Growing up or being born into the outbreak?

AgentZ46

What do you think is more interesting seeing a child grow up in the outbreak or born into it?

This topic has been on my mind for a while I've always liked child characters in apocalypse storys it's part of why Carls my favourite character in The Walking dead TV series.

So tell me which do find more interesting and why?

ClemisthequeenofSass

I think both because it's really interesting how the apocalypse effects the development of a child and how the child as an adult will turn out (Clem and Carl are really good examples) but if you're born in the extreme circumstances of a apocalypse (Judith for example) you'll get to learn other morals and life lessons which are also interesting to see how they're put in practise.

Leader_of_Wellington

I feel that so far in The Walking Dead series we've all experienced how character's develop in this world.

I think watching a child who has had no experience in the world before the apocalypse may actually be more interesting.

(Judith/ Alvin jr.)

Aerie88

I kinda see them as the same thing...as we've seen, characters like Carl and Clementine adapted quickly, but still have retained some reserves of empathy...and babies like Judith or A.j could develop the same way..

life among zombies is just going to seem natural for people born into it, so in that sense, being born into it would be easier...and since everyone turns no matter what if the brain isn't destroyed...dealing with zombies would be just another part of life...

-Kenny

• Being born in the outbreak = 99% death rate
• Growing up in Outbreak = adapting to the world around you and by the time you an adult you'll be a survivalist.

Aerie88

with a 99% death rate the human race doesn't stand much chance b/c eventually those growing up in the world will die and if their off spring have a 99% chance of dying...the human race ain't gonna make it