Hey I agree he seems way too overly dramatic about a lot of things but I don't think he did a bad job. . . and that was the point of playing dead : to review choices in the last episode.
I feel like there is no reason to complain about playing dead since its just a additional thing. I mean its just an added perspective that includes the people who made the game. If you don't like it, you don't have to watch it
In the previous episodes of Playing Dead he made jokes about how Luke and Clem would date later on....
Uggggghhhhhh even this episode is all about Greg's feeling about a character he hates! Nobody cares Greg!!
I don't ever intend on watching it because of the repulsive personality hosting it, which is a shame because I would love to see the developers' thoughts on the game.
Well thats a stretch about pedophilia there. . .
Hey I agree he seems way too overly dramatic about a lot of things but I don't think he … moredid a bad job. . . and that was the point of playing dead : to review choices in the last episode.
I feel like there is no reason to complain about playing dead since its just a additional thing. I mean its just an added perspective that includes the people who made the game. If you don't like it, you don't have to watch it
I know your feelings, i think IGN needs a better host with good opinions especially constructive ones.
I know that he needs to make jokes but I think he abuses of that.
The last Playing Dead of Season 1 was great...they even had Telltale cast answering fan-mail questions...They commented on every choice(why was good to "do that", why was bad)
This show...however...
Is all about how Greg feels...how Greg hates...even the staff is laughing with him...
This show it's like the game itself, first it was great and now it's falling apart.
I don't ever intend on watching it because of the repulsive personality hosting it, which is a shame because I would love to see the developers' thoughts on the game.
The last Playing Dead of Season 1 was great...they even had Telltale cast answering fan-mail questions...They commented on every choice(why … morewas good to "do that", why was bad)
This show...however...
Is all about how Greg feels...how Greg hates...even the staff is laughing with him...
This show it's like the game itself, first it was great and now it's falling apart.
Well, you had to promise to be her friend (or, if you reject this, to leave her alone). So she didn't help you purely out of good will and not wanting you to suffer. She helped you because she wanted a friend her own age (give or take) or because she didn't want you to bother her and get her into trouble. Granted, these are hardly devious reasons to help someone but I wouldn't say that she helped you "without any strings attached." She also seemed to trust you implicitly about the dog bite thing so there was less of a reason for her not to help you.
I liked Sarah because she was the only person who helped you without any strings attached. Carlos demanded you be locked up, Rebecca wanted… more you dead and forced her husband to comply, Nick shot at you, and Luke and Pete went along with the group. Being 'socially awkward' is a small price to pay for being the only person in the entire episode who actually helps you no matter what.
I guess it depends on your view about how much humans owe to each other. Do you think you are morally obligated to put your own life and pos… moresibly the life of another at risk in order to try to save someone else? Because that was the situation back there.
Every second you stay to help Sarah was another second you risked the walkers busting through the door and devouring Clem. And you see at the end that Jane waits for Clem to go up to the skylight first, so staying back puts Jane's life at risk as well. All of this for the chance to try to get through to Sarah, who doesn't really contribute anything as a survivor and may never do so.
So it's not as cut-and-dry an issue as choosing between "save this person" and "don't save this person." There are morally significant considerations on both sides of the equation.
Because she was a kid who literally had no other friends her age. I don't blame kids for needing companionship. Even Jane's hypocrisy shows the price you pay by trying to be a lone wolf - her social awkwardness and her mistreatment of Arvo brings about A LOT of trouble for the group, which players haven't seemed to acknowledge.
Well, you had to promise to be her friend (or, if you reject this, to leave her alone). So she didn't help you purely out of good will and n… moreot wanting you to suffer. She helped you because she wanted a friend her own age (give or take) or because she didn't want you to bother her and get her into trouble. Granted, these are hardly devious reasons to help someone but I wouldn't say that she helped you "without any strings attached." She also seemed to trust you implicitly about the dog bite thing so there was less of a reason for her not to help you.
