's inevitable to remember that phrase: "Always assume the worst and you'll be right".

A Great Director

Russell talks about many things, but he places great emphasis on "North Star." A director who knows the objective prevents the entire team from wandering aimlessly. He attributes delays in video game releases to programming without a clear direction, working for several months on one aspect of the game only to have it discarded and starting over on something completely different simply because an executive said it wasn't a good idea.

Story Comes First

This is the difference he noticed at Naughty Dog, where it was made clear to Russell from the beginning that the story comes first. Meanwhile, other studios would explore some kind of gameplay mechanic that seemed interesting, only to discard it after working on it for several months.

Quentin Cobb Job

Quentin Cobb was brought in to collaborate on The Last of Us (2013), having previously worked on Uncharted 3, to help with item placement in all scenarios. The system was failing, and Bruce asked for help. Quentin decided that the best way to implement the items was to place them one by one throughout each of the scenarios. What a painstaking job.

Everything you put on screen is saying something to the audience

This job gave him the opportunity to work very closely with Bruce, where he learned that Bruce not only proposes scenarios but also uses them to tell a story. And I don't know where Bruce grasped this idea, but McKee's seminars emphasize this aspect of screenplay. Everything you put on screen is saying something to the audience.

Character Development - Riley

From there we go to listen to Heather Cerlan, where she tells us how her working relationship with Neil began, where a curious Neil did his research for Left Behind, addressing the topic "Growing up as a closeted queer kid", in Heather’s words. Oh, shoot, I forgot to share the clip. Don’t worry, it’s quite short.

Author, Authority, and Authenticity

And I completely forgot about sharing that clip because what really excited me in this interview was Heather pointing out the lack of authenticity in Neil's story during the dance scenes and in Ellie's relationship with Dina.

To be an author, you must possess a vast knowledge of the world you've created. This knowledge will give you authority over your work, but you can't have authority if you don't demonstrate authenticity.

Lack of Authenticity

This is one of the biggest problems with The Last of Us: Part II, not just in this scene, not only as a "sequel" but also as a "story"—everything is overly contrived and convenient for the plot. Everything feels forced, and nothing is earned.

I hope you didn't miss the interviews. You can check them out on my profile.