Jane's recklessness got the Russians to attack the group. Btw, Arvo was simply leaving the group with his own supplies, but that's not relev… moreant to my argument.
So many baseless assumptions.
Jane can't think of keeping the baby on the seat while she secures the area around the car?
Have you not seen the scene before? The walker could almost reach her/the baby and she had to go outside asap and after few seconds, 2 walkers were coming at her.
Have you not seen the scene before? The walker could almost reach her/the baby and she had to go outside asap and after few seconds, 2 walkers were coming at her.
Exactly, so she should've kept the baby in the car until she secured the area around i.t
Jane's recklessness got the Russians to attack the group. Btw, Arvo was simply leaving the group with his own supplies, but that's not relev… moreant to my argument.
So many baseless assumptions.
Jane can't think of keeping the baby on the seat while she secures the area around the car?
Have you not seen the scene before? The walker could almost reach her/the baby and she had to go outside asap and after few seconds, 2 walkers were coming at her.
I have a life and i enjoy it very much. "get a life" is also rather stupid argument. That implies theres a purpose or meaning in life, or some sort of a goal.
Clementine doesn't have to be clairvoyant. She suspects Jane of having killed the baby, and she suspects that she did that to get Kenny riled up. She sees that Kenny is unarmed and Jane has a large knife. She doesn't want to take a chance that Kenny might lose the fight, so she shoots Jane. It's very proper.
She doesnt know, learn the difference between assumption and knowledge. You can assume that she did something bad, but you dont know shit. Kenny is the one who attacks her and after she puts her knife away, he charges at her. Why would you kill person who is defending herself?
If my Clementine suspects that a habitually reckless person kills a baby to get her uncle into a fight, she would do what's necessary to not lose her uncle, especially when she sees that the reckless person has a large knife and her uncle is unarmed.
You have failed to prove how Jane is reckless, so stop calling her reckless, could you? Also, why did you ignore every point i made about Kenny being reckless? Why dont you call him reckless on every message, or is it ok for Kenny to get people killed, because you are so in love with him?
She knows as much as Kenny knows, so she had no proper reason to shoot her, just as how Kenny didnt have proper reason to try murder Jane.
… more
Clementine doesn't have to be clairvoyant. She suspects Jane of having killed the baby, and she suspects that she did that to get Kenny riled up. She sees that Kenny is unarmed and Jane has a large knife. She doesn't want to take a chance that Kenny might lose the fight, so she shoots Jane. It's very proper.
So if your friend tries to murder someone else, you go there and help him to murder that person? You are pretty sick, if this is how you would do.
If my Clementine suspects that a habitually reckless person kills a baby to get her uncle into a fight, she would do what's necessary to not lose her uncle, especially when she sees that the reckless person has a large knife and her uncle is unarmed.
So many baseless assumptions.
I take it you agree, since you gave no reason.
Have you not seen the scene before? The walker co… moreuld almost reach her/the baby and she had to go outside asap and after few seconds, 2 walkers were coming at her.
Exactly, so she should've kept the baby in the car until she secured the area around i.t
Either Kenny or Jane would have to die. Clementine suspects Jane of having killed the baby, and she suspects that she did that to get Kenny riled up. She sees that Kenny is unarmed and Jane has a large knife. If she does nothing Jane could get away with her plan and Kenny could be dead. So, she intervenes.
You have failed to prove how Jane is reckless, so stop calling her reckless, could you?
Um I did prove that Jane was reckless, and you failed to disprove it.
Clementine doesn't have to be clairvoyant. She suspects Jane of having killed the baby, and she suspects that she did that to get Kenny rile… mored up. She sees that Kenny is unarmed and Jane has a large knife. She doesn't want to take a chance that Kenny might lose the fight, so she shoots Jane. It's very proper.
She doesnt know, learn the difference between assumption and knowledge. You can assume that she did something bad, but you dont know shit. Kenny is the one who attacks her and after she puts her knife away, he charges at her. Why would you kill person who is defending herself?
If my Clementine suspects that a habitually reckless person kills a baby to get her uncle into a fight, she would do what's necessary to not lose her uncle, especially when she sees that the reckless person has a large knife and her uncle is unarmed.
You have failed to prove how Jane is reckless, so stop calling her reckless, could you? Also, w… [view original content]
When my post was predicated on the other conversation, no, I won't limit myself to the successor. That's destructive and silly. Two books. One book about the sun, and one book about the book about the sun. The latter has no basis without the prior.
I did mention this to him "Clementine as a character has boundaries in what she is "willing" to do." And please, focus on this conversation.
I can't find that in the flood of replies. Can you give it more context? Or better, a position in the conversation? But again, the conversations are inseparable. (At least the beginning is, the newer posts I left to their own devices.)
