Bruh... Why would someone lie about this??? You've seen how sensitive she is when she talks about Jaime. Did you forget about the whole Rebecca deal when she talked about her sister. Jane must have some AMAZING acting skills then.
Bruh... Why would someone lie about this??? You've seen how sensitive she is when she talks about Jaime. Did you forget about the whole Rebecca deal when she talked about her sister. Jane must have some AMAZING acting skills then.
I see a retelling of the exchange between Jane and Rebecca where Rebecca's negative response to Jane's implication that they abandon her baby is categorized as "rude". Then something about Jane saying she was sad during her apocryphal pro-abandonment fable. Then you stating that Telltale doesn't make detailed characters.
But not a counter-argument.
We can't go on like this, we have to solve the mystery of Jamiegate.
Jane only brings up her sister because Rebecca was being rude and if her sister was fake Jane wouldve dropped it because she wasnt getting a… moreny pity. Jane also says it was better to leave Jaime or you should, she says it ate away at her for a long time and later said she says Jaime didnt want to live anymore.
Anyways i doubt the writers of Episode 4 went that detailed into characters to the point were characters lied about there passed family members, if they did we probably wouldve found out in episode 5 as a way to make Jane look worse.
Even if it's true: Jane's effective. I'm sticking with her and learning everything I can, I'm going to be just as good as she is. After all, Clem is in the best place possible to manipulate Jane as well.
There's likely never going to be a definite answer, but all your points here make sense to me. I've known pathological liars, and they will make up incredibly detailed lies and act it out for whatever reason they want. Attention? Sympathy? Manipulation? You can't try to say "Why would she bother to make up a lie like that?" if she is a pathological liar. Normal people wouldn't do that, correct. But if Jane is lying outright, then we won't know. It seemed really fishy to me how she kept bringing her up, every single time we talked. It seemed so forced to me, and that's why I can give this theory credit. Because if she is a pathological liar, it works. But if she's just socially challenged instead, and has a hard time letting go, then maybe not. We can't prove it, but it's interesting to think about, and it's what My Clementine believes.
Kenny is a vampire and he leeches life out of others as he kills them and this keeps him going. We can see this multiple times over the game… more.
* Larry. He kills Larry without hesitation, just showing how he needs to kill humans
* Katjaa. He probably shot Katjaa himself because Duck just wasnt big & live enough to satisfy his hunger.
* Ben. This is the longest time he hasnt killed anyone and he was so desperate that even Lee killing someone was good enough for him
* If you denied the kill from Kenny, later Ben falls to his demise and after Kenny realizes Ben is still alive, He had to take advantage of the situation and go shoot him personally.
* Walter. As a proper christian he hates gay people and killing the guard in order to get walter dead was just part of his brilliant plan
* Alvin. After Walter died, he wanted more and tried to take Carver out. Unfortunately he misses, but Carver rectifies the situation by shooting… [view original content]
now that you bring it up, it is a possibility, so she can manipulate clementine into abandoning people she sees as a liability, after the whole "AJ is dead" incident, i wouldn't put it past her
yeah i know a pathological liar that invented children they have to gain sympathy, because they have been taken away from them because they were poor, and someone who pretended to be in the army or a submariner (depending on their memory) to get respect.
people like that lie just because they think they get away with it, and it is hard to prove they are lying
There's likely never going to be a definite answer, but all your points here make sense to me. I've known pathological liars, and they will … moremake up incredibly detailed lies and act it out for whatever reason they want. Attention? Sympathy? Manipulation? You can't try to say "Why would she bother to make up a lie like that?" if she is a pathological liar. Normal people wouldn't do that, correct. But if Jane is lying outright, then we won't know. It seemed really fishy to me how she kept bringing her up, every single time we talked. It seemed so forced to me, and that's why I can give this theory credit. Because if she is a pathological liar, it works. But if she's just socially challenged instead, and has a hard time letting go, then maybe not. We can't prove it, but it's interesting to think about, and it's what My Clementine believes.
I can't say I understand your points here. If Jamie was real, Jane still wanted to keep Clementine around with her, because she was lonely. If Jamie wasn't real, then she has he same reasoning.
if there is no jaime, why would jane go through all this to just to be with / save clementine?
how is this so difficult to understand for… more you warmblooded people?
afford vs. benefit
what possible benefit could jane get out of this to be worth so much effort?
this are actions driven by emotions not coldblooded manipulation.
