Disappointments with S2 hopes for S3

New here, so hi. Just what I wanted to say on TWD series 2.

Disappointments with series 2.

My disappointments were the inconsistencies and dropped plot points. Rebecca being I hate you Clem in episode one to I love you Clem in the space of a night in Episode 2. Teaching Sarah to use a gun. The whole Luke Vs Kenny thing. From Episode 2 to 4 we were being built toward a confrontation between the two, then in Episode 5 they're suddenly buddies and all ill will forgot. I do not believe for one second that Jane vs Kenny was supposed to be the original outcome. Jane returning in Episode 5 was a forced at the last second change. Evidence to this is the whole it doesn't matter how long you wait after the baby is born she's still in the area. I'm not sure, but wouldn't one person with a knife get further than a group with a newborn baby and its mother, plus wounded Luke.

What I would've done was for Sarah learning how to shoot would for it play into the Episode 3 ending by having her either panic and shoot a walker and thus cause the death of her father, or if we choose not to teach her how to use it, something else happening entirely.

And regarding Luke vs Kenny there could be hundreds of ways that could've played out without forcing Jane to return.

I enjoyed series 2 but it wasn't without problems. I read in an interview BEFORE it came out that as playing as Clem we'd struggle to make our voices heard with the adult survivors and still get treated like a kid, yet when I played the first episode, as soon as I got the Pete seal of approval everyone was like. "Lead us oh Clem. We bow to your infinite wisdom."

Regarding series 3. I heard that they were looking for a new viewpoint and I kind of like what they're doing with Game of Thrones. How about us being able to play as more than one survivor within an episode so we can alter viewpoints within a scene in that episode. For example. Clem has scene with Jane. Clem is being nice to Jane. When we control Jane we can alter Clem's perception of us by our actions.

First thread, rambling thread. Sorry if there is already a topic for this.

«1

Comments

  • Lead us oh Clem. We bow to your infinite wisdom."

    Good... fucking god... you're right. Honestly I think Clementine as a character is getting stale and I completely grew away from her in the second season. Its high time they changed it tbh. Its just not fucking believable to have this kid do everything for these dumb bastards.

    Carlos: Dumb Doctor

    Alvin: "Let me park my fat ass on this tree stump while you go look for food for my pregnant wife"

    Luke: Inconsistent and choppy writing in episodes 3-5

    Sarah: Ruined in Amid The Ruins

    Nick: Doesn't say shit in episode 3. Ruined in Amid The Ruins

    Kenny: I think the writers thought if they brought back Kenny it would excuse his bad writing, and unconvincing anger

    Jane: Unlikable and a very forced bond in attempt to pack it in to the finale

    The cast was either unlikable or undeveloped the whole way.

  • What disappointed me so much were the determinant characters, I really fucking hate how Telltale handled them in S2. I saved EVERY determinant character, being Pete, Nick, Alvin and Sarah. They were definetly not like Carley, Doug and Ben. We just stay with Pette for day in a truck and then dies. Nick doesn't say shit in further episodes and was horribly found as a walker. Alvin didn't have much screentime in episode 3, he never said anything on the way to Carver's camp, just has a heroic death and he said the baby is gonna be a girl but it never was. If Telltale screws Season 3 up too, I'm done.

  • I really hope they use some of the characters from 400 days, instead of just making them cameo's in ep3..... Man, that really bothered me in S2 I feel like they made some great characters in 400 days and then just threw them in the trash. I also dont why they chose Bonnie out of all of them to stick around for S2, did anyone even like her...?

  • did anyone even like her...?

    Nope she turned out just as shitty as the rest of them

    Crydog posted: »

    I really hope they use some of the characters from 400 days, instead of just making them cameo's in ep3..... Man, that really both

  • Nobody even likes her story. If anything, it should have been Vince because he is cool out of all the other protagonists, his story is similar to Lee's and he was the leader of them.

