Jennifer wrote: »
Lee wouldn't survive in either situation. He had his arm cut off too late. The people who lived in The Walking Dead television show and comics had their infected areas cut off immediately. At least half an hour passed before Lee had his cut off. The zombie bacteria already got into his bloodstream by that point.
StanleyStutters wrote: »
That's true, but that doesn't necessarily mean it was the best decision for the series going forward. TTG may have sacrificed some of the long term quality of the story in favor of a shocking death in S1. They could have killed Lee in any season and it would have been just as shocking, memorable, and heartbreaking.
Obviously, we won't know if this was a good decision or not until season 2 and we see what new characters/story TTG is able to create. I'm confident in their ability to bring us another excellent story, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't a little worried that they won't be able to recreate the success from S1.
corruptbiggins wrote: »
It won't be the same story, it'll be someone else's story. And that's a good thing.
Riadon wrote: »
...and become depressed for a month.
Rommel49 wrote: »
... and I'm positive I couldn't have been the only one that knew what was going to happen when they saw that pile near the walkie-talkie at the end of Episode 4.
montesinos7 wrote: »
Listen people. Killing off Lee was a good idea. But either do it, and don't have a season 2, or make him survive then kill him off then. Don't kill of the characters that everyone gets attached to then make another game, because I will never be attached in the same way.
Jaded X Gamer wrote: »
Why do people keep saying they couldn't possibly get as attached to new characters as they were to the ones in the first season when you've only known the characters from the first season for just one game?
I mean, Lee was character created just for this game. He hadn't appeared anywhere else is any of series or part of The Walking Dead. He was a new character, Telltale crafted a great story that made you care about him and now his story is finished.
What makes you think they won't be able to do it again with new characters?
gimmeseason2 wrote: »
You're kidding about killing Clementine off right? The entire game was basically ABOUT protecting Clementine.. And I think they made the right move with killing Lee because I think that giving his life to protect Clem "redeems" him from that murder he committed prior to the zombie apocalypse. It's like Kenny. He felt like he wasn't the dad that he could have been to Duck or the husband he couldn't be to Katjaa, so he felt like he needed to sacrifice his life so that Ben didn't have to suffer. If you think about it and really go in depth with it, you would know that Lee's death was one of the most brilliant moves that TellTale did in this game. I know it sucks that Lee died and I used to be in denial too, but I learned to accept the fact that he will most likely not be coming back.
BlackBoxx wrote: »
It seems to me that your issue is playing the same role with a different character. Basically, you don't want a rehash of season one. I agree with that, but disagree with your conclusion (that killing Lee was a bad move). It seems to me that you just need a new role. How about you no longer play Clementine's guardian in season 2? After all, Lee prepared her to deal with the hardships of the new world. She doesn't need that kind of protection anymore. She can be a full group member now; able to have her own input on things, her own ideas for problem solving, her own disagreements, her own job when things go south, etc.
AnekiGX wrote: »
I thought it was brilliant that they killed off Lee.
He had always protected Clementine and at the end of it, was practically given a death sentence and forced to let her go. When Lee got bitten, I felt his anguish. Part of it was because he was going to die, but the biggest reason was because he could no longer protect Clementine to personally ensure her safety and survival.
Everything he did was for her. When she cried for him to get up when he clearly couldn't, he did it - all for her. His anxiety and concern of Clementine's well-being over his was made even clearer when Clementine was attacked by the security guard Walker and he was helpless to go to her aid.
Yet as the game comes to a close, Lee did all he could to make sure he taught Clementine whatever he could from their dire situation... he was her protector right up to the end, and successfully moulded her into a survivor who will not be helpless in face of danger.
But I think the lesson is also that nothing is for permanent, especially in a zombie apocalypse world. It was also about the maturing of Clementine from one who is protected to one who can protect herself (the scene of her killing the Walker and arming herself) without Lee. Seeing that, Lee can go in peace.
Because of this very strong connection and relationship between Lee and Clementine, which clearly affected the players as well, his death made the ending shine.
Players always feel the sense of accomplishment when they complete a game, but won't necessarily be too emotionally involved. This was an ending that achieved both. What more can you ask for?
Jeenyus wrote: »
Don't get me wrong, it makes for a great story and all that, but game wise it doesn't make sense. Most games you get a character and thats your role. Now its pretty much like just make me play a bunch of characters because it really doesn't matter anymore. It just sets up season two for failure, assuming they continue with the story from season 1. Which I'm pretty sure is what's gonna happen (not saying it won't be good, just not as good).