You may not consider it realistic behavior from the choices you made. Others made different choices. This isn't your game we are talking about here. Your "realism" is not realism for others, ergo it is biased.
So how do you expect me to answer this, if you wont allow me to give proper answer? Are you just annoying me on purpose now?
Try and dig a little deeper into the meaning and come to understand what it actually entails. In fact, the second half of my sentences pretty much spelled it out for you. You know, the part you happened to leave out. Obsession rising.
But never in the conversation I was insinuating of. It may have rendered into a Kenny vs Jane reply streak, but the entire time you fought f… moreor leaving Kenny and against shooting Jane. Point and case.
These are 2 seperate conversation, we are talking about choices being nullified in game and with hugo, its another typical Jane vs Kenny talk. Try to focus on this one.
Again another feebled attempt to cover yourself with an obviously not applicable statement. Had you been arguing about branching story line then it wouldn't have mattered if leaving Kenny was more realistic because both should have been implemented. (Again, you never mention this with Hugo)
I did mention this to him "Clementine as a character has boundaries in what she is "willing" to do."
And please, focus on this conversation.
How is pointing out a fact which eats away at your story mocking you?
You are implying that is a fact... All i wanted… [view original content]
Either Kenny or Jane would have to die. Clementine suspects Jane of having killed the baby, and she suspects that she did that to get Kenny riled up. She sees that Kenny is unarmed and Jane has a large knife. If she does nothing Jane could get away with her plan and Kenny could be dead. So, she intervenes.
Clementine doesnt know anything... Only stupid people act on baseless assumption, exaclty what Kenny did. Theres a reason why cops dont kill every suspect, but rather find evidence which proves that they are guilty.
Um I did prove that Jane was reckless and stupid, and you failed to disprove it.
Either Kenny or Jane would have to die. Clementine suspects Jane of having killed the baby, and she suspects that she did that to get Kenny … moreriled up. She sees that Kenny is unarmed and Jane has a large knife. If she does nothing Jane could get away with her plan and Kenny could be dead. So, she intervenes.
You have failed to prove how Jane is reckless, so stop calling her reckless, could you?
Um I did prove that Jane was reckless, and you failed to disprove it.
It's not baseless at all. Clementine was right that Jane planned to get Kenny riled up. She sees that Kenny is unarmed and Jane has a large knife. She thought Jane had killed the baby (rather than hide it, which was equally stupid), and Jane allowed her to think it.
If Jane planned a fight to the death in which she would get killed, she had nobody to blame but herself. Her recklessness caused her death.
Either Kenny or Jane would have to die. Clementine suspects Jane of having killed the baby, and she suspects that she did that to get Kenny … moreriled up. She sees that Kenny is unarmed and Jane has a large knife. If she does nothing Jane could get away with her plan and Kenny could be dead. So, she intervenes.
Clementine doesnt know anything... Only stupid people act on baseless assumption, exaclty what Kenny did. Theres a reason why cops dont kill every suspect, but rather find evidence which proves that they are guilty.
Um I did prove that Jane was reckless and stupid, and you failed to disprove it.
No you didnt?
I can't find that in the flood of replies. Can you give it more context? Or better, a position in the conversation? But again, the conversations are inseparable. (At least the beginning is, the newer posts I left to their own devices.)
Well this is exactly the reason i want to keep these conversations seperate, i dont want to say the same thing to both of you.
You may not consider it realistic behavior from the choices you made. Others made different choices. This isn't your game we are talking about here. Your "realism" is not realism for others, ergo it is biased.
No, i dont consider it realistic no matter what. Even if Clementine likes Kenny, why would she murder someone who is defending herself from Kenny?
Try and dig a little deeper into the meaning and come to understand what it actually entails. In fact, the second half of my sentences pretty much spelled it out for you. Obsession rising.
Yeah im just going to leave this conversation, if you keep annoying me on purpose.
When my post was predicated on the other conversation, no, I won't limit myself to the successor. That's destructive and silly. Two books. O… morene book about the sun, and one book about the book about the sun. The latter has no basis without the prior.
I did mention this to him "Clementine as a character has boundaries in what she is "willing" to do." And please, focus on this conversation.
I can't find that in the flood of replies. Can you give it more context? Or better, a position in the conversation? But again, the conversations are inseparable. (At least the beginning is, the newer posts I left to their own devices.)
You may not consider it realistic behavior from the choices you made. Others made different choices. This isn't your game we are talking about here. Your "realism" is not realism for others, ergo it is biased.
So how do you expect me to answer this, if you wont allow me to give proper answer? Are you just … [view original content]
Hah. you arent that great in math obviously.
20 years old unemployed guy.
I have a life and i enjoy it very much. "get a life" is also rather stupid argument. That implies theres a purpose or meaning in life, or some sort of a goal.
