No, I meant it's funny how you say in one sentence 'didn't hate it that much' and then in the same sentence 'fantastic actually'
From 'Meh' to 'Wooooooot!' in a few words.
And I also liked 'Amid The Ruins' from Day 1.
I don't speak Russian, but I did notice that Vitaly suddenly didn't sound like some American guy reading off a script. Now I know why! Thanks, dojo! I guess I was annoyed because their accents were so bad I was confused: actual Russians, or just pretending? Why would they pretend?
Green, you're right that only Buricko had tattoos, but he had enough for like six people just on his scalp. I doubt if Telltale meant to use a stereotype, and really, it was a pretty small thing--but it was still kind of an eye-roller.
There are no compelling cases or defenses being made here. I mean, your whole defense of Sarah and Nick's inevitable deaths were that they were inevitable deaths. Really? That's supposed to change our minds? Nope.
Nick's and Sarah's deaths were bad because there was clearly a conscious effort to give them both character and depth before this, only for it all to get squandered because plans clearly changed or Telltale themselves let their dislike of characters (supposedly for Sarah) get in the way. The fact that people can literally only defend it with "Sometimes people just die" is exactly what's wrong with the deaths. That's a bullshit line of reasoning to justify shitty writing and an insulting lack of closure.
Telltale just didn't respect these characters, and that's what pisses me off. You can tell they friggin' love Kenny and respect the hell out of him, but Sarah and Nick, who they'd been developing so well and gained such an audience? They gave that audience who grew attached to them a big middle finger and played it off as "Welp, the apocalypse is harsh". Yeah, that was true in season 1 too, and guess what? There were no deaths that felt insulting or like characterization had been uselessly squandered. Every death served a purpose, and the characters that died didn't even need "heroic moments" (which people like to pretend we were asking for for Sarah and Nick) for their deaths to have meaning. That's what happens when one season is written competently, and the other with blatant disregard for good characterization.
Ultimately, this is the biggest sore spot. The rest of the things you mentioned seem to hinge upon what happens in episode 5 to give them any meaning, which doesn't say good things about Amid the Ruins that it can't hook us on its own. Plus, for stuff like Mike and Bonnie, their later treachery was only shocking because the writing was shitty there too. And since Luke's whole deal with Kenny amounted to nothing in the end, that pretty much means that all the drama building up between them in ATR was a waste of time. Luke has no real impact on the story anymore once he died, aside from the flimsy idea that his death is what caused the group to implode, because it then pushes the focus on Jane and Kenny instead, so that's even less of a reason to praise ATR.
We all have our opinions, and mine is that Amid the Ruins remains one of the worst episodes of the series for the reasons I've given, even though I don't agree with others that it's the worst of the season, but only because it's beaten by In Harm's Way.
No, but a death that squanders character development, making everything beforehand largely a waste of time is an example of ZOMG Bad Writingz. With Nick's fate as it is and his character being utterly wasted in episodes 3 and 4, what was the point of saving him in 2? I'll tell you: There is none. People can only defend it with "You prove that you didn't give up on him", which is just reaching since it doesn't have an impact on a single thing in-story. Sarah's death, on top of being wrought with unfortunate implications about the writers and their views on mental illness, is turned into a vehicle for Jane to get development. Oh, how wonderful. The Crawford wannabe gets development, and the innocent girl who is clearly fighting hard to keep going despite her crippling condition and mental state dies horribly with little to no mourning except from Rebecca if you choose to let her die at the trailer home. There's nothing that we learn or feel from that except that only the assholes survive, the very cliche that season 1 never fell into.
Molly's character was done, served her purpose as the insider from Crawford who hated their methods, revealed her back story to us, and left to be a loner once again. Nothing felt incomplete with her.
Carley had left a huge mark on Lee's story by presenting him with the possibility to reveal his past, which is a pretty significant moment for him. Her death was an appropriate shock and came at a time in which her character had served an important purpose as Lee's friend and even a moral compass of sorts.
