So you're saying that Lee, had he known the world would end up being overrun by zombies, would have gladly left Clementine to die just because she could be a danger to the group? I don't care how old you are or what your experience is, you don't get left behind, ever. We're no better than the walkers if we abandon our own, even if we don't like the person.
even though Clementine was a small child, she clearly knew how to protect and provide for herself to a degree.
No she didn't, she was just as helpess as AJ, the only reason she survived this long is because of Lee.
Lee had no idea when he saved Clementine, that the entire world had been overrun by zombies. How do you know if he had that information prio… morer, that he wouldn't have left her? And besides, even though Clementine was a small child, she clearly knew how to protect and provide for herself to a degree. AJ, like you said is simply a baby that can't do anything except piss, shit and cry for the next 2-3 years. Even when the majority of the group was still intact, they could barely provide for him; And you expect Clem, an 11-year-old to do all by herself what an experienced group of adult survivors could not?
That baby has caused nothing but death, if I couldn't leave him with Kenny, a bullet to the head would be a kindness.
How do you know if he had that information prior, that he wouldn't have left her?
It was a question to consider, not something I posed as fact because obviously we'll never know.
No she didn't, she was just as helpess as AJ, the only reason she survived this long is because of Lee.
Lol, did you not play the same game as everyone else? No, she wouldn't have lasted so long without Lee, but if she were as helpless as AJ, she would've died before Lee found her. She knew enough to hide in the tree house, and give him a hammer to kill her sitter, which saved his life; AJ for the foreseeable future cannot do any of those things.
And what is all this moral high ground nonsense, "We're no better than the walkers..." The walkers aren't evil, they're undead beings acting on base instinct. And if you're going by that logic, the walkers usually stick together, and plenty of living players chose to leave behind Lily, Sarah and/or Jane/Kenny, so according to your (unrealistic) moral standards a lot of us are 'worse' than the walkers.
So you're saying that Lee, had he known the world would end up being overrun by zombies, would have gladly left Clementine to die just becau… morese she could be a danger to the group? I don't care how old you are or what your experience is, you don't get left behind, ever. We're no better than the walkers if we abandon our own, even if we don't like the person.
even though Clementine was a small child, she clearly knew how to protect and provide for herself to a degree.
No she didn't, she was just as helpess as AJ, the only reason she survived this long is because of Lee.
And how was any of that AJ's fault. He didn't put us in the shed, he didn't force Clementine to stitch up her arm, why would you take your a… morenger out on someone who doesn't deserve it. AJ had no role in any of that, so why you would try to get revenge on what the adults did to you by taking it out on him is beyond me. What they did was wrong, yes, but that doesn't mean you have to become like them. Just because others have lost their humanity doesn't mean you have to as well. You talk about Walter, he is the best example. We were two years into the apocalypse when we met him, but he didn't let the world he lived in change him. He tried helping out people who were in need, he looked for the good in people, and he always had a sort of optimistic outlook on a certain situation. And if you tell him Nick is a good guy, despite the fact that Nick killed Matthew, he still saves Nick from a walker. That's what I try to do with my Clementine as well, I… [view original content]
Personally, I cannot justify leaving a baby to die under any circumstance, unless it's a situation where saving him would absolutely result … morein the death of both of us. Then and only then would I actually consider leaving him behind, and even then I'd still prefer to die right there rather than live with that on my conscience
Killing a baby is where you completely cross the line beyond redemption in my eyes, the mere thought of simply considering it is reprehensible to me
I just can't justify doing it, even if it's just a game and a fictional character we're talking about
Nope
Can't do it man
Can't do it bro
Here is a situation a lot of you have not thought of...
AJ Lovers I riddle you this, what do you think when that baby eventually dies on her, do you think she can handle that emotional pain, or wI'll it be the breaking point.
Does anyone even think about how this will effect her? Obviously not.
I would not ever leave a child. No matter how big of burden or how bratty a kid is, they have every right to live, just as those who are alr… moreeady grown and know how to survive. It isn't their fault. I don't want to play God, and I don't like deciding who gets to live and who gets to die. No one should have to decide that.
