• Okay. I mean no offence by this, but honestly, it's a video game. (I love the game to pieces, I don't mean that I don't like it). I don't really think Telltale expected people to look into it this much.

  • I love how the OP went throught the trouble of contacting specialists on the matter and posted FACTS to explain his opinion, and the first answer is from this guy.

    Zombies are Awesome!:

    JUST STOP! Just because people don't like it doesn't mean it's not "realistic the dog was fucking hungry!

    I just laughed hard, it's like if the guy only read the title and based his reply on that and not the actual post. Wich is what probably happened.

  • calm... its only a game

  • I think people are looking too deeply into whether a certain scene was realistic or not. The whole game is unrealistic. Sure, maybe some realism is needed to keep the balance, but is it worth causing a dispute over something so unimportant. It seems people have taken a disliking to this first episode simply because it's so different from Season 1, and are now finding anything and everything to negatively criticise.

    • Nail on the head. Couldn't have said it any better.

    • "The general view among writers of fantasy and science fiction is that for every implausible premise, you are obliged to counter-balance it with realism to make the story as a whole feel plausible." - JohnnyAngel

      EDIT: I out in quotations but forgot to write the name of who i quoted, sorry.

      • The dog thing felt plausible to me. Plausible =/= 100% scientifically accurate. The only people who would feel pulled from the story by this are dog behavior experts and laypersons who find it suspect because it's counter to an incident they've witnessed firsthand or because they have come by very specific secondhand knowledge. The majority of the audience would have no reason to be bothered by this. It isn't like Sam suddenly started driving a car or something. If it IS scientifically inaccurate, it's not very blatant. It's like a gun lover bitching about a character calling a magazine a clip. Sure, it's a writing mistake, but it doesn't mean the story suddenly unravels all to hell and we're justified obsessing over it to the degree some people have with this dog attack. It's pure nitpicking.

        Besides, we're dealing with an animal capable of fairly complex emotions, that has underwent the kind of trauma you can't faithfully replicate in real life. The writers are deserving of some leeway here. And this is assuming all the naysayers are correct, by the way. I just don't put animal psychologists on the same infallibility scale as, say, an accomplished astrophysicist. Animal behavior is much too open to interpretation unlike a hard science, where empirical evidence trumps all. So even if people are right about how Sam would not have attacked in that manner, it's not very difficult to suspend belief and look at the situation as a rare exception to the rule.

        • But the phenomenon of food aggression that samclem mentioned above means you don't have to appeal to animal behavioral specialists or plead special post-apocalypse circumstances. It turns out that many people have problems with perfectly sweet dogs turning on them if they try to get near their food when they're eating. See my more detailed post about this above.

      • Of course.
        The argument "there's zombies so who cares what crazy things happen" is really wrong.

        If we go that way, there could be aliens involved in episode 2 and it would be perfectly right... Nope. The unrealistic premise is made realistic to the reader/viewer/player by having its own coherence, and by keeping the rest completely realistic.

        Even zombies have their own rules of realism that were created by the author. He has defined how they are, how they behave, their limitations, etc...
        If suddenly these rules were disregarded without reasons (like we'd meet a talking, intelligent and nice zombie out of nowhere), the coherency of the universe created by its maker would collapse and would lose the interest of every self-respecting reader/viewer/player.

        Regarding the dog situation, I found it weird too (didn't need any dog expert to tell me that) that his only focus suddenly became to kill Clementine, and not the food itself : if being deprived of that food was what made him so mad, first thing he would have done after "making a point" through a swift attack would have been to get back at the can. The fact that he suddenly seems determined to kill Clementine and attack her repeatedly somewhat lacks of realism when you know a thing or two about common animal behaviour (no need to be an expert), and if you think of this dog as your common dog.
        You have to consider that he's not your average dog and that he's fucked up because of something to bring realism back.

        So OP is right about Sam not being a normal dog, and the answer is that he was most probably not a normal dog. That happens.

        Some people reply with logical explanations and good arguments, but those who go "zombies are not realistic so nothing needs to be realistic" are completely wrong.

  • I've had dogs and cats my whole life, meet others outside and i can say that something like this is very plausible if all the circumstances fit in. It's not quite hard if you just think about what this dog has gone through.

    I have never encountered something as serious as this but something in a smaller scale, my dog getting mad, other dogs being mad if someone takes from them or keep food away.

  • I hate people like you who talk about realism within video games. If games were real this game wouldn't exist and many others wouldn't either.

  • For me that scene was realistic because in a way that happened to me.,When i was little about 8 or 9 i was visting my grandparent for thanksgiving and i was out side eating some food and the neighbors dog attacked me and bit me on the arm that i was holding the food in. I was not starving, teasing or even playing with the dog and neither was the dog starving but that dog attacked me for the food i was eating and in order to get the dog off me the owner cracked him once over the head with a bumper from the car he was working on. So yeah for some that is not realistic but hell that happened to me and the dog wasn't even starving or living in a bad way. So before anyone say's that bull shit i still have the bite mark on my arm and i can take a pic and post but thats to much. So for me that scene could happen and was realistic enough for me not to call bs,google or speak to dog specialist . Because i had that experience

  • hmm not realistic? and a zombie apocalypse is?

  • I guess its good for telltale that it's a video game and not real...

This discussion has been closed.