I can't say I understand your points here. If Jamie was real, Jane still wanted to keep Clementine around with her, because she was lonely. If Jamie wasn't real, then she has he same reasoning.
not being lonely is really not the highest priority for coldblooded people.
and just look at all the shit she had to go though for clementine.
would there not be easier ways to find someone?
it is like telling people they are noting special and pointing out what terrible mentor lee is ...
even when most of humanity has died. there are others out there like you.
clementine is just don't worth the trouble if you are not as emotionally attached to her. and how could she be so attached to her without the sister back story.
Much like Carver, Jane probably just finds her strength and potential interesting and so wants to keep her around.
which her experience she could make someone in short time "stronger" then clementine.
Also I don't understand the premise for your argument, are you working from the presupposition that Jane's a "coldblooded manipulator"?
the people i usually discuss this seem to assume that.
Clementine's not just anyone.
Much like Carver, Jane probably just finds her strength and potential interesting and so wants to keep her … morearound.
Also I don't understand the premise for your argument, are you working from the presupposition that Jane's a "coldblooded manipulator"?
WTF did I just read.I wanted to reply and start healthy debate but seeing you're the one who made the thread.. I changed ma mind. because, you typically create a thread to insult Jane.
Seriously why aren't you banned yet, from Jane hate spams and from heavy insults and bad behavior. I just have no idea, the mods must love Kenny and hate Jane too, and if that case I suspect they just, you know picking favorites and all and keeping you in the thread. (just my honest opinion)
Clementine's not just anyone.
it is like telling people they are noting special and pointing out what terrible mentor lee is ...
… moreeven when most of humanity has died. there are others out there like you.
clementine is just don't worth the trouble if you are not as emotionally attached to her. and how could she be so attached to her without the sister back story.
Much like Carver, Jane probably just finds her strength and potential interesting and so wants to keep her around.
which her experience she could make someone in short time "stronger" then clementine.
Also I don't understand the premise for your argument, are you working from the presupposition that Jane's a "coldblooded manipulator"?
the people i usually discuss this seem to assume that.
I understand if you find the dire conclusions that any careful examination of Jane's sociopathic behavior and villainous role in TWD leads to personally uncomfortable, but your discomfort with the discussion doesn't serve as a basis for punitive actions against people who bring these facts to light.
The foundation of this belief, the concept of having to deal with and confront truths one might find unpleasant, has served as the broader shared basis of a free, brave and enlightened culture for hundreds of years.
WTF did I just read.I wanted to reply and start healthy debate but seeing you're the one who made the thread.. I changed ma mind. because, y… moreou typically create a thread to insult Jane.
Seriously why aren't you banned yet, from Jane hate spams and from heavy insults and bad behavior. I just have no idea, the mods must love Kenny and hate Jane too, and if that case I suspect they just, you know picking favorites and all and keeping you in the thread. (just my honest opinion)
Actually he/she has a point. Jane came back and killed a man who didn't wrong her just for Clementine. It would make sense for her to do this if she saw her REAL sister in Clementine.
Sorry but there's more evidence that Jane was telling the truth. It's true she told stuff about her sister that was relevant to the situation they were in but that's because the situations they were in reminded her of what she had experienced with her sister.
I'm sorry I can't follow what you're saying if you're not going to use proper grammar and won't build on a premise that has any internal consistency.
But I hope you have a nice day!
Actually there's zero evidence that Jane was telling the truth. There is literally none.
We do have evidence of Jane lying and lying well on multiple occasions.
You're supposing that Jane's telling the truth simply because she seemingly likes Clementine and sold the motivational story of a younger sister.
Accepting that Jane is capable of deceit puts the sister story in contention. So, what other motivations are equally valid? One that's possible is that Jane just sees herself in Clementine, much like Carver saw himself in Clementine.
So now we're left with two mutually exclusive narratives of motivation. One has circumstantial evidence based on a character study and the themes of previously explored relationship dynamics. The other just has the words of an unreliable narrator.
Actually he/she has a point. Jane came back and killed a man who didn't wrong her just for Clementine. It would make sense for her to do thi… mores if she saw her REAL sister in Clementine.
Sorry but there's more evidence that Jane was telling the truth. It's true she told stuff about her sister that was relevant to the situation they were in but that's because the situations they were in reminded her of what she had experienced with her sister.
No I'm saying she's telling the truth because she came back to Clementine after initially leaving her and killed a man who didn't wrong her despite the fact that she didn't like killing people who didn't wrong her.