Hold on, are you asking us if there had been a choice to ignore AJ's cry would we have ignored it? Or it we as Clementine honestly hadn't he… moreard him crying and just left.
Well, of course I'd walk away if I didn't hear anything. It's fucking cold, Walkers are everywhere and probably on their way too me, and Jane or Kenny or maybe both are gonna turn into Walkers soon, I'm high tailing it outta there Jack. How was I supposed to know he was still alive? It's just and honest mistake if that had been the case, it wasn't like we would've been intentionally thinking, "Hurrdurr I hear baby crying k bai."
I'm curious on one thing though... What would've happened, if we had killed Kenny, and then AJ didn't start crying, and Jane didn't say anything about him. Does anyone think that maybe, if Jane had gotten her way with Kenny out of the way, and AJ didn't cry, Clementine would've keep on going with Jane's lie and the two would've left the place and returned back to Carver's place? Me personally, I think she would have.
Why don't we get a little realistic, and the baby dies because of either disease, hunger, or exposure to the weather. It doesn't get "killed… more."
To be fair, all the players will probably end up in Wellington no matter what ending they had. Seeing as there is always a pregnant woman in the apocalypse, AJ most likely will be passed to her. Now, what may be interesting would be to leave us the choice to let a competent person take care of him or not. And, in the end, those who decided that Clem has to stick with AJ will end up with him dying of cold or hunger like you said.
But, to answer the topic, I wouldn't leave him. As much as I don't feel any sort of attachment to him and see him more as a burden than anything, I just can't let him die. He didn't ask for anything, he was just born at the wrong time. Plus, I liked Bec and Alvin. But, I won't miss the first occasion I have to give him to a competent person, I will do it without any remorse or regret.
Here is a situation a lot of you have not thought of...
AJ Lovers I riddle you this, what do you think when that baby eventually dies on … moreher, do you think she can handle that emotional pain, or wI'll it be the breaking point.
Does anyone even think about how this will effect her? Obviously not.
Here is a situation a lot of you have not thought of...
AJ Lovers I riddle you this, what do you think when that baby eventually dies on … moreher, do you think she can handle that emotional pain, or wI'll it be the breaking point.
Does anyone even think about how this will effect her? Obviously not.
One of the most popular theory is that there will be a DLC to make everyone who is not already part of it go to Wellington. As for why the players who picked Jane would end up in Wellington, we both know that Jane will most likely die, due to her determinant status. It's summer, Clem is left with the family ,or on her own, the baby formulas are not enough to feed AJ so she decides to head north in the hope that the clear weather will help her find Wellington.
But, like you said, no one knows until it's released. I'm just theorizing
I'm curious on one thing though... What would've happened, if we had killed Kenny, and then AJ didn't start crying, and Jane didn't say anything about him. Does anyone think that maybe, if Jane had gotten her way with Kenny out of the way, and AJ didn't cry, Clementine would've keep on going with Jane's lie and the two would've left the place and returned back to Carver's place? Me personally, I think she would have.
My Clem definitely wouldn't have.
In my case, the only reason I ultimately shoot Kenny was because I already suspected that Jane didn't actually abandon the baby. The little conversation while Kenny was out looking for AJ..."Now we'll see what kind of person he is"... that tipped me off.
So I kept trying to break up the fight, hoping that Jane would cry out the truth before things truly went to shit. Well, of course that didn't happen, but I shoot Kenny because I didn't want Jane dead, and hoping I wasn't wrong about her. If I truly thought that she abandoned AJ, I would have looked away and ran to hug Kenny afterwards.
So if it did turn out that I was wrong, my Clem would have definitely told Jane to fuck off and left on her own.
Hold on, are you asking us if there had been a choice to ignore AJ's cry would we have ignored it? Or it we as Clementine honestly hadn't he… moreard him crying and just left.
Well, of course I'd walk away if I didn't hear anything. It's fucking cold, Walkers are everywhere and probably on their way too me, and Jane or Kenny or maybe both are gonna turn into Walkers soon, I'm high tailing it outta there Jack. How was I supposed to know he was still alive? It's just and honest mistake if that had been the case, it wasn't like we would've been intentionally thinking, "Hurrdurr I hear baby crying k bai."