    Crydog posted: »

    I really hope they use some of the characters from 400 days, instead of just making them cameo's in ep3..... Man, that really both

  • Everytime we saved Nick I bet you someone at Telltale went. "Jesus. Are you fucking kidding me!"

    Series one followed a story, but we could actually make characters like or hate Lee and it changed the last episode somewhat.

    Series two you could shit in Luke's cereal and he'd still love you.

  • dojo32161dojo32161 Moderator

    I was just disappointed with the handling of a few determinant characters (specifically Nick and his death in episode 4). Otherwise I liked S2.

  • I was disappointed that nick took a small role on EP 3-4 and Pete died on the very beginning of EP1-2. Plus; if it was Luke vs Kenny would have been more interesting, and I can't believe that they patched the option to shoot mike, And let arvo get away.

  • did anyone even like her...?

    I did...

    Crydog posted: »

    I really hope they use some of the characters from 400 days, instead of just making them cameo's in ep3..... Man, that really both

  • Rebecca being I hate you Clem in episode one to I love you Clem in the space of a night in Episode 2.

    The awkward mood swings started with Luke. From: "Don't look at me like that. You're the one that's bit here." to "I'm on your side kid. No need for a guilt trip." in about 10 minutes. Really strange and wishy-washy character writing throughout the whole season. I' didn't mind at the beginning, it was weirdly funny to internally laugh about their quirks and their lack of skills and direction. How exactly are you people still alive? How did idiots like them manage to flee from Carver in the first place?

    Soon it fell apart for me and the aimless and inconsistent writing became unbearable. Arvo's existence, Jane's sudden change of character, Nick being a ghost in episode 3 and the fact that Telltale lured me into buying 400 Days with tweets like "If you haven't played 400 days yet, it reeeaally is about time!" before episode 2 was released and made me play episode 1 again with a 400 Days save data for absolutely nothing were only some of my major disappointments with S2.

    Hopes for S3? I really don't know. To be different.

  • edited May 2015

    My main hope is that series 3 has an actual story arc. Series 2 had none, or at least a wishy washy plot. And I'm talking Once upon a Time season 4 Wishy Washy!

    Series one story arc: Find a boat.
    Series two story arc: Clementine is a bad ass? An 11 year old Clementine is a more appropriate leader of a group of survivors than people with actual experience? Watch how she leads them to salvation? Save the cabin group from a guy who ended up being pretty reasonable? Protect the pregnant lady from people with lots of guns and a safe place to stay? Umm. The writers don't like Nick so expect him to be phased out during episode 3? Um...... I think they mentioned going to Wellington, but that was forgotten about until Episode 5.

  • Slap on less character development for everyone too, and don't forget wasted character potential Pete,Walter, Sarita, Carver...
    I hate to say things like that but its true, I just hope Telltale will see these things and completely change them. We know they are capable of a good story still (GoT and TFtBL) so I hope this upcoming DLC and S3 will be worth it.

    Clemenem posted: »

    Lead us oh Clem. We bow to your infinite wisdom." Good... fucking god... you're right. Honestly I think Clementine as a ch

  • edited May 2015

    You guys made me realize one extra reason why Nick was my favorite. Because he actually stayed consistent (well, before they turned him to a ghost in episode 3 and sloppily wrote him off). When he changed his stand about Clementine and came to apologize, it was realistic and believable because it was tied to his temper and past experiences. Not a sudden turn without any explanation. His character development seemed to flow naturally, not randomly zigzag.

    So... agreed on your notions about the inconsistency of the characters in S2. Writing seemed to be all over the place sometimes (like suddenly changing Luke's role and forcing us to bond with Jane instead) and while I really like Clementine and want to see her story continued, I think her as a protagonist created some problems as well. Though it didn't have to be so. I personally was very excited to experience a ZA from a POV of a very young girl. Never been done before. However, the problem was that in many cases I didn't even feel like Clem was treated like a child and by trying to give us important things to do, they often turned the adults very incompetent. It's like the gameplay and narrative became too challenging to balance with each other.

