Was The Mark meat even needed?

edited December 2012 in The Walking Dead
they had a lot of cheese, a feild full of corn and veg. so was it even nessasery to cut off that 4 eyed assholes legs and serve them up? they could have just served a huge salad? and THAT ladies and germs is why i killed them, both of them
«1

Comments

  • edited July 2012
    Your a moron.

    The Real reason that serving Mark meat is unnecessary because they have boxes of meat in the meat locker. Lee can comment on it. If that meats tainted why not throw it out if it's not tainted why not serve it?
  • edited July 2012
    I think they ate Mark because they could - they prey on the injured after all, not the dying as they claim.

    On the other hand, perhaps they wanted fresh meat and not frozen. Either way, the entire thing was totally unnecessary. *is sick*
  • edited July 2012
    it's always arrogance that causes the downfall
  • edited July 2012
    I wonder if they were cannibals before the Zombie Apocalypse and were just using it to justify their sick actions?:mad:
  • edited July 2012
    Possible. Who knows, really? There are a lot of strange things happening in this world. It just wasn't discussed in the game. Not sure if there were hints of it in the comic books.
  • edited July 2012
    ozzmann wrote: »
    I wonder if they were cannibals before the Zombie Apocalypse and were just using it to justify their sick actions?:mad:

    I'd ask them, but I made sure all 3 of them died like the little pigs they were. NO ONE EATS MY PEOPLE! Someone else's people, fine, but not mine!
  • edited July 2012
    I can see how it would work in a way. Obviously, the more you have the better off you are, if they were to heal up mark and let him go back to the group that would be less meat for them. Now over time, eventually the group would get mad and begin to worry about what is really going on with why Mark has not been seen. After all it was an arrow to the shoulder, not half his body being removed and put back together.

    If they feed Mark to the group, perhaps they felt they could persuade them in a way, that "the meat wasnt so bad after all" and allow them to make the group understand sometimes it is for the best to kill and eat others.

    Just my thought on it.
  • edited July 2012
    so the st johns used mark as the 'sacrificial lamb' and thus being part of the group they where all hungry so the only option left to lee's group was to follow the st johns waste not want not ethic...

    like some wild animals the weak are eaten.

    i dunno where it was i saw 'heard' it but cannabalism changes a persons mindset i suppose akin to drug addicts, common sense goes out the window and these freaks can only see the next fix maybe the stored meat is animal meat but because of their new mission statement for eating human flesh they have forgotten about it as they prefer humans...
  • edited July 2012
    I am guessing they just saw the opportunity and went for it, instead of just leaving him which could end up with him dying and the 'meat' going to waste.
  • edited July 2012
    brenda emphasized the injured/people who will die anyway..

    but all the fuss they make and the supplies they use to keep him alive after chopping his legs off is actually more work and effort than just taking the arrow out packing the wound and sewing it up...

    which imo is not 'smart/intelligent' and legs do not grow back if they did we would not have amputies / a need for prosthetic limbs....
  • edited July 2012
    brenda emphasized the injured/people who will die anyway..

    but all the fuss they make and the supplies they use to keep him alive after chopping his legs off is actually more work and effort than just taking the arrow out packing the wound and sewing it up...

    which imo is not 'smart/intelligent' and legs do not grow back if they did we would not have amputies / a need for prosthetic limbs....


    HA HA thats the truth! I lost a toe in 2010 and they in fact do not grow back.:D
  • edited July 2012
    ozzmann wrote: »
    HA HA thats the truth! I lost a toe in 2010 and they in fact do not grow back.:D

    i lost my mind in 2000....;)
  • edited July 2012
    CapnJay wrote: »
    Your a moron.

    The Real reason that serving Mark meat is unnecessary because they have boxes of meat in the meat locker. Lee can comment on it. If that meats tainted why not throw it out if it's not tainted why not serve it?

    *You're


    Also: When Danny says "tainted" meat, he means the person became a zombie before they could get the meat. Once they reanimate, its inedible.
  • edited July 2012
    UnknownFox wrote: »

    If they feed Mark to the group, perhaps they felt they could persuade them in a way, that "the meat wasnt so bad after all" and allow them to make the group understand sometimes it is for the best to kill and eat others.

    I can see them using it as an initiation as they said they needed help.
    i think whoever accepted cannibalism would be allowed to stay and the rest would be let go or quietly butchered.

    As for it being not necessary, they were also paying off the bandits with meat. They need as much as they can get and if they didn't try to recruit the group i think they all would have been killed. No-one leaves that farm
  • edited July 2012
    I was thinking that the mother had a "let's not waste any good food"-mindset. One of the St. Johns-brothers obviously enjoys killing. Perhaps he went behind his mother's and brother's back, saying he "found" some mortally wounded people?

    Notice the trap in the barn, inside the "slaughter room"? It looks a lot like the one the teacher gets stuck in at the beginning of the episode, doesn't it? Lee comments that the trap doesn't have a release pin. If the hunter wanted to catch animals, why would he go through the bother of modifying the trap? I think the St. John modified the trap so that he could get fresh meat for himself and his family.