Doug's death mostly banks on pure shock value. However, Doug had been progressively getting stronger up until that point, raising a gun to fight, becoming more argumentative to protect Ben, and then dying for him. He died a hero, thus it wasn't unfulfilling.
Chuck's death came after he made arguably the biggest impact on Clementine by persuading Lee to train her, ensuring her survival. His death was a real shock and I understand why it felt unfulfilling to some, but he had left his mark on the story and his final act was saving Clementine's life and going out like a hero. Again, not unfulfilling.
I was totally willing to believe that there were Russians in the US--there are a lot of Russians here. I was a little disappointed that only… more one of the voice actors actually speaks Russian (Arvo), at least that I could tell. And did they have to be Russian mafia-looking guys with tattoos? I thought that was a little...well, cold war-ish, I guess. I thought Telltale could have done better by Russian culture.
That said, I also liked this episode, and you have an excellent point that people probably hated on it because of Nick and Sarah.
I didn't have a problem with Nick or Sarah's deaths, because zombies. Besides, if you think back to Season 1, remember the people we got to know and all too soon they were gone, like Molly, Doug/Carley, and Chuck, to name a few? You can't be sure that people are going to be around for long when there are zombies--an early death or exit doesn't necessarily mean ZOMG Bad Writingz. I could go more into why it wasn't bad writing, but I already did that at the time.
They didn't have to survive the whole season, nor did they need heroes' deaths. Carley's death was a horrible shock and she most certainly didn't die a hero's death, but that doesn't make her dying when she did and how she did badly written or a ruination of her character. Hell, even letting Ben die at Crawford holds a lot of emotion, mourning, and serious moral questions which the game throws right into your face, and deservedly so.
Nick and Sarah, on the other hand, were squandered characters by writers who didn't respect what had been done with them up until that point. Like I said in another reply, Nick was reduced to some dude standing off in the distance after we saved him, rendering our choice absolutely useless before he even died. We're not asking for heroism, we're asking for actual consideration of the characters. Nick didn't get that, and that's BS, full stop.
Sarah's isn't as egregious a case since she does get some actual focus in the episode, but only enough so that everything we ever did for Sarah and what Sarah did for us can be made a mockery of with her fate which is used to essentially prove the Carver/Crawford/Jane philosophies correct. Let's go back to Ben for a second. Like I said, leaving him behind is treated with the judgment you deserve. Choosing to let Sarah die due to her "true nature", on the other hand? "Meh... sucks, I guess. So what's next?"
The problem isn't that our choices meant nothing, necessarily. We're all used to that by now. The problem is that these character arcs now feel meaningless because they didn't lead to anything. All the shock deaths in season 1 still led to something. I mean, hell, even Brie got a more heartfelt mourning from Vernon, and that was him saying that he didn't feel much pain anymore, for god's sake. The sentiment is heartbreaking and sets the tone brilliantly. Sarah? Doesn't even succeed in setting a tone. It just... happens, and that's it. And from a writer's point of view, that's just no way to treat a character you bother to put into a story and give attention to to begin with.
Thanks Green for making that, really good read.
Personally, I think some of players expected too much from Nick and Sarah, facilely choos… moreing them as their favorites, forgetting their true nature. To be honest, I've never thought that Nick and Sarah were going to survive through the whole Season. Not everyone has to die like a hero, even if some characters fairly deserved it and the others wished for it to happen. World immersed in the zombie apocalipse is the place where people die in many ways. Somethimes just isn't an option to save them.
Are you serious? "they're just characters" woopty fucking doo lets just treat them like shit since they're just characters because character development and themselves are fucking useless since TWDG focuses on GAMEPLAY!!!!!
You should go work at telltale with that kind of attitude, they'll accept you. But it's you anyways, I didn't expect anything.
