Cities

Aren't cities better than just wilderness? Why does everybody wanna keep away from them? I personally think that cities are more ideal

Reasons:

  • More shops (food, clothes, etc.)
  • More vehicles and gas stations
  • there might be more population

Yeah the food will get expired over time, but in 1 grocery store, there is like a thousand cans of beans at least and baby formula!

Comments

  • Didn't you see how overrun Crawford and Savannah was?

    Yes there might be more supplies, but it's a double-edged sword.

  • edited September 2014

    You said it: more population..
    More population = more zambies who'll try to eat your face off

  • and alot of more zombies.

  • Not to mention the black friday shoppers of the zombie apocalypse which you don't want to be around

  • edited September 2014

    Cities can be good if you find the right one. But chances are they're full of walkers or survivors that will try to kill you. I think a place like the cabin in the beginning of season 2 is the best place because its out of the way and not that easy to find as its surrounded by trees. Especially if they are able to grow they're own food and have a water supply close by.

  • I think it's time to go back into the city - it's a much cooler environment than the countryside, and we've already spent too much of the game in the wilderness anyway.

    The slide for No Going Back depicted a city. If only we actually got to have Clementine enter an abandoned, snow-covered, zombie-infested city...

Sign in to comment in this discussion.