Clementine was right that Jane planned to get Kenny riled up. She sees that Kenny is unarmed and Jane has a large knife. She thought Jane had killed the baby (rather than hide it, which was equally stupid), and Jane allowed her to think it.
No she didnt? She can try to calm down Kenny and doesnt even imply that Jane is trying to provoke him on purpose.
She saw that Kenny tried to punch Jane and she backed off and took her knife out and told Kenny to stay away. Then she puts her knife away and Kenny attacks her. Why would she murder Jane after this, when she clearly is defending herself?
If Jane planned a fight to the death in which she would get killed, she had nobody to blame but herself. Her recklessness caused her death.
Yes, she thought Clementine was more intelligent than what she turned out to be, so it was her fault.
It's not baseless at all. Clementine was right that Jane planned to get Kenny riled up. She sees that Kenny is unarmed and Jane has a large … moreknife. She thought Jane had killed the baby (rather than hide it, which was equally stupid), and Jane allowed her to think it.
If Jane planned a fight to the death in which she would get killed, she had nobody to blame but herself. Her recklessness caused her death.
I don't care if you want to keep them separate. One is based on the other.
No, i dont consider it realistic no matter what. Even if Clementine likes Kenny, why would she murder someone who is defending herself from Kenny?
It doesn't matter what you consider realistic! It doesn't matter what you want! This isn't your game! Others hated Jane, they loved Kenny. If it makes sense for you to leave Kenny then it makes sense for them to shoot Jane. Stop being so self-involved. There are other people, with other minds, who don't think like you do, and don't like Jane, and love Kenny. They exist. A lot of them.
Yeah im just going to leave this conversation, if you keep annoying me on purpose.
You can't be this daft... it's not possible. It simply can't be.
I can't find that in the flood of replies. Can you give it more context? Or better, a position in the conversation? But again, the conversat… moreions are inseparable. (At least the beginning is, the newer posts I left to their own devices.)
Well this is exactly the reason i want to keep these conversations seperate, i dont want to say the same thing to both of you.
You may not consider it realistic behavior from the choices you made. Others made different choices. This isn't your game we are talking about here. Your "realism" is not realism for others, ergo it is biased.
No, i dont consider it realistic no matter what. Even if Clementine likes Kenny, why would she murder someone who is defending herself from Kenny?
Try and dig a little deeper into the meaning and come to understand what it actually entails. In fact, the second half of my sentences pretty much spelled it out for you. Obsession rising.
Yeah im just going to leave this conversation, if you keep annoying me on purpose.
Yes, she thought Clementine was more intelligent than what she turned out to be, so it was her fault.
Clementine was indeed very intelligent. That's why she does't take the bait and allows Jane to be killed. Still, it would have been nice to have the option to directly shoot Jane, which is what I was asking for in the first place.
Clementine was right that Jane planned to get Kenny riled up. She sees that Kenny is unarmed and Jane has a large knife. She thought Jane ha… mored killed the baby (rather than hide it, which was equally stupid), and Jane allowed her to think it.
No she didnt? She can try to calm down Kenny and doesnt even imply that Jane is trying to provoke him on purpose.
She saw that Kenny tried to punch Jane and she backed off and took her knife out and told Kenny to stay away. Then she puts her knife away and Kenny attacks her. Why would she murder Jane after this, when she clearly is defending herself?
If Jane planned a fight to the death in which she would get killed, she had nobody to blame but herself. Her recklessness caused her death.
Yes, she thought Clementine was more intelligent than what she turned out to be, so it was her fault.
You already started ignoring points when you couldn't think of a rational response and starting making personal attacks. If this means you are going to stop the personal attacks, then that's a positive development.
It doesn't matter what you consider realistic! It doesn't matter what you want! This isn't your game! Others hated Jane, they loved Kenny. If it makes sense for you to leave Kenny then it makes sense for them to shoot Jane. Stop being so self-involved. There are other people, with other minds, who don't think like you do, and don't like Jane, and love Kenny. They exist. A lot of them.
It feels like you have ignored everything i have said so far. Not sure if its worth to continue this conversation anymore.
You just ignored this completely also "Clementine as a character has boundaries in what she is "willing" to do". I have shared my thoughts on this subject, but you just dont care and keep talking as if i want the story to be exactly like i want it to be.
I don't care if you want to keep them separate. One is based on the other.
No, i dont consider it realistic no matter what. Even if Cl… moreementine likes Kenny, why would she murder someone who is defending herself from Kenny?
It doesn't matter what you consider realistic! It doesn't matter what you want! This isn't your game! Others hated Jane, they loved Kenny. If it makes sense for you to leave Kenny then it makes sense for them to shoot Jane. Stop being so self-involved. There are other people, with other minds, who don't think like you do, and don't like Jane, and love Kenny. They exist. A lot of them.