    In addition to fixing some problems in the writing, one of the things I think they REALLY need to bring back are the damn hubs. Season 2 lacked the chances of chatting with the characters which in turn caused many of them feel more distant than in Season 1 where you actually had more chances to get to know everyone. Just think about S1 Ep1. When you meet up with Kenny & his family in Hershel's farm, you get a hub and are allowed to discuss with all of the present characters. When you meet up with Lily's group, the same thing happens. Compare that to S2 Ep1, you don't get a single damn hub with the cabin group. You are not allowed to try and get to know all of them.

    I also missed the minor puzzle solving we had in S1 since they gave a great opportunity to meaningfully explore the environment and also chat with people. In S2 there seemed to be too many cases where the hubs felt like some artificial padding slapped on the game. "Here's your hub although there's actually no reason to have one, but go look at that random chair/rock/tree over there".

    Besides these things, I think they really need to ditch or revamp the determinant character -status. Now that we know the pattern, as soon as someone gets to be determinant, it's pretty much a sign to stop giving a crap about them. It also makes the writing of the character go downhill (I'm looking at you Nick). At least that's what happened in Season 2 whereas in Season 1 Carly/Doug situation was much more meaningfully handled. Even Ben had a chance to be more involved and have a great character moment. If they are going to bother to add these choices over a character's fate, then for the love of god, do try to make it matter.

  • [removed]

    CreeperX posted: »

    You guys made me realize one extra reason why Nick was my favorite. Because he actually stayed consistent (well, before they turne

  • Another inconsistency with characters was Carlos. Remember in Episode 2 where he raised objections about Clem going on a scouting mission with Luke in the woods because she's just a little girl, then raised no objections to her stealing from someone he called a very dangerous man?

  • Seems like the writer of the E3 episode didn't care much for Carlos' characterisation since he was planned to be offed by the end of it.

    As I recall, the beginning of E3 in the back of the truck was out-of-character for him too. He talks about consequences to rash actions to Kenny, and yet he intentionally spat at Carver's face in EP2.

    Anthorn posted: »

    Another inconsistency with characters was Carlos. Remember in Episode 2 where he raised objections about Clem going on a scouting

  • A huge disappointment to me is that you weren't able to just chill and get to know the people like you could do int the Motor Inn in S1 for example, the hubs were just too short to do that.

  • I think that Telltale thought people liked the cinematic presentation of the first Season more so than the emotional character roleplaying, which is why I'm guessing they've reduced puzzles and hubs in Wolf and Season 2 of Dead. The longer episodes for the current series are nice, but I do wish there was more interactivity like in Season 1 of Walking Dead.

    AWESOMEO posted: »

    A huge disappointment to me is that you weren't able to just chill and get to know the people like you could do int the Motor Inn in S1 for example, the hubs were just too short to do that.

  • I would defend S2 once again if I had the patience, but I'm afraid I've lost it 7-8 months ago.

    Just asking, is it easier to judge everything negatively or does word "dissappointment" sounds extremely fun to use?

    I'm not adressing my comment particulary to OP, but to you guys in general. About sudden character changing or lack of development - S2 was vague and confusing, you were supposed to connect the dots yourself, things do make sense if you can see the deeper meaning to all of this. It's not like everything was perfect (really, does any game is?) but it wasn't complete garbage and it surely didn't deserve the huge amount of hate, especially that the things that people are constantly bringing up mainly relate to Nick and Sarah. Personally, I could've be mad about Chuck's death and hate S1 because of that, but guess what, I didn't.

    Long story short, you can find pros and cons in everything, so how about we stop focusing on negative.

  • edited May 2015

    No it wasn't complete garbage. And I don't mind connecting the dots. But there have to be dots to connect in the first place. I enjoyed Series 2. I really liked Episode 2 and 3, but I cannot ignore what disappointed me regarding the abandoned story arcs or inconsistent characters. I won't let that stop me replaying the season again either.