Well I don't blame Sarah for needing companionship either. But she was still using her access to potentially life-saving medicine as leverage to get someone to be her friend. (...that actually sounds pretty fucked up when I say it like that.)
Because she was a kid who literally had no other friends her age. I don't blame kids for needing companionship. Even Jane's hypocrisy show… mores the price you pay by trying to be a lone wolf - her social awkwardness and her mistreatment of Arvo brings about A LOT of trouble for the group, which players haven't seemed to acknowledge.
I mostly agree in regards to the second death. Bonnie, Mike, and Luke could have done a bit more shooting there. I don't know if I could really blame them for not wanting to jump down towards the hoard of walkers to try to save someone, but I agree they could have done more.
But now let's look at two NPC character reactions to the first death more closely. Luke had already spent hours trying to convince Sarah to leave as he was being surrounded by walkers. He said himself that he would have left already had it not been for Sarah. So he was voluntarily spending hours slowly being surrounded by zombies for the sake of trying to get this one girl to just get up and follow him. His friend even potentially died there because they were trying to save her from essentially herself. Given all of that, I can't fault him too much for essentially giving up on Sarah there. And he still feels bad for it afterwards.
Jane had that deal with her sister and she barely knew Sarah as anyone other than "Clem's friend who screamed in the middle of the zombie hoard." The only person she really cared for there was Clem, who was risking her life trying to convince Sarah. If you have a little brother or sister, imagine yourself in Jane's position. Your young sibling is trying to convince their catatonic friend to get up and move to safety while a zombie hoard is about to bust through and devour them both at any minute. For a lot of people, their priority would be getting their sibling to safety, even if that means telling them to abandon their friends.
So to me it seems that, at least in the first death, it made sense for the group not to put more effort into helping Sarah.
If you don't want to be her friend, she helps you anyway because she's too nice to just let you die. She also stands up for you when Carver hits you regardless of your "friendship".
Nice people who can also be brave are really rare. They should be treasured, not wasted.
Well I don't blame Sarah for needing companionship either. But she was still using her access to potentially life-saving medicine as leverage to get someone to be her friend. (...that actually sounds pretty fucked up when I say it like that.)
Well, sort of. If I remember correctly,she says something along the lines of "Fine. If I give you this, will you leave me alone?" Then she locks the door behind you after you leave and refuses to talk to you anymore.
If you don't want to be her friend, she helps you anyway because she's too nice to just let you die. She also stands up for you when Carver… more hits you regardless of your "friendship".
Nice people who can also be brave are really rare. They should be treasured, not wasted.
She gets frustrated with Clem for being rude and rejecting her. Just like how Alvin tells Clem off if she threatens him, but still gives her supplies anyway.
If I'm feeling charitable, I'd say it's because they're nice characters. If I feel cynical, then I'd say it's just laziness. :P
Well, sort of. If I remember correctly,she says something along the lines of "Fine. If I give you this, will you leave me alone?" Then she locks the door behind you after you leave and refuses to talk to you anymore.
imo season one was all bout protecting Clem, teaching her about morality and humanity and how to survive, given until what the inevitable to happen (Lee's death), to take her to her parents, even though we all pretty much knew they were death. Season 2 like they said, and I agree, is hey this is the world you live in now, youre are more time in in this world and the shit you did before, a couple of years into the ZA, are not going to have the same outcome, specially when it's a kid. And its about keeping everything she learned from Lee, Christa, Bromid, and everyone from season 1 in this npw very cold, colder world that she lives one, having to make decisions that might not go as she (we in reality) thought would, good or bad
Comments
Well thats a stretch about pedophilia there. . .
Hey I agree he seems way too overly dramatic about a lot of things but I don't think he did a bad job. . . and that was the point of playing dead : to review choices in the last episode.
I feel like there is no reason to complain about playing dead since its just a additional thing. I mean its just an added perspective that includes the people who made the game. If you don't like it, you don't have to watch it
I don't ever intend on watching it because of the repulsive personality hosting it, which is a shame because I would love to see the developers' thoughts on the game.
i did like that saying they did (are you ok with robbing harry potter )
You can't save the IGNorant.