    How much his brother and mother were involved, I don't know. The brother who doesn't love killing (I should really learn their names) seems to be the handyman around the house though, so he might've modified the trap.
  • edited July 2012
    Discon wrote: »
    I was thinking that the mother had a "let's not waste any good food"-mindset. One of the St. Johns-brothers obviously enjoys killing. Perhaps he went behind his mother's and brother's back, saying he "found" some mortally wounded people?

    Notice the trap in the barn, inside the "slaughter room"? It looks a lot like the one the teacher gets stuck in at the beginning of the episode, doesn't it? Lee comments that the trap doesn't have a release pin. If the hunter wanted to catch animals, why would he go through the bother of modifying the trap? I think the St. John modified the trap so that he could get fresh meat for himself and his family.

    How much his brother and mother were involved, I don't know. The brother who doesn't love killing (I should really learn their names) seems to be the handyman around the house though, so he might've modified the trap.

    I got the same creepy murderer vibe from Danny (LOL, it took me forever to learn their names, too!). I halfway expected him at some point in the woods to tell me that I had a "purdy mouf".

    Andy always seemed a tad less creepy. He was certainly complicit in what was going on - he was the the one that turned on the electric fence (he admits to it, but says it was an "accident"), and he is also the one to lock up the back of the barn (meaning he must knew SOMETHING about what went on in there, including the modified traps).
  • edited July 2012
    to be fair even kenny cant remember the brothers names and he's only a couple letters away from Danny himself
  • edited July 2012
    They were the ones who set the traps! The one that got the high school music teacher looked like the exact same trap in the locked room in the barn. They were not simply eating the injured that were going to die, they were the ones that injured them!

    Oh, and everyone's spelling is TERRIBLE! No wonder you all can't figure it out.

    Your - Possession
    You're - You are.
    Their - Possession
    There- Location
    They're- They are
  • edited July 2012
    Mstone45 wrote: »
    They were the ones who set the traps! The one that got the high school music teacher looked like the exact same trap in the locked room in the barn. They were not simply eating the injured that were going to die, they were the ones that injured them!

    Oh, and everyone's spelling is TERRIBLE! No wonder you all can't figure it out.

    Your - Possession
    You're - You are.
    Their - Posession
    There- Location
    They're- They are

    Had you been reading this thread (or any other thread considering episode two), you would have realized that we have already reached the aforementioned conclusion you believe us all to be too "bad at spelling" to figure out. (As if correct word usage has anything to do with understanding narrative clues within visual media, anyway.)
  • edited July 2012
    Oh my god, they're cannibals!
  • edited July 2012
    Oh my god, they're cannibals!

    Lol! What other shocking revelations do we need?

    Holy cow, we've been in Georgia for the entire duration of the story!:p
  • edited July 2012
    I think they took advantage of the situation, where Mark was some helpless free meal that they could butcher easily, and they wouldn't be questioned about it if he died.
  • edited July 2012
    you know, I thought of something: The group brought Mark in because he had food, Lilly then said that his food was running out and they didn't need him. He ended up becoming food.

    BTW: First post woo
  • edited July 2012
    On my first playthrough I was conflicted when Lee ran to stop the party eating - the whole game had been setting up just how desperate the party's food situation was, so I was thinking "Is cannibalism what we need to do to survive now? Am I about to doom everyone to starvation by hanging onto pre-crisis squeamishness?" and that guilt led to me ultimately cutting the family too much slack for "doing what they had to do", when in retrospect the traps, the severity of Mark's shoulder wound and the other food should have made it clear that they were murdering people, and they weren't cannibals out of necessity (although perhaps selling the meat to the bandits was the only thing stopping them from being killed by bandits, or walkers when the gas ran out).

    I find it interesting how they all deal with their complicity in different ways - Danny seems to enjoy it, Brenda justifies it, and Andy seems to be in denial - when he's shouting at Lee at the end, he says "You did all this! We just wanted gas!"
  • edited July 2012
    fanganga wrote: »
    I find it interesting how they all deal with their complicity in different ways - Danny seems to enjoy it, Brenda justifies it, and Andy seems to be in denial - when he's shouting at Lee at the end, he says "You did all this! We just wanted gas!"

    Accurate.
  • edited July 2012
    fanganga wrote: »
    Andy seems to be in denial - when he's shouting at Lee at the end, he says "You did all this! We just wanted gas!"

    Yet Andy is the one who asks you to go check on the fence, which he ends up switching on trying to fry lee and mark.