Carver did not see himself in Clementine. He had a Darwinian belief on how society had to be run. He believed that the next generation had to be stronger than the last so only the strong deserved to survive. But that does not mean he saw himself in Clementine. Clementine was nothing like him. She was just young and strong and that's why he admired her.
Also how did Jane see herself in Clementine? Jane and Clem have almost nothing in common. Jane is a loner but Clem isn't. Clem had faith in her group but Jane didn't. Clem is willing to trust others and give them a chance but Jane isn't. Clem was willing to give Kennya chance but Jane didn't. The only thing they have in common is that they're both resourceful.
Also plenty of characters use deciet throughout the episode but that doesn't invalidate everything they say. Arvo claims you stole from him even if you didn't but that didn't mean he was lying when he claimed he knew a place where the group was getting supplies.
Actually there's zero evidence that Jane was telling the truth. There is literally none.
We do have evidence of Jane lying and lying well… more on multiple occasions.
You're supposing that Jane's telling the truth simply because she seemingly likes Clementine and sold the motivational story of a younger sister.
Accepting that Jane is capable of deceit puts the sister story in contention. So, what other motivations are equally valid? One that's possible is that Jane just sees herself in Clementine, much like Carver saw himself in Clementine.
So now we're left with two mutually exclusive narratives of motivation. One has circumstantial evidence based on a character study and the themes of previously explored relationship dynamics. The other just has the words of an unreliable narrator.
"But Jane came back" isn't evidence of Jane telling the truth, since the competing narrative of Jane having lied about everything could just as easily have the same outcome.
Carver was literally using "we" when talking about himself and Clementine.
Jane literally told Clem she could "make it on her own" and suggested she did so.
Arguing that other characters have used "deceit" is a false equivocation. Nevermind that you did steal from Arvo regardless of whether or not you took the meds (Jane stole his revolver) there is no comparison to what Jane has shown she's capable of with Troy and Kenny/Clem.
Like...I don't even know the positions you're arguing from at this point.
No I'm saying she's telling the truth because she came back to Clementine after initially leaving her and killed a man who didn't wrong her … moredespite the fact that she didn't like killing people who didn't wrong her.
Carver did not see himself in Clementine. He had a Darwinian belief on how society had to be run. He believed that the next generation had to be stronger than the last so only the strong deserved to survive. But that does not mean he saw himself in Clementine. Clementine was nothing like him. She was just young and strong and that's why he admired her.
Also how did Jane see herself in Clementine? Jane and Clem have almost nothing in common. Jane is a loner but Clem isn't. Clem had faith in her group but Jane didn't. Clem is willing to trust others and give them a chance but Jane isn't. Clem was willing to give Kennya chance but Jane didn't. The only thing they have in common is that they're both resourceful.
Also plenty of… [view original content]
This would require a massive conspiracy at the highest levels of state government and local news media as well as Lee's cooperation with his own incarceration, loss of career and social/familial ostracization.
That's like MGS3 Boss levels of deep cover. I could understand the rationale for taking these steps if it was to eliminate the entire ruling council of a country or something but all that for killing a state senator?
Are we sure that Kenny isn't a clone? Are we sure that Rebecca wasn't just keeping the "baby" AJ in a flesh-like incubation chamber on her abdomen? Are we sure The Walking Dead isn't just a really sadistic homage to The Truman Show?
Are we sure that Kenny isn't a clone? Are we sure that Rebecca wasn't just keeping the "baby" AJ in a flesh-like incubation chamber on her abdomen? Are we sure The Walking Dead isn't just a really sadistic homage to The Truman Show?
But doesn't Jane have some traces of morality though? For example: when the family asks Clem and Jane if they can enter "Howe's", Jane will allow them to go into Carver's former camp if the player does not make a decision, which probably makes it easy to associate Jane's infatuation with Clem, with an almost sister-sister like relationship that has developed between the two from their time together since Jane, supposing her story is true, probably misses her sister and is amazed that Clemintine, a young girl, has made it through two years of the apocalypse.
If I had to guess it's because selfish/self-centered people with streaks of psychopathy are attracted to the idea of fostering, nurturing an… mored raising a "powerful" acolyte like they're Sith Lords out looking for apprentices or something. They see themselves in a younger form and think that creating a duplicate of themselves will give them a legacy or the closest they could get to "immortality" etc. etc.
Because remember: Carver was infatuated with Clementine too.
No I'm saying she's telling the truth because she came back to Clementine after initially leaving her and killed a man who didn't wrong her … moredespite the fact that she didn't like killing people who didn't wrong her.
