Really sick of seeing people act like TLOU2 is the only thing in the world that can determine if people "get empathy". As though if you don't connect with the sloppily handled writing, then you're an unemotional robot who can't understand the emotion. I just think they did a bad job with that aspect of the game. I've felt plenty of empathy during other games, just not TLOU2. It's no "empathy test".
This. Times ten. I, and many others, could obviously see the angle Druckman was going with the plot. We don't need the enlightened few to beat us over the head with the "You don't get it, you fell right into the trap," stick. It was obvious with the substantial switch over to Abby's perspective that the player was supposed to walk a mile in her shoes and see what was initially (and in most games, only) portrayed as a black and white scenario in shades of grey.
Where it fails is pacing, narrative structure, and giving these very key themes to the plot a chance to breathe. Let's go over this:
1. Pacing
This game has two mandatory campaigns, and both are absolute SLOGS until the middle portions. Too many Telltale walking simulator scenarios and a little too much free roam through wide linear areas with nothing along the lines of environmental puzzles or combat. Lots of mash button to pick up a piece of cloth or a bottle type stuff.
2. Narrative Structure
Could also fit in with pacing. I don't know who decided to have one campaign, nice and slow build, chop off right before the climax, second campaign, largely unrelated to first, entirely separate, unattached climax in different place, at different time. All three "stories," worked well enough in a vacuum, but slammed together (and I say that quite intentionally, slammed, not woven) into one narrative harmed all three. Easiest solution is one that's parroted a lot, but how about Ellie chapter 1, Abby chapter 1, Ellie chapter 2, etc, etc? It keeps both characters and their motivations fresh and relevant in the players' mind, keeps the characters and settings interesting, and allows for the theatre climax to occur as the natural climax for both.
3. Managing themes
Giving Abby one flashback scene in the middle of the story to justify her decision may work, to some. Giving her one scene to justify her decision and to validate spending the second half of the game with her is a tougher sale. This isn't crying about Abby, indeed, I thought her section was much more compelling froma game design standpoint than Ellie's first and largest segment. But as a narrative decision, I think it falls flat because of the amount of time we've been given with Joel and Ellie FAR surpasses that one scene with Abby. This could have been remedied by giving her some pathos regarding everything being the same after her Jackson trio, that revenge was hollow, etc, and having her deal with some of that fallout, but instead, we get some lines from the characters equaling "yeah, that happened, haha," and all of her character development from that point on is based on Lev.
Lev's story was interesting, and the foil it provided for Abby was a classic "civilized man realizes the savages are humans, too," angle and completely worked as far as breaking her from her insular way of life, but it felt like a filler arc in the context of the main story to me. In a laser focused narrative with dual protagonists, every decision and action by Ellie should affect Abby as much as it does for Abby to Ellie. If that was the angle they were going for, they needed to go all in, and tie these two characters together TIGHTLY. The story that was told in Abby's campaign was one worthy of hearing, but I might have preferred it in a hypothetical Part III, an entire game centered around allegiances, perspectives, toxic dogma, etc. Here, it felt more like a buffet of ideas, with the guest stuffing too many different flavors on their plate to really appreciate the nuance of any one of them. Yeah, you leave full, but it hurts your retention for the individual dishes.