    Mark 'convenitantly' gets an arrow, and then after lee finds mark , he says 'brothers'

    so Andy is actually no different he may of 'protested' but he still eats the human meat and allows it to happen..
  • edited July 2012
    I'm not saying he's not complicit. I'm saying he deals with his guilt by shutting it out whenever he can.
  • edited July 2012
    fanganga wrote: »
    I'm not saying he's not complicit. I'm saying he deals with his guilt by shutting it out whenever he can.

    how does he 'shut out' the guilt ?

    never saw that or heard it said..

    if anything andy is extremely naive more than in denial/guilt imo

    it's easy to claim 'innocence' after things have happened but who really believes they just wanted gas after what went down ? not me no siree..
  • edited July 2012
    I wouldn't say Andy's naive - certainly not in the "Oh gorsh, Danny, why'd ya want the release latches off them traps?" way. He certainly knows what he's doing when he modifies the traps, triggers the fence on Lee and Mark and plans what to do with the prisoners. He lies more effectively than Danny or Brenda, and I think he can do that because he's able to fool himself into believing that they're not eating people - and I'm taking the fact that he sticks with the lie under extreme stress, and when it's painfully obvious to the player that he's lying as evidence of that. Dude's seriously messed up, but messed up in a different way to the others and in retrospect a scarier way because he can calmly do evil, then behave as if nothing bad has happened, because he genuinely believes that's the case.
  • edited July 2012
    fanganga wrote: »
    I wouldn't say Andy's naive - certainly not in the "Oh gorsh, Danny, why'd ya want the release latches off them traps?" way. He certainly knows what he's doing when he modifies the traps, triggers the fence on Lee and Mark and plans what to do with the prisoners. He lies more effectively than Danny or Brenda, and I think he can do that because he's able to fool himself into believing that they're not eating people - and I'm taking the fact that he sticks with the lie under extreme stress, and when it's painfully obvious to the player that he's lying as evidence of that. Dude's seriously messed up, but messed up in a different way to the others and in retrospect a scarier way because he can calmly do evil, then behave as if nothing bad has happened, because he genuinely believes that's the case.

    makes sense ;)
  • edited July 2012
    Just in case you guys were wondering what Brenda did for a living before the apocalypse...

    Here we go Y'all... :D
  • edited July 2012
    No, of course it wasn't necessary.

    They were all lunatics.

    Hence why I killed them. Also, to starve out the bandits.
  • edited July 2012
    again with the killing...

    will no one think of the children

    please someone think of the children...
  • edited July 2012
    Didn't feel the need to kill them. Danny was zombie food with his leg screwed up, and I didn't see Andy getting away after Lee put a whooping on him.
  • edited December 2012
    they had a lot of cheese, a feild full of corn and veg. so was it even nessasery to cut off that 4 eyed assholes legs and serve them up? they could have just served a huge salad? and THAT ladies and germs is why i killed them, both of them

    Moron. You clearly didn't listen/pay attention to the game.

    Also, "4 eyed asshole"? What evidence did he give of being an "asshole"? He was perfectly nice, sensible, responsible, and trustworthy.

    "4 eyed"? I wear glasses. Does that make me four eyed? No. I have two eyes and then I have glasses. Do they LOOK like eyes to you?
  • edited December 2012
    Demopan wrote: »
    *You're


    Also: When Danny says "tainted" meat, he means the person became a zombie before they could get the meat. Once they reanimate, its inedible.

    I think he just generally means when a person dies normally, the meat is tainted, which is why he asked to be kept alive so he could be eaten.
  • edited December 2012
    I think he just generally means when a person dies normally, the meat is tainted, which is why he asked to be kept alive so he could be eaten.


    Real life cannibals did kill their victims before eating them. Just like with cows or pigs, so long as the meat is eaten fresh it won't be 'spoiled.'

    And that is probably the most disturbing thing I've ever typed. lol

    I think by tainted, he meant zombie meat. He was saying that once a person turned, it wasn't safe to cannibalize them.
  • edited December 2012
    I had a minor issue with the whole cannibale thing as it was only 3 months into the ZA. The had food.. The had all that corn, a cow for milk and butter and even to eat if they absolutely had to. I would even argue they had enough land to grow more veggies, so why turn to eating people?

    It did make for an interesting twist within the story, I just wouldnt agree with that if I were part of the writing staff unless they decided for some other reason the St. John's were already cannibles like the Texas Chainsaw Masacre who killed people for the meat in their chili.

    They had food and rational people do not resort to eating each other unless there is absolutely no alternative.
  • edited December 2012
    Seemed obvious to me. They give away the meat to trade for gas. Maybe it's not the only reason they resorted to cannibalism, but it's certainly a good point. They even mention this in the barn("Not the girl, though. Ain't enough meat on her to trade."). They need to trade food for gas as much as possible as often as possible to keep those generators running, which requires a truckload of food at all times. Not to mention how big that farm is.

    Adding that they need to eat as well, the food they have stocked up simply won't cut it. Even more, they need to constantly give food to the bandits so they'll stop harassing them. With so much food they have to be giving away for gas and protection, AND to eat, chopping up a few humans to ease the job doesn't seem too implausible.
  • edited December 2012
    i lost my mind in 2000....;)

    raisins1-template.jpg
This discussion has been closed.