Carver did not see himself in Clementine. He had a Darwinian belief on how society had to be run. He believed that the next generation had to be stronger than the last so only the strong deserved to survive. But that does not mean he saw himself in Clementine. Clementine was nothing like him. She was just young and strong and that's why he admired her.
Also how did Jane see herself in Clementine? Jane and Clem have almost nothing in common. Jane is a loner but Clem isn't. Clem had faith in her group but Jane didn't. Clem is willing to trust others and give them a chance but Jane isn't. Clem was willing to give Kennya chance but Jane didn't. The only thing they have in common is that they're both resourceful.
Also plenty of… [view original content]
Comments
You lack common sense, because you are replying to a troll seriously.
So how good is she in bed?
Spoiler Alert: Bruh, Lemoncakes is a troll, bruh.
I call it bollocks.
I see a retelling of the exchange between Jane and Rebecca where Rebecca's negative response to Jane's implication that they abandon her baby is categorized as "rude". Then something about Jane saying she was sad during her apocryphal pro-abandonment fable. Then you stating that Telltale doesn't make detailed characters.
But not a counter-argument.
We can't go on like this, we have to solve the mystery of Jamiegate.
Can Kenny turn in to a bat?
Nope, Kenny turns into a boat.
"Act like you belong, and you will belong." - Me, everytime I enter the forums.
Luke said it was pretty good.
Even if it's true: Jane's effective. I'm sticking with her and learning everything I can, I'm going to be just as good as she is. After all, Clem is in the best place possible to manipulate Jane as well.
There's likely never going to be a definite answer, but all your points here make sense to me. I've known pathological liars, and they will make up incredibly detailed lies and act it out for whatever reason they want. Attention? Sympathy? Manipulation? You can't try to say "Why would she bother to make up a lie like that?" if she is a pathological liar. Normal people wouldn't do that, correct. But if Jane is lying outright, then we won't know. It seemed really fishy to me how she kept bringing her up, every single time we talked. It seemed so forced to me, and that's why I can give this theory credit. Because if she is a pathological liar, it works. But if she's just socially challenged instead, and has a hard time letting go, then maybe not. We can't prove it, but it's interesting to think about, and it's what My Clementine believes.
if there is no jaime, why would jane go through all this to just to be with / save clementine?
how is this so difficult to understand for you warmblooded people?
afford vs. benefit
what possible benefit could jane get out of this to be worth so much effort?
this are actions driven by emotions not coldblooded manipulation.
You may be right... I mean kenny IS in fact immortal. You have to hit him in his heart with a boat to kill him.
now that you bring it up, it is a possibility, so she can manipulate clementine into abandoning people she sees as a liability, after the whole "AJ is dead" incident, i wouldn't put it past her
yeah i know a pathological liar that invented children they have to gain sympathy, because they have been taken away from them because they were poor, and someone who pretended to be in the army or a submariner (depending on their memory) to get respect.
people like that lie just because they think they get away with it, and it is hard to prove they are lying
I can't say I understand your points here. If Jamie was real, Jane still wanted to keep Clementine around with her, because she was lonely. If Jamie wasn't real, then she has he same reasoning.
not being lonely is really not the highest priority for coldblooded people.
and just look at all the shit she had to go though for clementine.
would there not be easier ways to find someone?
Clementine's not just anyone.
Much like Carver, Jane probably just finds her strength and potential interesting and so wants to keep her around.
Also I don't understand the premise for your argument, are you working from the presupposition that Jane's a "coldblooded manipulator"?
it is like telling people they are noting special and pointing out what terrible mentor lee is ...
even when most of humanity has died. there are others out there like you.
clementine is just don't worth the trouble if you are not as emotionally attached to her. and how could she be so attached to her without the sister back story.
which her experience she could make someone in short time "stronger" then clementine.
the people i usually discuss this seem to assume that.
WTF did I just read.I wanted to reply and start healthy debate but seeing you're the one who made the thread.. I changed ma mind. because, you typically create a thread to insult Jane.
Seriously why aren't you banned yet, from Jane hate spams and from heavy insults and bad behavior. I just have no idea, the mods must love Kenny and hate Jane too, and if that case I suspect they just, you know picking favorites and all and keeping you in the thread. (just my honest opinion)
I'm sorry I can't follow what you're saying if you're not going to use proper grammar and won't build on a premise that has any internal consistency.
But I hope you have a nice day!