    I'm sure Telltale wish they'd done things differently too.

  • I believe your reply was to me.

    I've seen plenty of dots, that agrees with the number of theads around here; people actually try to figure out some stuff, create theories, point out things that were well hidden in the story. The creativity made me love S2 - it would've never happened if the game explained everything to us.

    Anthorn posted: »

    No it wasn't complete garbage. And I don't mind connecting the dots. But there have to be dots to connect in the first place. I e

  • The only thing I can think of regarding connecting the dots would be the Rebecca/Carver thing. It's suggested that the baby might be the result of an affair, but also that it was rape. It could be either way judging by how you interpret the dialogue and why she didn't want Alvin to know. It seemed clear to me that Alvin only found out about it in Episode 2.

    They were good on the small things like that, but actual character arcs were not so well done.

    fallandir posted: »

    I believe your reply was to me. I've seen plenty of dots, that agrees with the number of theads around here; people actually tr

  • edited May 2015

    Come to think of it... Luke did the opposite. He insisted Clem to come with him to the bridge since she's a very "valuable/capable little girl etc" (don't remember what he said exactly), then he made her talk to the stranger (Matthew), climb up to the tower and also wanted her to steal him a walkie talkie while in Carver's camp. However, when it came time for her to sneak into Carver's office to meddle with the sound system, Luke suddenly went "Wait! THAT'S the plan?" Ummm... haven't you been the one who believes Clementine can handle herself? It's like in that moment they just wanted him to butt heads with Kenny again and thus ended up ignoring his previous traits.

    His character seemed to zig-zag all over the place since he had these mood swings in episode 1 already. Yes, there may be reasons for that and there are people IRL who can't make up their minds but the presentation here just ended up being confusing. I think it's one of the major reasons why I didn't find myself that invested in Luke since I didn't really find much to... grasp at in his character.

    Anthorn posted: »

    Another inconsistency with characters was Carlos. Remember in Episode 2 where he raised objections about Clem going on a scouting

  • I'll have to admit that it was difficult to relate to Luke seeing how the writers can't seem to make up their mind on his characterisation, and their reluctance to give him something noteworthy to do on-screen. I have a feeling that he's only there to cater to the younger audience seeing how he's meant to be an attractive young man.

    In fact, the majority of his moments are either done off-screen or ignored entirely. His biggest moment is his heroic rescue attempt of his team during Episode 3, and its hilariously underplayed. Everyone didn't seem all that interested in knowing that Luke chasing them down the entire time they were kidnapped without stopping for a moment, and no one seems to say to him "Geez, Luke, you came all this way for us when you could have just left us to save your own skin when Carver kidnapped us and sent us down here? Aw, you're a pal".

    CreeperX posted: »

    Come to think of it... Luke did the opposite. He insisted Clem to come with him to the bridge since she's a very "valuable/capable

  • Alt text

    Luke's one of my favorite characters in Season 2, but I swear it bugs me how his role became mostly that of eye candy and his characterization being all over the place across the episodes. And you're right, that moment in Episode 3 was seriously underplayed; I remember being kinda confused when they didn't even show him getting captured or beaten up by Carver, and the things you mentioned about the group not making that big a deal about him attempting to save him was as bad as the whole Nick becoming a ghost business where even if he died in Episode 2, nobody mentions him and the nobody apart from Clem or Rebecca seems concerned about Alvin being used as a punching bag.

    RichWalk23 posted: »

    I'll have to admit that it was difficult to relate to Luke seeing how the writers can't seem to make up their mind on his characte

  • it was difficult to relate to Luke

    I find Luke easy to relate to because the way he acts is almost exactly how I am. So it's possibly the writers fault for mixing him up like some cake mixture but I guess for some people (unless I'm the only one) he can be relatable. :P

    RichWalk23 posted: »

    I'll have to admit that it was difficult to relate to Luke seeing how the writers can't seem to make up their mind on his characte

  • That picture is hilarious, cheers.