I'm curious on one thing though... What would've happened, if we had killed Kenny, and then AJ didn't start crying, and Jane didn't say anything about him. Does anyone think that maybe, if Jane had gotten her way with Kenny out of the way, and AJ didn't cry, Clementine would've keep on going with Jane's lie and the two would've left the place and returned back to Carver's place? Me personally, I think she would have.
Why not look at what they did to Sarah, i could easily see them doing this for the hype/shock value, trying to make up for season 2 and wha… moretnot.
They want to start strong, why not kill off the baby. You can't kill Clementine off, because she is immune to death, but AJ.
I know, right? Wanting to keep a plot device included that never had any reason to exist and was only put in to swerve the plot is pretty fucked up, honestly...
Nah wanting to feed a helpless baby too a bunch of walkers is fucked up. there's lots of thing they can do with it that don't involve brutally murdering it.
I know, right? Wanting to keep a plot device included that never had any reason to exist and was only put in to swerve the plot is pretty fucked up, honestly...
Then why don't you go ahead and post up a thread stating your arguments instead of constantly whining about how "messed up" it is that other people have different opinions on a shitty character that was only used as a variable to the dumb final conflict.
Nah wanting to feed a helpless baby too a bunch of walkers is fucked up. there's lots of thing they can do with it that don't involve brutally murdering it.
So is a baby being born without any stabilizers for his immune systems in the freezing cold and being in the middle of a huge firefight and sustaining no damages. I guarantee leaving that anti-Christ won't kill him, he's got one hell of a plot armor blanket.
So is a baby being born without any stabilizers for his immune systems in the freezing cold and being in the middle of a huge firefight and … moresustaining no damages. I guarantee leaving that anti-Christ won't kill him, he's got one hell of a plot armor blanket.
Hey, it's happened before. Remember Kenny's BS return and all the BS about Carver being a moron running a community of morons. TWD S2 is a lot of BS excuses.
As much as I hate clem taking care of a baby or the idea of a baby drawing unwanted attention in an apocalypse, id still have to bring AJ, for all that happened for him to survive, how could I leave him?
unless they pull some BS excuse
Hey, it's happened before. Remember Kenny's BS return and all the BS about Carver being a moron running a community of morons. TWD S2 is a lot of BS excuses.
You know, I'm REAL grateful none of us are writing season 3.
Well, the developers actually wanted the choice of ditching AJ but they took it out because Clementine isn't 'there' yet. So really were just regurgitating old ideas, not creating new one's.
Comments
So you're saying that Lee, had he known the world would end up being overrun by zombies, would have gladly left Clementine to die just because she could be a danger to the group? I don't care how old you are or what your experience is, you don't get left behind, ever. We're no better than the walkers if we abandon our own, even if we don't like the person.
No she didn't, she was just as helpess as AJ, the only reason she survived this long is because of Lee.
Actually I said, quite clearly:
It was a question to consider, not something I posed as fact because obviously we'll never know.
Lol, did you not play the same game as everyone else? No, she wouldn't have lasted so long without Lee, but if she were as helpless as AJ, she would've died before Lee found her. She knew enough to hide in the tree house, and give him a hammer to kill her sitter, which saved his life; AJ for the foreseeable future cannot do any of those things.
And what is all this moral high ground nonsense, "We're no better than the walkers..." The walkers aren't evil, they're undead beings acting on base instinct. And if you're going by that logic, the walkers usually stick together, and plenty of living players chose to leave behind Lily, Sarah and/or Jane/Kenny, so according to your (unrealistic) moral standards a lot of us are 'worse' than the walkers.
How is it Clementines responsibility to take care of someone else'so baby.
Whose killing it, I'm ignoring it, and walking away.
Lol
Here is a situation a lot of you have not thought of...
AJ Lovers I riddle you this, what do you think when that baby eventually dies on her, do you think she can handle that emotional pain, or wI'll it be the breaking point.
Does anyone even think about how this will effect her? Obviously not.
Did you hear a baby crying?
It was just gas sorry...
How would you end up in Wellington if you side with Jane, no one knows until it's released.
Or, little Aj grows up and slowly begins to look a lot like Carver.