I want to say something about the writing of Jane. It feels like they just stuff Jamie's story there to show Jane's past. She's silent in E3 and then in E4 she suddenly can't stop talking about her sister. Sometimes the topic seems to come out of nowhere, because it doesn't join well with what they're doing/talking about at that time. It's not like Molly's story, which is just brought up naturally with her strange action and the tape. And there's hardly any foreshadowing, proof or follow-up, which makes someone even question if Jamie does exist. Well the question is paranoid but it shows how the story feels fancied.
Even though I sometimes disagree with your statements, usually without saying so, I'm glad we can agree to disagree with some of OP's points. To be honest I really don't have the patience to counter-argument this post (hear me out). Every time I say Amid the Ruins sucked I add a 'in my opinion' or 'to me', so I'm not forcing anyone to hate the episode. However I, for one, but not alone, really did hate Amid the Ruins for multiple reasons, many of which have been thoroughly and extensively discussed in other, already forgotten topics.
well first she was going to die anyway, SHE WAS DETERMINANT,
Good reasoning to why to justify killing Sarah so poorly.
Nick's … moredeath was bad, sure I can agree on that, but is a character death really going to turn the whole episode into shit just cause
People promised Uncle Pete they would look after him, and to see him die like that pissed off a lot of fans. He was a favorite.
I agree, I don't think it would of taken much to put some extra dialogue into the game for Nick and Sarah, and extra Dialogue regarding their deaths, I mean shit if you get nick killed in episode 2, Luke never mentions him until episode 5 right?
No, but a death that squanders character development, making everything beforehand largely a waste of time is an example of ZOMG Bad Writing… morez. With Nick's fate as it is and his character being utterly wasted in episodes 3 and 4, what was the point of saving him in 2? I'll tell you: There is none. People can only defend it with "You prove that you didn't give up on him", which is just reaching since it doesn't have an impact on a single thing in-story. Sarah's death, on top of being wrought with unfortunate implications about the writers and their views on mental illness, is turned into a vehicle for Jane to get development. Oh, how wonderful. The Crawford wannabe gets development, and the innocent girl who is clearly fighting hard to keep going despite her crippling condition and mental state dies horribly with little to no mourning except from Rebecca if you choose to let her die at the trailer home. There's nothing that we learn or feel fro… [view original content]
First, Doug's death wasn't a horrible shock to me. I know something like this was gonna happen sooner or later. Problem is, most of people expected to see Nick sacryficing himself to protect Luke, or Sarah using gun found under the house to save Clementine from walkers. They were comparing Nick to Luke and Sarah to Clementine, expected something that was incompatible with the nature of these characters. I've never said I approved how Nick was reduced to become some dude, but then again, I see here the story about the realism, and what real person would do, if somebody really close to him died in front of his eyes. Most of people forced to live in the apocalypse would be like Nick, Sarah, Reggie, Ben.
They didn't have to survive the whole season, nor did they need heroes' deaths. Carley's death was a horrible shock and she most certainly d… moreidn't die a hero's death, but that doesn't make her dying when she did and how she did badly written or a ruination of her character. Hell, even letting Ben die at Crawford holds a lot of emotion, mourning, and serious moral questions which the game throws right into your face, and deservedly so.
Nick and Sarah, on the other hand, were squandered characters by writers who didn't respect what had been done with them up until that point. Like I said in another reply, Nick was reduced to some dude standing off in the distance after we saved him, rendering our choice absolutely useless before he even died. We're not asking for heroism, we're asking for actual consideration of the characters. Nick didn't get that, and that's BS, full stop.
Sarah's isn't as egregious a case since she does get some actual … [view original content]
I loved the development of Jane in this chapter and, by the end of it, I was ready to go with her. In fact, I think I asked to go with her (that was a choice, wasn't it?). They got me attached to her incredibly quickly and that's a testament to the writing in this episode. In fact I got jealous when her and Luke got it on - not in a weird sexual way (given Clem is a kid, obviously) but just in the closeness of the characters. I wanted Clem and Jane to be a team and so Luke was suddenly a part of that without Clem.