Yeah im just going to leave this conversation, if you keep annoying me on purpose.
You can't be this daft... it's not possible. It simply can't be.
She doesn't care about people she doesn't even know...
This is what i said and how i think irl?
She knew Clem just as long as … morethe others, but then why was the Arvo thing such a big deal then, nobody knew him
Clem is the only person she really talked with. What Arvo thing?
Sarah reminded her of jamie and jane wanted to leave, thats PTSD (because sarah isn't jamie she only reminds her of that forgetting that she just lost her father )
And do you think she was thinking clearly that moment? All she saw was another Jamie situation and wanted to leave.
I'm not making arguments , i just said what everyone on this forum can see
You cant speak for everyone, so dont.
Kenny beating him after he ran , he could have a gun in that house so i think kenny did the right thing
He didnt beat him after that, he just caught him so he didnt escape. After they went inside and he said the supplies are bs too, before even checking the house, Arvo finally decided to tell Kenny to fuck off.
And the reason she was upset was because Kenny started to beat him to death before they even knew if there was any supplies in the house. And like she said, how does beating a kid to death help anyone?
Sarah reminded jane of Jamie but that doesn't make her Jamie
Have i said anything else but this the whole time? Try to read what i say for once.
What arvo thing?
Kenny beating him after he ran , he could have a gun in that house so i think kenny did the right thing
Sarah reminded jane of Jamie but that doesn't make her Jamie
Kenny beating him after he ran , he could have a gun in that house so i think kenny did the right thing
He didnt beat him after that… more, he just caught him so he didnt escape. After they went inside and he said the supplies are bs too, before even checking the house, Arvo finally decided to tell Kenny to fuck off.
And the reason she was upset was because Kenny started to beat him to death before they even knew if there was any supplies in the house. And like she said, how does beating a kid to death help anyone?
Sarah reminded jane of Jamie but that doesn't make her Jamie
Have i said anything else but this the whole time? Try to read what i say for once.
It feels like you have ignored everything i have said so far. Not sure if its worth to continue this conversation anymore
Says the one who can't interpret something spelled out for them, then has the audacity to say I am annoying them on purpose because they fail so. (Although, I do apologize for calling you daft, that was uncalled for.)
You just ignored this completely also "Clementine as a character has boundaries in what she is "willing" to do".
No, I >directly< referred to that. The opposite of ignoring it. When I asked for context or placement you said exactly "Well this is exactly the reason i want to keep these conversations seperate, i dont want to say the same thing to both of you."
I have shared my thoughts on this subject, but you just dont care and keep talking as if i want the story to be exactly like i want it to be.
How else should it be taken? You talk about why your way makes sense, and why the other completely understandable way doesn't, and then go forward to say you were talking about story branching.......
It doesn't matter what you consider realistic! It doesn't matter what you want! This isn't your game! Others hated Jane, they loved Kenny. I… moref it makes sense for you to leave Kenny then it makes sense for them to shoot Jane. Stop being so self-involved. There are other people, with other minds, who don't think like you do, and don't like Jane, and love Kenny. They exist. A lot of them.
It feels like you have ignored everything i have said so far. Not sure if its worth to continue this conversation anymore.
You just ignored this completely also "Clementine as a character has boundaries in what she is "willing" to do". I have shared my thoughts on this subject, but you just dont care and keep talking as if i want the story to be exactly like i want it to be.
he beat him when they were on shore over the ice that beating , not the one inside
And i keep saying Clem got trough to Sarah , she listens to women and her dad
Says the one who can't interpret something spelled out for them, then has the audacity to say I am annoying them on purpose because they fail so. (Although, I do apologize for calling you daft, that was uncalled for.)
" Try and dig a little deeper into the meaning and come to understand what it actually entails. In fact, the second half of my sentences pretty much spelled it out for you. Obsession rising."
How am i supposed to know what moves in your head when you make these sentences? I still have no idea what this "deeper meaning" is what you meant and you call me stupid for not knowing this. You just keep on throwing ad hominems and then try to provoke me even more.
No, I >directly< referred to that. The opposite of ignoring it. When I asked for context or placement you said exactly "Well this is exactly the reason i want to keep these conversations seperate, i dont want to say the same thing to both of you."
You missed my point. Im not looking for story spesifically for my liking, but realistic story based on Clementine's personality and previous decisions.
How else should it be taken? You talk about why your way makes sense, and why the other completely understandable way doesn't, and then go forward to say you were talking about story branching.......
