Season 3 Conflict...
The fact that no ending is by no means the "Right" choice and that each ending is subjective to the individual and their perception of the plot and character development makes anticipating how Season 3 will be a complete fucking mystery. It's hard to imagine that it wouldn't focus on Clem after season 1 and 2 were basically all about her. However these endings lead to basically 2 different paths if you generalize it.
Staying with someone (Jane\Kenny)
Going off alone with AJ.
None of those answers are necessarily the right choice. Especially since each ending doesn't really convince the player that Clem will be safe and that they won the game. (The closest thing to the assumption that she is probably safe is the ending where you allow Kenny to live and reach the safe haven of Wellington. Although there are MANY things that can go wrong in those gated communities.) One important thing that one could point out is Lee's conversation with Chuck in season 1 where basically Chuck says that if she stays with anyone they're going to end up getting her killed (and then ironically staying with them ends up getting Chuck killed.) That's when Lee begins to teach her how to look after herself. It almost alludes that the writers intended on her to be alone. Which is now impossible due to the fact that she would now have a small baby to look after. I am, truly conflicted as to what the authors intentions were for the story and i'm not sure how Season 3 will start. It's almost as if they ended Clem's story here by leaving it so open ended. If they do continue with Clem's story we're basically just getting what the Author's felt was the "Right" choice and i don't think they'd do that to us. I would be disappointed that they would end Clem's story with such cliff hangers as all the endings but now it seems like the only options are
- Author's choose which ending they thought was best and continued on from there.
or - New story line. Not Clem, Kenny, Jane.
The most logical outcome in my opinion is 2. As much as I don't want that to be. They couldn't possibly continue with Clem now that they drew such a fork in the plot line without making people's decisions that weren't in line with theirs null and void. They have been known to do just that time and again when they decide that a character is going to die and there's nothing you can do to avoid it... So i can understand how people wouldn't put it past them to do that in this case.. but i feel that the gaps are too large to close in this situation with the outcomes all being dramatically different. I don't think they'll slap anyone in the face and go with the ending of their choice.
Personally, I chose the ending to let Kenny live and lead Clem and AJ to wellington because it seemed best for AJ. Also, I felt that Jane provoked Kenny into that fight and was manipulating Clem to be "Like her." A cold survivalist. While Kenny was being genuine the whole time and truly cared for Clem and AJ. He was affected heavily by all the losses and blamed himself for not being able to do more. He knew that he was getting crazy and was trying to be better. Looking after Clem and AJ was his road to recovery. Kenny is a man who needs purpose and he found it (like Lee) protecting Clem. Respect to what everyone else chose but I saw Kenny for who he truly was. He was like a father to Clem and he only killed Jane because she orchestrated that event in a time of Crisis and got what she deserved. It was a dumb decision to create danger like that for herself, Clem and AJ.
What do you think?
Comments
We will probably get the Omid treatment and follow a main path, given there cant be different paths because you would be creating different games.
I hope not. Why give the player choices if they mean nothing in the end? I don't want to believe that it will come to that again.
It would be nice to have multiple paths, but then again thats creating 2 different games. While it boosts replayability, its not gonna be worth it for them in the long run.
According to Kevin Bruner at the NYCC, there is no canon ending. I really have no idea what TTG is up to and what their plans for S3 will be like. However, I do hope Clem's storyline will continue and that whoever we chose to be with at the ending Kenny or Jane will be in S3 as well. I hope they could branch the story just like the witcher 2 did where it's basically the same story and outcome but we play it through different perspective.
3: don't hire a complete fail of an author and figure out one of the fifty-five billion, six hundred twenty-seven million, three hundred eighty-four thousand, seven hundred ninety-four and a three quarters ways to tie each ending into a common plot point in a way that is interesting and won't break the bank.
FYI, it took me about two min to think of a way that would work for them and about ten min or so to write it for a topic similar to this one.
Out of all the different ways to write it about ten percent should work.
then there's no use protecting clem in season 1 and playing clem in season 2 it will be meaningless.... her story shouldn't end that quickly.... or if telltale miraculously do that..
My point is that if they decide to continue with Clem then they're basically going to have to choose the ending of their choice from season 2 to build up from, leaving the players who chose a different path disqualified. If we're accepting that fact then which ending do you hope the authors go with? All of them could potentially lead to a dramatically different season 3.
you do know your playing a telltale game right? choices that change things short term but ultimately end up generally useless are the MO here
what your saying is not true. as much as you dont want to believe it, it is more likely that you will start from where you left off based on the ending picked, kenny/jane will get omid treatment or end up unknown, and we wind up in the same spot no matter which ending you got in s2. if they do in fact do it that way its not really as bad as you make it sound. as long as they do it correctly and make the whole thing feel meaningful why does it matter if we wind up in the same spot regardless of endings. this is after all a telltale game and you should be used to that kind of thing by now
I have no idea how they are going to make it work but since they said in the spoilercast interview that they already had an idea, I don't worry too much about it. To me, it seems obvious that we will see Clem again because otherwise there would be no point in calling it season 3 if it had nothing to do with the previous seasons.
There are people who say that if they keep Clem as the main protagonist in season 3, it will mean that none of our choices will matter because no matter who we ended up with will die since they're determinant and all the endings will inevitably lead us to the same place. But I realized that our choices won't matter even if they change the protagonist and start with new characters because in that case everything we did in the past two seasons won't mean anything and for me that would be more frustrating than having all the endings come to the same conclusion.
I can think of two possibilities for season 3:
We continue with Clem as the main protagonist (we get a short introduction that will show us where we left Clem and what happened causing her to leave (Jan/Kenny dies, Wellington falls apart or is a dangerous place and Clem escapes, alone Clem finds something or someone that will lead her in a specific place where the season 3 story will take place) and then we all end up in the same situation
-We play as a new character and we will find Clem in one of the places where we left her and our choices will still matter because her behavior towards us and everyone will depend on who we made her become (she could even chose to let us die if we made her become a cold survivalist!) and she will talk to us about where she's been and what happened to her after the events of season 2.
If they were able to create different endings, why couldn't they make different beginnings ? I believe that if it was that difficult for them, they would've never created different endings for season 2. If they did it, it means that they had already figured out a way of making it work for season 3 or at least that's what I chose to believe for now.
Clem becomes a survivalist even if you let Kenny kill Jane and then shoot him going off on your own. Clem becomes a survivalist if you shoot kenny let jane live and go off on your own. She becomes a survivalist if you shoot Kenny and go off with Jane. She becomes a survivalist if you let Kenny kill jane and then go off on your own. There is essentially no right answers for the end. It's either she becomes a survivalist or allows herself to sort of "become" either Kenny or Jane. I can't see them wanting that for her. I also can't see them wanting her to be a survivalist. She has always retained her humanity and has been someone who is dependent on a group. However, each ending leaves her with a choice that makes her lose her humanity.
Letting Jane die seems to be the most logical decision because she told Clem not to interfere no matter WHAT happens. So even though Jane didn't get the upper hand in the fight with Kenny Clem should not be interfering but by not doing so she essentially lets a person die. (Even though Jane is by no mean innocent.) Pushing Kenny to murder her is exactly what she wanted to show Clem how unstable he is. Although, if she would have just told Kenny that the baby was safe he probably would have been overwhelmed with joy, went for the baby and they would all be alive together.
No matter what ending it's unfair for clems character and leads her to become a cold rational survivalist devoid of humanity and with only her interests in mind. Sort of like Jane. I'd hate to see them kill off Kenny for no reason after how far he has come with Clem.