So I think pulling all that off in one episode was great.
I loved Nick's death. It came as a complete shock and, for me, sums up the bleakness of this season overall. Nobody values life like they should any more and you leave and when you come back, not everyone will be alive. In this case, they didn't make it to where they were supposed to be and to find Nick like that was heartbreaking because there was absolutely nothing we could have done.
Oddly the bigger death issue for me was Sarah because I think it deserved more weight than it was given. In contrast to my views on the Nick death, it felt wrong to me that it was so matter of fact. That was one death I thought needed more drama and more of a come down time afterwards.
Where the episode fell down in my opinion was in not giving the baby birth the drama it deserved. This was true in ep5 too (the baby food issue is just one example) where the danger and implications of keeping a newborn alive in this situation didn't really come into it, which is weird given the build up to this plot point. I don't know who wrote the episodes but it felt like someone sowed the seed of that birth thinking it could lead to huge dramatic potential and the person who ultimately handled it fumbled it or just didn't know or care about babies. Giving birth to a baby in a walker-infested environment without the proper resources should have been a bigger deal in my opinion.
But the searching for supplies led to a few nice moments and I felt we got to know Mike a bit better. The raccoon bit was great.
Probably one of my biggest criticisms of this episode would be one I'd level at others but was even more important for ep5 in a five episode series - I didn't feel any sense of satisfaction on completion of the episode and there didn't seem to be a clear goal of any sort to lead to the next one. The driving motivations were weak and episodes just seemed to end mid-action in this season. Given we were moving on to the last episode, I don't think it felt like we were building to a climax (hence probably my feeling that the end of ep5 was rushed and weird).
So it wasn't the strongest episode for me but it was probably more coherent for me than the end of ep5. Hard to say which one I found weaker. But there were definitely things in this episode that I liked and I do think the Jane development was spot-on in this episode.
I loved the development of Jane in this chapter and, by the end of it, I was ready to go with her. In fact, I think I asked to go with her (… morethat was a choice, wasn't it?). They got me attached to her incredibly quickly and that's a testament to the writing in this episode. In fact I got jealous when her and Luke got it on - not in a weird sexual way (given Clem is a kid, obviously) but just in the closeness of the characters. I wanted Clem and Jane to be a team and so Luke was suddenly a part of that without Clem.
So I think pulling all that off in one episode was great.
I loved Nick's death. It came as a complete shock and, for me, sums up the bleakness of this season overall. Nobody values life like they should any more and you leave and when you come back, not everyone will be alive. In this case, they didn't make it to where they were supposed to be and to find Nick like that was heartbreaking because there was absolutely nothing we… [view original content]
Are you serious? "they're just characters" woopty fucking doo lets just treat them like shit since they're just characters because character… more development and themselves are fucking useless since TWDG focuses on GAMEPLAY!!!!!
You should go work at telltale with that kind of attitude, they'll accept you. But it's you anyways, I didn't expect anything.
My biggest beef is that he is trying to state his opinion as fact. That is not true. He can't say the deaths were "little" things because everyone is different. To him it might have been small, where someone else could look at the same situation, and those two instances ruin the entire episode/game.
Everyone is different, and has a different way of looking at things.
Thank you George.
Even though I sometimes disagree with your statements, usually without saying so, I'm glad we can agree to disagree wit… moreh some of OP's points. To be honest I really don't have the patience to counter-argument this post (hear me out). Every time I say Amid the Ruins sucked I add a 'in my opinion' or 'to me', so I'm not forcing anyone to hate the episode. However I, for one, but not alone, really did hate Amid the Ruins for multiple reasons, many of which have been thoroughly and extensively discussed in other, already forgotten topics.
It isn't. They've done so much better. Doug, Carley and Ben in S1 were determinants that gave us the illusion of choice. They talked after we saved them and they even had a huge impact on the plot. If we saved Ben for Ep5, he didn't feel determinant. He felt like he was supposed to be in the episode. That's good determinant writing
I agree, I fucking hated their deaths but that's how Telltale works, They wanted to show that Sarah could never adapt to Survive in the hars… moreh world and With Nick, Telltale got lazy with him but they might have wanted to show that no matter what you can't protect everyone.