The last Playing Dead of Season 1 was great...they even had Telltale cast answering fan-mail questions...They commented on every choice(why was good to "do that", why was bad)
This show...however...
Is all about how Greg feels...how Greg hates...even the staff is laughing with him...
This show it's like the game itself, first it was great and now it's falling apart.
Shame to see it used to be good. From what I've seen, the devs themselves don't come off very well in their current interviews.
Well, you had to promise to be her friend (or, if you reject this, to leave her alone). So she didn't help you purely out of good will and not wanting you to suffer. She helped you because she wanted a friend her own age (give or take) or because she didn't want you to bother her and get her into trouble. Granted, these are hardly devious reasons to help someone but I wouldn't say that she helped you "without any strings attached." She also seemed to trust you implicitly about the dog bite thing so there was less of a reason for her not to help you.
True. It just seemed like in both versions of Sarah they could've saved her with no casualties if the writing had the group actually care
Because she was a kid who literally had no other friends her age. I don't blame kids for needing companionship. Even Jane's hypocrisy shows the price you pay by trying to be a lone wolf - her social awkwardness and her mistreatment of Arvo brings about A LOT of trouble for the group, which players haven't seemed to acknowledge.
Well I don't blame Sarah for needing companionship either. But she was still using her access to potentially life-saving medicine as leverage to get someone to be her friend. (...that actually sounds pretty fucked up when I say it like that.)
I mostly agree in regards to the second death. Bonnie, Mike, and Luke could have done a bit more shooting there. I don't know if I could really blame them for not wanting to jump down towards the hoard of walkers to try to save someone, but I agree they could have done more.
But now let's look at two NPC character reactions to the first death more closely. Luke had already spent hours trying to convince Sarah to leave as he was being surrounded by walkers. He said himself that he would have left already had it not been for Sarah. So he was voluntarily spending hours slowly being surrounded by zombies for the sake of trying to get this one girl to just get up and follow him. His friend even potentially died there because they were trying to save her from essentially herself. Given all of that, I can't fault him too much for essentially giving up on Sarah there. And he still feels bad for it afterwards.
Jane had that deal with her sister and she barely knew Sarah as anyone other than "Clem's friend who screamed in the middle of the zombie hoard." The only person she really cared for there was Clem, who was risking her life trying to convince Sarah. If you have a little brother or sister, imagine yourself in Jane's position. Your young sibling is trying to convince their catatonic friend to get up and move to safety while a zombie hoard is about to bust through and devour them both at any minute. For a lot of people, their priority would be getting their sibling to safety, even if that means telling them to abandon their friends.
So to me it seems that, at least in the first death, it made sense for the group not to put more effort into helping Sarah.
If you don't want to be her friend, she helps you anyway because she's too nice to just let you die. She also stands up for you when Carver hits you regardless of your "friendship".
Nice people who can also be brave are really rare. They should be treasured, not wasted.
Well, sort of. If I remember correctly,she says something along the lines of "Fine. If I give you this, will you leave me alone?" Then she locks the door behind you after you leave and refuses to talk to you anymore.
She gets frustrated with Clem for being rude and rejecting her. Just like how Alvin tells Clem off if she threatens him, but still gives her supplies anyway.
If I'm feeling charitable, I'd say it's because they're nice characters. If I feel cynical, then I'd say it's just laziness. :P
imo season one was all bout protecting Clem, teaching her about morality and humanity and how to survive, given until what the inevitable to happen (Lee's death), to take her to her parents, even though we all pretty much knew they were death. Season 2 like they said, and I agree, is hey this is the world you live in now, youre are more time in in this world and the shit you did before, a couple of years into the ZA, are not going to have the same outcome, specially when it's a kid. And its about keeping everything she learned from Lee, Christa, Bromid, and everyone from season 1 in this npw very cold, colder world that she lives one, having to make decisions that might not go as she (we in reality) thought would, good or bad
Not sure if you made that up or not, but still, that's pretty good lol.