Like i have stated before, Clementine isnt completely under our control, we cant decide how she feels about AJ, for example. After all my Clementine went through and when Kenny left the Car to look for diesel, not having choice to leave Kenny behind would have been similar to not having choice to leave Lilly behind after she killed/murdered someone. Its just illogical and stupid thing to do for sake of story. "here, you can dislike this character and his plans, but after he is driving you on suicide mission, you wont leave him behind when you get a chance to save your life".
It feels like you have ignored everything i have said so far. Not sure if its worth to continue this conversation anymore
Says the o… morene who can't interpret something spelled out for them, then has the audacity to say I am annoying them on purpose because they fail so. (Although, I do apologize for calling you daft, that was uncalled for.)
You just ignored this completely also "Clementine as a character has boundaries in what she is "willing" to do".
No, I >directly< referred to that. The opposite of ignoring it. When I asked for context or placement you said exactly "Well this is exactly the reason i want to keep these conversations seperate, i dont want to say the same thing to both of you."
I have shared my thoughts on this subject, but you just dont care and keep talking as if i want the story to be exactly like i want it to be.
How else should it be taken? You talk about why your way makes sense, a… [view original content]
he beat him when they were on shore over the ice that beating , not the one inside
What? Kenny doesnt beat him on the shore...
… more And i keep saying Clem got trough to Sarah , she listens to women and her dad
This is the first time you mention that, so stop talking shit.
How am i supposed to know what moves in your head when you make these sentences? I still have no idea what this "deeper meaning" is what you meant and you call me stupid for not knowing this. You just keep on throwing ad hominems and then try to provoke me even more.
Inference, knowledge, intelligence. I can tell you it has nothing to do with actually giving an answer to the rhetorical question. Read the last two sentences in the paragraph again and do some deductive thinking.
You missed my point. Im not looking for story spesifically for my liking, but realistic story based on Clementine's personality and previous decisions.
Your Clem's personality. Your decisions. Your logic. Your reasoning. Your story. You fight tooth and nail for Jane but can't even contemplate the other side of the story. You said that you were ok with people basing their decisions on emotions (by choosing Kenny) (since, for some inconceivable reason you can't see the rational side of their argument.... obsession) so chalk it up to their Clem's being emotionally invest in Kenny and disliking Jane. If one side should be an in-game path then the other must be also, and don't hop on the "I was talking about branching story!" wagon again.
Like i have stated before, Clementine isnt completely under our control, we cant decide how she feels about AJ, for example. After all my Clementine went through and when Kenny left the Car to look for diesel, not having choice to leave Kenny behind would have been similar to not having choice to leave Lilly behind after she killed/murdered someone. Its just illogical and stupid thing to do for sake of story. "here, you can dislike this character and his plans, but after he is driving you on suicide mission, you wont leave him behind when you get a chance to save your life".
Again, this is all your subjective perspective on the subject. You can dislike Jane and what she says, so it belongs right there beside your wanted story branch. But you negate it because you don't want it.
But I've come to a conclusion. I can't carry on an intelligible discussion with you because your bull headedness throws all objectiveness out the window. So go ahead and preach the God-woman you see as Jane and dismiss every other conceivable option because of your distaste for Kenny, then when you're called out on it run and hide behind arguments like "I was talking about story branching!" which is, obviously, not remotely true.
Says the one who can't interpret something spelled out for them, then has the audacity to say I am annoying them on purpose because they fai… morel so. (Although, I do apologize for calling you daft, that was uncalled for.)
" Try and dig a little deeper into the meaning and come to understand what it actually entails. In fact, the second half of my sentences pretty much spelled it out for you. Obsession rising."
How am i supposed to know what moves in your head when you make these sentences? I still have no idea what this "deeper meaning" is what you meant and you call me stupid for not knowing this. You just keep on throwing ad hominems and then try to provoke me even more.
No, I >directly< referred to that. The opposite of ignoring it. When I asked for context or placement you said exactly "Well this is exactly the reason i want to keep these conversations seperate, i dont want to say the same thing to both of you."
… [view original content]
How am i supposed to know what moves in your head when you make these sentences? I still have no idea what this "deeper meaning" is what you… more meant and you call me stupid for not knowing this. You just keep on throwing ad hominems and then try to provoke me even more.
Inference, knowledge, intelligence. I can tell you it has nothing to do with actually giving an answer to the rhetorical question. Read the last two sentences in the paragraph again and do some deductive thinking.
You missed my point. Im not looking for story spesifically for my liking, but realistic story based on Clementine's personality and previous decisions.