    I think I remember someone posting a map of the distance that Luke had travelled to track down his friends, and the distance covered miles upon miles. That's an impressive feat and a huge display of loyalty to his friends, and it's a damn shame that the narrative itself fails to acknowledge it, which is a huge weakness in the season and had harmed Luke's contribution into the story. It also makes it even more jarring that as soon as he escapes from Carver's community, he suddenly doesn't seem to care much about anyone else, never bringing up Carlos' death, fails to understand or help Sarah, and suddenly takes a shine to a woman who had just shot a man in the willy and suddenly drop his duties to have sex with her.

    And I did find it a big surprise that Luke doesn't seem to notice that his friend of 20 years is missing should he die in EP2, especially when Nick instead dies in EP4 and he takes a few seconds to grieve and gets over it fast. Unless Telltale is trying to make Luke look dismissive when it comes to Nick's friendship, it was a big oversight and could have given Luke some depth if he actually broke down over Nick's death in either EP3 or 4.

    Lilacsbloom posted: »

    Luke's one of my favorite characters in Season 2, but I swear it bugs me how his role became mostly that of eye candy and his char

  • edited May 2015

    The reason Nick/Sarah's death gets so much more hate than Chuck's death is pretty obvious...

    fallandir posted: »

    I would defend S2 once again if I had the patience, but I'm afraid I've lost it 7-8 months ago. Just asking, is it easier to ju

  • edited May 2015

    Besides these things, I think they really need to ditch or revamp the determinant character -status. Now that we know the pattern, as soon as someone gets to be determinant, it's pretty much a sign to stop giving a crap about them. It also makes the writing of the character go downhill.

    I have to admit, one thing about No Going Back that impressed me was how I didn't even realize Bonnie was a determinant character first playthrough. The conversation with her if Clem tried to help Luke was very well done and had tons of variety to it. Bonnie has completely different dialogue depending on how Clem treated her in A House Divided, and much like with Lee and the Stanger, Clem can talk about characters she regrets hurting depending on past choices (Arvo, Sarita, Walter...). The fact that Bonnie just leaves the group rather than die if she survives the lake was a good way of handling it too. More determinant characters like Bonnie please.

    CreeperX posted: »

    You guys made me realize one extra reason why Nick was my favorite. Because he actually stayed consistent (well, before they turne

  • No discussion about taste. I enjoyed both simple and hopeless Sarah and Nick's deaths.

    The reason Nick/Sarah's death gets so much more hate than Chuck's death is pretty obvious...

  • edited May 2015

    Nothing to do with taste, more to do with the other characters' reactions (or lack thereof).

    Yeah, he saved Clem, but Chuck was still just a homeless stranger Lee met a day ago. Completely understandable why he'd react with little more than a respectful "you deserved better, old man".

    Nick was Luke's best friend for 20 years. Made absolutely no sense why Luke barely reacted to Nick's death. Sarah was a child, and knew Luke and Rebecca for quite a while. Luke gets over her second death in about five seconds. Despite the fact that Rebecca clearly cared about Sarah, she doesn't even seem to notice that Sarah was devoured.

    fallandir posted: »

    No discussion about taste. I enjoyed both simple and hopeless Sarah and Nick's deaths.

  • No offense, but it kinda seems like you're confusing "connecting well hidden dots together" with "desperately filling in gaping plot holes with fanon"...

    fallandir posted: »

    I believe your reply was to me. I've seen plenty of dots, that agrees with the number of theads around here; people actually tr

  • edited May 2015

    The fan in me is constantly at war with the writer in me.

    No offense, but it kinda seems like you're confusing "connecting well hidden dots together" with "desperately filling in gaping plot holes with fanon"...

  • Which is weird because if Sarah dies at the park then Rebecca is upset. She's more upset about Nick and Sarah than Luke.