Personally for me, I see it as was Lee was me (my character in this story) now that he's dead essentially my role in this story is over. No matter how I see season 2 going, I don't think I'll have the same attachment to the game. Unless they just make a completely new story with all new characters. Which would still suck, for me at least (I'd like to know what happens to Clem at the end)
Wether I'm a new character, who ends up being Clementines new guardian, I'd want to play it like I was lee (whom I'm not). If I take the role of Clementine then it would just feel weird. Regardless of the role, sans, lee just ruins it. Personally, I feel it would have been a smarter Idea to kill Clementine. Glad they didn't. But it makes more sense game wise.
Your thoughts.. ?
Jeenyus wrote: »
Right, the game is about protecting Clementine. "As lee". I completely agree, killing off lee is the best ending for the story. But again this is a game at the end of the day, not a tv show or a book. Yes some games you jump from character to character, but this is pretty much story based and you're given one guy to be. If they just made an entirely new story without any connection to season 1, then I'd be fine just being a different character. I'd be curious to what happened to Clementine and what not but continuing on a second season with a new character, following the same group of people (whoever is left alive) would just feel unnatural without being "Lee".
I'm sure if they did just continue on and add a new character for you to play as, in time I'd grow to like them. I just doubt I'll enjoy the overall experience as much.
Again this is just my personal opinion
Desmodus87 wrote: »
I don't really agree.
There are a lot of game series that don't offer your old character in the new game. The Fallout series, I don't believe you're ever the same person from one game to the next? (Admittedly, I have much less experience with the first two than the last two.)
And to be honest, I wasn't attached to Lee right from the get go. He won me over during the second half of the first episode and on, but first starting out, he was interesting and all, but if he had died, it wouldn't have mattered. But me and my hubby both expected him to die pretty early on. We figured Lee or Clem one would be dying, and I didn't think TTG would actually want to kill a little girl. :P (Fictional or otherwise! lol)
I just think that because they have such a powerful way of storytelling that we will all grow to love the new cast and/or storyline. I don't think there will be any shortages of "Lee was better" or "We miss Clem" threads, but I think, for the most part, people will like the new season.
Inconsu. wrote: »
Yeah but season 2 is a new story. It would be lame if you were Lee all over again in the 2nd season.
dee23 wrote: »
Yeah his story has finished but if Clementine's story continues his absence will feel strange. Could Clementine realistically bond with a new character the way she did with Lee? Time will tell but I find it unlikely.
It will be fine if season 2 is centered around new characters but if Clementine's story continues it will probably feel weird because she is associated with Lee and he with her. They were a duo. In most of the game's advertising posters the two were together and the story was depicted as focusing on their relationship in the ZA, having one with out the other is like having a ratchet and clank game without Ratchet. Yeah they exist but they're fucking weird.
gimmeseason2 wrote: »
Leaving Lee alive or saving him would not have made the game(season 1) as memorable and heartbreaking as it was in my opinion . But I guess many other people may see this in a different way.
Rommel49 wrote: »
Basically this. There's not even an option to amputate until after Lee passes out the first time in the Morgue at the start of Episode 5. Anything he did after that was just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic, it was already too late.
In my view, I'm not even sure it would've made the season less memorable if Lee had survived. Killing off the Protagonist is hardly new. Quite a few games have been doing that over the past few years (hell, the protagonist dies in the very first known story written in the English language). As has also been said, part of the problem is that Lee was effectively killed in Episode 4; which for me just further blunted the impact of his inevitable death in Episode 5 because it was basically drawn out over the course of weeks.
TealBlue wrote: »
Quick question, since we know that in stories anything can happen, which is sorta good, but also sorta bad too, anyway, what if that scene where Lee and Clementine go to sleep and Lee is mad at her for talking to someone else on the walkie talkie... well... what if everything that happened after that, was a dream?
Or, you could even have it all happen right after Shawn drives them up to the farm, what if Lee fell asleep in the truck and the second season picks up from him waking up in the truck when they arrive at the farm?
I guess what i'm saying is what if each season, was a different play through of season 1?
Or would you mind the second season starting with your character being Kenny or Katja and playing through the same scenario's but from the new character point of view. Seeing how they made decisions about other things, but also their decisions about Clementine?
I mean, maybe people will scream and yell, or think it a cheap shot or not, but really in stories anything is possible, and it might be interesting to play another character, maybe especially a familiar character and know that Duck and Katja and Kenny and Lee and the others are still alive. The second season could end, exactly like the first, well... and season three could push us into what happens with Clementine.
Or we could flip back and do prequels, what i mean is play Clementine's family just before they leave for Savannah, or Lee and his wife, before he killed the man he found with his wife, or as Kenny and Katja and Duck, or as Merle and Shawn before all goes to heck in a handbasket.
Cheap shot? Or worth the risk and fun? And the familiarity? And having them alive again?