Your Clem's personality. Your decisions. Your logic. Your reasoning. Your story. You fight tooth and nail for Jane but can't even contemplate the other side of the story. You said that you were ok with people basing their decisions on emotions (by choosing Kenny) (since, for some inconceivable reaso… [view original content]
Your Clem's personality. Your decisions. Your logic. Your reasoning. Your story. You fight tooth and nail for Jane but can't even contemplate the other side of the story. You said that you were ok with people basing their decisions on emotions (by choosing Kenny) (since, for some inconceivable reason you can't see the rational side of their argument.... obsession) so chalk it up to their Clem's being emotionally invest in Kenny and disliking Jane. If one side should be an in-game path then the other must be also, and don't hop on the "I was talking about branching story!" wagon again.
For this one spesific situation in the game. And yeah, i still dont care if people base their decision on emotions, all im arguing that going with Kenny isnt rational thing to do, since looking for Wellington isnt rational thing to do.
Again, this is all your subjective perspective on the subject. You can dislike Jane and what she says, so it belongs right there beside your wanted story branch. But you negate it because you don't want it.
Just because Clementine chooses to dislike Jane, it doesnt mean that she would just murder her when she defends herself from Kenny. Im talking about what would be realistic decision Clementine could do based on previous actions and you are mixing this with full control over Clementine's actions and personality.
But I've come to a conclusion. I can't carry on an intelligible discussion with you because your bull headedness throws all objectiveness out the window. So go ahead and preach the God-woman you see as Jane and dismiss every other conceivable option because of your distaste for Kenny, then when you're called out on it run and hide behind arguments like "I was talking about story branching!" which is, obviously, not remotely true.
Funny. You just keep insulting me and then say "im out". I never thought you would be this childish. Im trying to be as objective as possible here, but you just ignore my points and call me irrational. That gets rather frustrating.
How am i supposed to know what moves in your head when you make these sentences? I still have no idea what this "deeper meaning" is what you… more meant and you call me stupid for not knowing this. You just keep on throwing ad hominems and then try to provoke me even more.
Inference, knowledge, intelligence. I can tell you it has nothing to do with actually giving an answer to the rhetorical question. Read the last two sentences in the paragraph again and do some deductive thinking.
You missed my point. Im not looking for story spesifically for my liking, but realistic story based on Clementine's personality and previous decisions.
Your Clem's personality. Your decisions. Your logic. Your reasoning. Your story. You fight tooth and nail for Jane but can't even contemplate the other side of the story. You said that you were ok with people basing their decisions on emotions (by choosing Kenny) (since, for some inconceivable reaso… [view original content]
Very annoying. I can't rationally explain how someone can be so shut off to everything excluding their own opinions to the point they can't even understand the point at hand, and instead always bring it back to one topic that's not even in the same ball park. Oh well, go talk to someone else
Your Clem's personality. Your decisions. Your logic. Your reasoning. Your story. You fight tooth and nail for Jane but can't even contemplat… moree the other side of the story. You said that you were ok with people basing their decisions on emotions (by choosing Kenny) (since, for some inconceivable reason you can't see the rational side of their argument.... obsession) so chalk it up to their Clem's being emotionally invest in Kenny and disliking Jane. If one side should be an in-game path then the other must be also, and don't hop on the "I was talking about branching story!" wagon again.
For this one spesific situation in the game. And yeah, i still dont care if people base their decision on emotions, all im arguing that going with Kenny isnt rational thing to do, since looking for Wellington isnt rational thing to do.
Again, this is all your subjective perspective on the subject. You can dislike Jane and what she says, so it belon… [view original content]
She doesn't want to take the chance that her uncle could get killed by the mad person who engineered the fight.
She knows as much as… more Kenny knows, so she had no proper reason to shoot her, just as how Kenny didnt have proper reason to try murder Jane.
A walker attacks Clementine when she just exits the car. They were not passive. It's still very reckless and stupid of Jane to leave a baby in that situation.
So you decided to ignore the facts i provided completely? And yes, it was stupid to leave the baby alone, but it wasnt in any greater danger than just being outside in a snowstorm.
Again, Clementine is not a psychopath. It was perfectly rational for Clementine to protect her uncle from the actual psychopath who engineered that fight to the death. The psychopath ends up getting her dumb self killed.
Well you do have lousy reading comprehension skills, thats for sure.
So if your friend tries to murder so… [view original content]
Funny. You just keep insulting me and then say "im out". I never thought you would be this childish. Im trying to be as objective as possible here, but you just ignore my points and call me irrational. That gets rather frustrating.
Guys, please try to behave and stay on topic. Thanks.
Your Clem's personality. Your decisions. Your logic. Your reasoning. Your story. You fight tooth and nail for Jane but can't even contemplat… moree the other side of the story. You said that you were ok with people basing their decisions on emotions (by choosing Kenny) (since, for some inconceivable reason you can't see the rational side of their argument.... obsession) so chalk it up to their Clem's being emotionally invest in Kenny and disliking Jane. If one side should be an in-game path then the other must be also, and don't hop on the "I was talking about branching story!" wagon again.