No way to repress those memories anymore :P
She has a moral obligation to protect another human life.
Because happy endings go with twdg? What reason will he remain in the story after his plot role has expired? None.
Something tells me Telltale isn't ballsy enough to show him getting killed.
It'll have to be some other means of getting rid of him...
Let us pray...
[removed]
No such thing as dumb questions, only dumb answers.
Oh and dogs. Plenty of dumb dogs.
Why not look at what they did to Sarah, i could easily see them doing this for the hype/shock value, trying to make up for season 2 and whatnot.
They want to start strong, why not kill off the baby. You can't kill Clementine off, because she is immune to death, but AJ.
eh, i hate Clem anyways, i'd be more mad at Clem than feel bad for her if she causes him to die
One of the most popular theory is that there will be a DLC to make everyone who is not already part of it go to Wellington. As for why the players who picked Jane would end up in Wellington, we both know that Jane will most likely die, due to her determinant status. It's summer, Clem is left with the family ,or on her own, the baby formulas are not enough to feed AJ so she decides to head north in the hope that the clear weather will help her find Wellington.
But, like you said, no one knows until it's released. I'm just theorizing
My Clem definitely wouldn't have.
In my case, the only reason I ultimately shoot Kenny was because I already suspected that Jane didn't actually abandon the baby. The little conversation while Kenny was out looking for AJ..."Now we'll see what kind of person he is"... that tipped me off.
So I kept trying to break up the fight, hoping that Jane would cry out the truth before things truly went to shit. Well, of course that didn't happen, but I shoot Kenny because I didn't want Jane dead, and hoping I wasn't wrong about her. If I truly thought that she abandoned AJ, I would have looked away and ran to hug Kenny afterwards.
So if it did turn out that I was wrong, my Clem would have definitely told Jane to fuck off and left on her own.
What moral obligation? LOL ok. Says who? She can't even protect herself. That is why she is always in a group.
Even in that case, I still couldn't justify willingly leaving someone to die when I could have helped them, but just chose not to
Now we're talking about ditching a screaming baby inside a freezing car. Charming.
You know, I'm REAL grateful none of us are writing season 3.
There's lots of ways they could make it happen
The real question you should be asking is whether or not they'll find a good explanation for it happening, or if it will be another contrivance
Jesus Christ there's a lot of F*cked up comments in this thread
You know, there have been nastier things in TWD. Just saying.
Go ahead and laugh. It doesn't matter. It's not like you're going to change your mind any time soon either.
Sarah's death was immensely lame.
If AJ does kick the bucket, it'll most likely be off screen and only mentioned once.
I know, right? Wanting to keep a plot device included that never had any reason to exist and was only put in to swerve the plot is pretty fucked up, honestly...
It's funny how there's so much absurd whing towards the character. Heh, maybe some should be the ones wearing a diaper instead of AJ.
Nah wanting to feed a helpless baby too a bunch of walkers is fucked up. there's lots of thing they can do with it that don't involve brutally murdering it.
Then why don't you go ahead and post up a thread stating your arguments instead of constantly whining about how "messed up" it is that other people have different opinions on a shitty character that was only used as a variable to the dumb final conflict.
I mean, Christ on crutches man.
This thread is about leaving AJ, not feeding him to walkers.
In the walking dead leaving a child is a death sentence
So is a baby being born without any stabilizers for his immune systems in the freezing cold and being in the middle of a huge firefight and sustaining no damages. I guarantee leaving that anti-Christ won't kill him, he's got one hell of a plot armor blanket.
Not his fault for being born and yes leaving him will kill him unless they pull some BS excuse of someone else finding him
Rekt
Hey, it's happened before. Remember Kenny's BS return and all the BS about Carver being a moron running a community of morons. TWD S2 is a lot of BS excuses.
As much as I hate clem taking care of a baby or the idea of a baby drawing unwanted attention in an apocalypse, id still have to bring AJ, for all that happened for him to survive, how could I leave him?
How many pc games have you played and how many of them were at least 50% true to real life?
Well, the developers actually wanted the choice of ditching AJ but they took it out because Clementine isn't 'there' yet. So really were just regurgitating old ideas, not creating new one's.