Oh, and what would you think if the ending to this 'replay' was different and people that died in the first season didn't die in the second with the 're-telling'?
Just some crazy ideas,
Jaded X Gamer wrote: »
Would it really be any stranger for Clementine to bond with new characters than it was for Lee to bond with new people after losing half the group in episode three? Hell, Clem bonded with Lee after he came out of nowhere. I agree that simply having someone else serve as Clementine's parental figure would be strange but to be against her ever forming connections with new people at all sounds almost selfish.
If anything it would likely be a natural continuation of the parental themes in the first season. Season one you get to raise her, season two you could watch what kind of person she grows into, see how she applies the lessons you teach her. Clementine had a life before Lee and hopefully she'll have one after him, I wouldn't mind watching it unfold.
By the same measure is it really that hard for people to think you could be made to care as much about a new character as you did for Lee? He wasn't some keystone to the entire Walking Dead universe or some long running character we've known for generations. He was a well written character people were sad to see, but he was hardly the only one. He wasn't even the only in the game, he was just one of several.
I wonder, all you people who think killing Lee or continuing the series without him is a major mistake, have you ever seen a zombie... well anything before this game? Because the zombie sub-genre is rife with both killing central characters and continuing stories with entirely new casts. Right from the outset with Night of the Living Dead, a series that's never starred the same characters twice as far as I know.
And it's true for video games in the genre too. Dead Rising changed protagonists between games, as did Left 4 Dead. Hell, Resident Evil and Resident Evil 2 had completely different casts and it could be considered the forerunner for modern zombie video games. If anything, video games are more receiptable as a genre to cast changes due to players always being allowed to project a part of themselves into the experience. None of the Grand Theft Auto games star the same person.
If anything it would have been weird to me if Lee hadn't died. Right from the beginning I figured he would probably die at some point. Between the cop talking about what Lee did and the look of regret on Lee's face I assumed this would be a tale of redemption with Lee dying as part of his atonement.
Between that and people constantly facing the horror of losing the ones they loved most and I figured it was obvious that something would eventually separate Lee and Clementine, with death being the most likely choice. I was just relieved it was Lee and not Clementine who died.
dee23 wrote: »
I hear what your saying about the zombie genre but this game is not based on them, hell the walking dead is not based on them that is why it stands out. The zombies are just the back drop. The walking dead differs from said zombie flicks because you get attached to the characters, seeing them develop over long periods of time. Your point would be so much more valid if the protagonist of the walking dead series wasn't alive and kicking after 8 years worth of comics and hadn't been surviving the ZA for nearly 2 years.
When you watch a movie like Dawn of the dead you expect everyone to die, every one does die and that is how the story ends but the walking dead is the zombie story that doesn't end so there is no rush to kill of it's characters.
Mark$man wrote: »
^I liked the game alot, and would love if Telltale made another 2 or so epsiodes. However, I wouldn't have minded season 1 being the end if it wasn't for the cliff hanger.
In my opinion that really sucked lol. Not that they did that, just that I don't like it. Makes me overthink stuff.
montesinos7 wrote: »
I agree. It would have been a good idea only IF they were not going to have a season 2. I will never be as attached to those characters than the season 1 characters. I think it makes a compelling story, but they should have done it at the end of season 2 if they wanted to continue the story.
zjs wrote: »
If you continue the next season with Lee, you're essentially re-running the same game, with a slightly older and wiser Clem.
As I've said before, there needs to be a new dynamic: a new group, with an older and more experienced Clementine, who's a useful member of the group and at an age where she's like a (younger sister) to a younger character, who can take care of herself. The absolute worst thing would be to see someone else taking up Lee's role with Clem and going through the exact same paternal role.
Moving the story on a few years so that Clem is a young teenager, has seen and done a lot more etc, means she can elude to Lee. Your character could even be someone with a similar story, but the key point is: new group, new areas.
I was most disappointed that Carley was killed off and that Lilly left the group. In my game, Kenny was killed off, but it allowed him to redeem himself. He was definitely a Shane character; caring only about himself and his family, willing to do anything etc. Sometimes he was right, a lot of times wrong. He wasn't bad to the point of being evil, but he did fail to help on a lot of occasions until his final redemption.
Having Kenny alive would make sense if you let Ben go, but it would have to be a token appearance. I mean, if the saves are being imported, then he couldn't be someone who took a big role, as it would either mean he'd have to come back as a human (when he was 'lost to the horde' last season) in saves where he sacrificed himself. It could work if those saves where Kenny died meant he was replaced with a different character model/name for the few episodes he's in during the next season, if he was to return.
Web Head wrote: »
I am attached to Lee, AND THIS ATTACHMENT CAN
be BROKEN, NEVERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR EVEN AFTER MY FUCKIN' OWN DEATH!