Ok, now THAT'S funny.
I understand if you find the dire conclusions that any careful examination of Jane's sociopathic behavior and villainous role in TWD leads to personally uncomfortable, but your discomfort with the discussion doesn't serve as a basis for punitive actions against people who bring these facts to light.
The foundation of this belief, the concept of having to deal with and confront truths one might find unpleasant, has served as the broader shared basis of a free, brave and enlightened culture for hundreds of years.
I hope you find peace.
Actually he/she has a point. Jane came back and killed a man who didn't wrong her just for Clementine. It would make sense for her to do this if she saw her REAL sister in Clementine.
Sorry but there's more evidence that Jane was telling the truth. It's true she told stuff about her sister that was relevant to the situation they were in but that's because the situations they were in reminded her of what she had experienced with her sister.
Actually there's zero evidence that Jane was telling the truth. There is literally none.
We do have evidence of Jane lying and lying well on multiple occasions.
You're supposing that Jane's telling the truth simply because she seemingly likes Clementine and sold the motivational story of a younger sister.
Accepting that Jane is capable of deceit puts the sister story in contention. So, what other motivations are equally valid? One that's possible is that Jane just sees herself in Clementine, much like Carver saw himself in Clementine.
So now we're left with two mutually exclusive narratives of motivation. One has circumstantial evidence based on a character study and the themes of previously explored relationship dynamics. The other just has the words of an unreliable narrator.
No I'm saying she's telling the truth because she came back to Clementine after initially leaving her and killed a man who didn't wrong her despite the fact that she didn't like killing people who didn't wrong her.
Carver did not see himself in Clementine. He had a Darwinian belief on how society had to be run. He believed that the next generation had to be stronger than the last so only the strong deserved to survive. But that does not mean he saw himself in Clementine. Clementine was nothing like him. She was just young and strong and that's why he admired her.
Also how did Jane see herself in Clementine? Jane and Clem have almost nothing in common. Jane is a loner but Clem isn't. Clem had faith in her group but Jane didn't. Clem is willing to trust others and give them a chance but Jane isn't. Clem was willing to give Kennya chance but Jane didn't. The only thing they have in common is that they're both resourceful.
Also plenty of characters use deciet throughout the episode but that doesn't invalidate everything they say. Arvo claims you stole from him even if you didn't but that didn't mean he was lying when he claimed he knew a place where the group was getting supplies.
I like chicken.
So deep that even Adele isn't rolling there.
You know, I used to hate this Lemoncakes guy... But i think he's slowly becoming one of my favorite Kenny enthusiasts XD
Why does everybody try to turn everything into The Usual Suspects? This is not The Usual Suspects and Jane is not Keyser Soze.
"But Jane came back" isn't evidence of Jane telling the truth, since the competing narrative of Jane having lied about everything could just as easily have the same outcome.
Carver was literally using "we" when talking about himself and Clementine.
Jane literally told Clem she could "make it on her own" and suggested she did so.
Arguing that other characters have used "deceit" is a false equivocation. Nevermind that you did steal from Arvo regardless of whether or not you took the meds (Jane stole his revolver) there is no comparison to what Jane has shown she's capable of with Troy and Kenny/Clem.
Like...I don't even know the positions you're arguing from at this point.
Are we even sure this "Jane" is a woman?
This would require a massive conspiracy at the highest levels of state government and local news media as well as Lee's cooperation with his own incarceration, loss of career and social/familial ostracization.
That's like MGS3 Boss levels of deep cover. I could understand the rationale for taking these steps if it was to eliminate the entire ruling council of a country or something but all that for killing a state senator?
Seems a bit much.
Are we sure that Kenny isn't a clone? Are we sure that Rebecca wasn't just keeping the "baby" AJ in a flesh-like incubation chamber on her abdomen? Are we sure The Walking Dead isn't just a really sadistic homage to The Truman Show?
But that wouldn't make any sense.
It makes more sense than Jane not being a woman.
But doesn't Jane have some traces of morality though? For example: when the family asks Clem and Jane if they can enter "Howe's", Jane will allow them to go into Carver's former camp if the player does not make a decision, which probably makes it easy to associate Jane's infatuation with Clem, with an almost sister-sister like relationship that has developed between the two from their time together since Jane, supposing her story is true, probably misses her sister and is amazed that Clemintine, a young girl, has made it through two years of the apocalypse.
I am just thinking out loud here.
Luke is.
Lemoncakes is a troll. A known troll.