For this one spesific situation in the game. And yeah, i still dont care if people base their decision on emotions, all im arguing that going with Kenny isnt rational thing to do, since looking for Wellington isnt rational thing to do.
Again, this is all your subjective perspective on the subject. You can dislike Jane and what she says, so it belon… [view original content]
Comments
[removed]
I take it you agree, since you gave no reason.
Exactly, so she should've kept the baby in the car until she secured the area around i.t
Hah. you arent that great in math obviously.
20 years old unemployed guy.
I have a life and i enjoy it very much. "get a life" is also rather stupid argument. That implies theres a purpose or meaning in life, or some sort of a goal.
She doesnt know, learn the difference between assumption and knowledge. You can assume that she did something bad, but you dont know shit. Kenny is the one who attacks her and after she puts her knife away, he charges at her. Why would you kill person who is defending herself?
You have failed to prove how Jane is reckless, so stop calling her reckless, could you? Also, why did you ignore every point i made about Kenny being reckless? Why dont you call him reckless on every message, or is it ok for Kenny to get people killed, because you are so in love with him?
[removed]
Either Kenny or Jane would have to die. Clementine suspects Jane of having killed the baby, and she suspects that she did that to get Kenny riled up. She sees that Kenny is unarmed and Jane has a large knife. If she does nothing Jane could get away with her plan and Kenny could be dead. So, she intervenes.
Um I did prove that Jane was reckless, and you failed to disprove it.
When my post was predicated on the other conversation, no, I won't limit myself to the successor. That's destructive and silly. Two books. One book about the sun, and one book about the book about the sun. The latter has no basis without the prior.
I can't find that in the flood of replies. Can you give it more context? Or better, a position in the conversation? But again, the conversations are inseparable. (At least the beginning is, the newer posts I left to their own devices.)
You may not consider it realistic behavior from the choices you made. Others made different choices. This isn't your game we are talking about here. Your "realism" is not realism for others, ergo it is biased.
Try and dig a little deeper into the meaning and come to understand what it actually entails. In fact, the second half of my sentences pretty much spelled it out for you. You know, the part you happened to leave out. Obsession rising.
Clementine doesnt know anything... Only stupid people act on baseless assumption, exaclty what Kenny did. Theres a reason why cops dont kill every suspect, but rather find evidence which proves that they are guilty.
No you didnt?
You have no point to make, and are trying (failing, rather) to compensate with personal attacks.
It's not baseless at all. Clementine was right that Jane planned to get Kenny riled up. She sees that Kenny is unarmed and Jane has a large knife. She thought Jane had killed the baby (rather than hide it, which was equally stupid), and Jane allowed her to think it.
If Jane planned a fight to the death in which she would get killed, she had nobody to blame but herself. Her recklessness caused her death.
Well this is exactly the reason i want to keep these conversations seperate, i dont want to say the same thing to both of you.
No, i dont consider it realistic no matter what. Even if Clementine likes Kenny, why would she murder someone who is defending herself from Kenny?
Yeah im just going to leave this conversation, if you keep annoying me on purpose.
Your still taking everything to far. Writing so many comment's deffending a fictional character is just strange if you ask me.
No she didnt? She can try to calm down Kenny and doesnt even imply that Jane is trying to provoke him on purpose.
She saw that Kenny tried to punch Jane and she backed off and took her knife out and told Kenny to stay away. Then she puts her knife away and Kenny attacks her. Why would she murder Jane after this, when she clearly is defending herself?
Yes, she thought Clementine was more intelligent than what she turned out to be, so it was her fault.
I don't care if you want to keep them separate. One is based on the other.
It doesn't matter what you consider realistic! It doesn't matter what you want! This isn't your game! Others hated Jane, they loved Kenny. If it makes sense for you to leave Kenny then it makes sense for them to shoot Jane. Stop being so self-involved. There are other people, with other minds, who don't think like you do, and don't like Jane, and love Kenny. They exist. A lot of them.
You can't be this daft... it's not possible. It simply can't be.
Yeah, you are just ignoring what i say and act like a kid, im just going to ignore from this point on. Dont bother replying back.
Clementine was indeed very intelligent. That's why she does't take the bait and allows Jane to be killed. Still, it would have been nice to have the option to directly shoot Jane, which is what I was asking for in the first place.
Its not really about Jane, its more about what she stands for and people being judgemental about that.
You already started ignoring points when you couldn't think of a rational response and starting making personal attacks. If this means you are going to stop the personal attacks, then that's a positive development.
[removed]
It feels like you have ignored everything i have said so far. Not sure if its worth to continue this conversation anymore.