    Nothing to do with taste, more to do with the other characters' reactions (or lack thereof). Yeah, he saved Clem, but Chuck was

  • Exactly. Good notion about them underplaying Luke's achievements too. I remember there being folks in the forums who pretty much called him an idiot for his failed rescue attempt. I thought it was uncalled for since what he did was very loyal and heroic but I do wonder if the way the whole thing was represented in the game (i.e. other characters not really giving him any credit etc) caused even players to be kind of indifferent about it. I too thought it was strange how nonchalant everyone were about it after Kenny pretty much tried to tell everyone Luke abandoned them.

    RichWalk23 posted: »

    I'll have to admit that it was difficult to relate to Luke seeing how the writers can't seem to make up their mind on his characte

  • edited May 2015

    I agree. For a long time I too didn't realize Bonnie was determinant and while doing my scumbag-Clementine run I was pleasantly surprised how different Bonnie acted towards me after Luke's death. Unless I'm forgetting someone I don't think there's really any other character in the season who changed so significantly depending of your actions. Cleverly done. I too would welcome more determinant characters like Bonnie. She caught me by a surprise since I didn't even expect her to die/leave because the whole determinant scene was done pretty ambiguously.

    Besides these things, I think they really need to ditch or revamp the determinant character -status. Now that we know the pattern,

  • Luke did abandon them, it was all an illusion. They just didn't tell Clementine because they didn't want her to think she was crazy for seeing Luke when he wasn't there.

    CreeperX posted: »

    Exactly. Good notion about them underplaying Luke's achievements too. I remember there being folks in the forums who pretty much c

  • edited May 2015

    It all boils down to bad writing, at least from what I can see. Not only should Luke's return should have had more of a positive response from the very group he's trying to rescue, even if he was caught trying to sneak them out again from behind the scenes, his friends should have also called Kenny out on his lack of faith in Luke and making him look like a coward.

    And perhaps it's just me, but I did have the feeling that the writers had a hand in underplaying and demonising Luke's role in EP3 in an attempt to have Kenny presented in a more favourable light, seeing how Kenny was the one to take the beating for the radio theft (which was indirectly caused by Luke, and Kenny to a degree), and he's the one to finish off Carver when Luke hesitated.

    The trend seemed to have also continued from EP4 where Luke screws up even more by having sex with Jane while ignoring his duties and bungling his rescue attempt with Sarah, while Kenny wallowed in self pity after Sarita's death, and ending up causing more trouble for everyone while Kenny is 'redeemed' by helping with the birth of AJ, making the Luke and Kenny conflict appear even more unbalanced and biased.

    If there was meant to be a conflict between Luke and Kenny, then it appeared that the writers favoured Kenny over Luke, which is probably why Luke's role kept declining at the start of EP3 until EP5. The change in writers probably didn't help either thanks to poor communications with the direction of the writing.

    CreeperX posted: »

    Exactly. Good notion about them underplaying Luke's achievements too. I remember there being folks in the forums who pretty much c

  • And if Sarah dies during Rebecca's birthing scene, she doesn't react at all. Hell, she doesn't think "What happened to Sarah could also happen to my baby, and what if I'm not around to look after him? What if he's all alone if the walkers get to my baby?"

    Anthorn posted: »

    Which is weird because if Sarah dies at the park then Rebecca is upset. She's more upset about Nick and Sarah than Luke.

  • Wow. I think you've just hit on the reason why they dropped the Luke v Kenny conflict in Episode 5. They made it so unbalanced that they probably thought everyone would side with Kenny regardless, so let's use Jane instead and pretend that was the plan from day 1.

    "Goddamn it Kenny!" said Luke. "I'm sorry I put Rebecca and the baby in danger, but I NEEDED SEX AND THAT WAS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THEIR SAFETY!"

    RichWalk23 posted: »

    It all boils down to bad writing, at least from what I can see. Not only should Luke's return should have had more of a positive r

Sign in to comment in this discussion.