You just ignored this completely also "Clementine as a character has boundaries in what she is "willing" to do". I have shared my thoughts on this subject, but you just dont care and keep talking as if i want the story to be exactly like i want it to be.
Not interested in any of that.
[removed]
What arvo thing?
Kenny beating him after he ran , he could have a gun in that house so i think kenny did the right thing
Sarah reminded jane of Jamie but that doesn't make her Jamie
He didnt beat him after that, he just caught him so he didnt escape. After they went inside and he said the supplies are bs too, before even checking the house, Arvo finally decided to tell Kenny to fuck off.
And the reason she was upset was because Kenny started to beat him to death before they even knew if there was any supplies in the house. And like she said, how does beating a kid to death help anyone?
Have i said anything else but this the whole time? Try to read what i say for once.
he beat him when they were on shore over the ice that beating , not the one inside
And i keep saying Clem got trough to Sarah , she listens to women and her dad
Says the one who can't interpret something spelled out for them, then has the audacity to say I am annoying them on purpose because they fail so. (Although, I do apologize for calling you daft, that was uncalled for.)
No, I >directly< referred to that. The opposite of ignoring it. When I asked for context or placement you said exactly "Well this is exactly the reason i want to keep these conversations seperate, i dont want to say the same thing to both of you."
How else should it be taken? You talk about why your way makes sense, and why the other completely understandable way doesn't, and then go forward to say you were talking about story branching.......
Gah
What? Kenny doesnt beat him on the shore...
This is the first time you mention that, so stop talking shit.
" Try and dig a little deeper into the meaning and come to understand what it actually entails. In fact, the second half of my sentences pretty much spelled it out for you. Obsession rising."
How am i supposed to know what moves in your head when you make these sentences? I still have no idea what this "deeper meaning" is what you meant and you call me stupid for not knowing this. You just keep on throwing ad hominems and then try to provoke me even more.
You missed my point. Im not looking for story spesifically for my liking, but realistic story based on Clementine's personality and previous decisions.
Like i have stated before, Clementine isnt completely under our control, we cant decide how she feels about AJ, for example. After all my Clementine went through and when Kenny left the Car to look for diesel, not having choice to leave Kenny behind would have been similar to not having choice to leave Lilly behind after she killed/murdered someone. Its just illogical and stupid thing to do for sake of story. "here, you can dislike this character and his plans, but after he is driving you on suicide mission, you wont leave him behind when you get a chance to save your life".
I've said numerous times that if Clem got through to her then so could Jane
and your right he doesn't beat him on shore because arvo (almost) fell through the ice
Inference, knowledge, intelligence. I can tell you it has nothing to do with actually giving an answer to the rhetorical question. Read the last two sentences in the paragraph again and do some deductive thinking.
Your Clem's personality. Your decisions. Your logic. Your reasoning. Your story. You fight tooth and nail for Jane but can't even contemplate the other side of the story. You said that you were ok with people basing their decisions on emotions (by choosing Kenny) (since, for some inconceivable reason you can't see the rational side of their argument.... obsession) so chalk it up to their Clem's being emotionally invest in Kenny and disliking Jane. If one side should be an in-game path then the other must be also, and don't hop on the "I was talking about branching story!" wagon again.
Again, this is all your subjective perspective on the subject. You can dislike Jane and what she says, so it belongs right there beside your wanted story branch. But you negate it because you don't want it.
But I've come to a conclusion. I can't carry on an intelligible discussion with you because your bull headedness throws all objectiveness out the window. So go ahead and preach the God-woman you see as Jane and dismiss every other conceivable option because of your distaste for Kenny, then when you're called out on it run and hide behind arguments like "I was talking about story branching!" which is, obviously, not remotely true.
Viva out.
I tried it too but gave it up
For this one spesific situation in the game. And yeah, i still dont care if people base their decision on emotions, all im arguing that going with Kenny isnt rational thing to do, since looking for Wellington isnt rational thing to do.
Just because Clementine chooses to dislike Jane, it doesnt mean that she would just murder her when she defends herself from Kenny. Im talking about what would be realistic decision Clementine could do based on previous actions and you are mixing this with full control over Clementine's actions and personality.
Funny. You just keep insulting me and then say "im out". I never thought you would be this childish. Im trying to be as objective as possible here, but you just ignore my points and call me irrational. That gets rather frustrating.
Very annoying. I can't rationally explain how someone can be so shut off to everything excluding their own opinions to the point they can't even understand the point at hand, and instead always bring it back to one topic that's not even in the same ball park. Oh well, go talk to someone else
You call me childish, yet the only person I've ever seen with such a set-in-your-own-way personality is my 4 year old niece. Go figure.
[removed]
That's not necessary. Please try to be more civil in discussing characters.
Guys, please try to behave and stay on topic. Thanks.