Nick and Sarah were developed though. It's lazy to spend an ep focusing heavily on a character e.g. Ep2 for Nick, Ep3 for Sarah, only to kill them for shock value. The comics aren't even that bad. When they have a character and an arc, they develop that arc
I was totally willing to believe that there were Russians in the US--there are a lot of Russians here. I was a little disappointed that only… more one of the voice actors actually speaks Russian (Arvo), at least that I could tell. And did they have to be Russian mafia-looking guys with tattoos? I thought that was a little...well, cold war-ish, I guess. I thought Telltale could have done better by Russian culture.
That said, I also liked this episode, and you have an excellent point that people probably hated on it because of Nick and Sarah.
I didn't have a problem with Nick or Sarah's deaths, because zombies. Besides, if you think back to Season 1, remember the people we got to know and all too soon they were gone, like Molly, Doug/Carley, and Chuck, to name a few? You can't be sure that people are going to be around for long when there are zombies--an early death or exit doesn't necessarily mean ZOMG Bad Writingz. I could go more into why it wasn't bad writing, but I already did that at the time.
Nick was one of those deaths that just happened, rather than seeming to be for shock value. And that does happen in the comics and has happened a lot over the years. A favourite character is there one second and gone the next. One particular character taking an arrow to the eye out of nowhere jumps to mind.
Sarah's was a bit odd and it felt like something was missing to me. Unlike Nick, Sarah's character seemed to be going somewhere in particular. Her death could have been designed to be a reminder that no character is ever safe but I'm not sure it was that deliberate. There were a few strange changes in direction in ep 4 and 5 like that.
Nick and Sarah were developed though. It's lazy to spend an ep focusing heavily on a character e.g. Ep2 for Nick, Ep3 for Sarah, only to kil… morel them for shock value. The comics aren't even that bad. When they have a character and an arc, they develop that arc
Alright, you have a point there, but for me however it's still the worst episode of Season 2. You have to admit Telltale could've put a bit more of an effort in it.
It isn't. They've done so much better. Doug, Carley and Ben in S1 were determinants that gave us the illusion of choice. They talked after w… moree saved them and they even had a huge impact on the plot. If we saved Ben for Ep5, he didn't feel determinant. He felt like he was supposed to be in the episode. That's good determinant writing
I thought Nick was going places tbh. His arc seemed to be growing up like Uncle Pete wanted, and if he had to be killed I'd say it should be determinant e.g. give him the watch and be supportive, he makes Uncle Pete proud heroically, don't give him the watch and act less supportive to him and he's stuck in the fence. The character taking an arrow had completed a few arcs imo
Nick was one of those deaths that just happened, rather than seeming to be for shock value. And that does happen in the comics and has happe… morened a lot over the years. A favourite character is there one second and gone the next. One particular character taking an arrow to the eye out of nowhere jumps to mind.
Sarah's was a bit odd and it felt like something was missing to me. Unlike Nick, Sarah's character seemed to be going somewhere in particular. Her death could have been designed to be a reminder that no character is ever safe but I'm not sure it was that deliberate. There were a few strange changes in direction in ep 4 and 5 like that.
They could have put more effort into it, but that would have just made it better for me, the only thing I see wrong with it is the Nick and Sarah death which I don't think are that bad, just being blown way out of proportion.
Alright, you have a point there, but for me however it's still the worst episode of Season 2. You have to admit Telltale could've put a bit more of an effort in it.
Are you serious? "they're just characters" woopty fucking doo lets just treat them like shit since they're just characters because character… more development and themselves are fucking useless since TWDG focuses on GAMEPLAY!!!!!
You should go work at telltale with that kind of attitude, they'll accept you. But it's you anyways, I didn't expect anything.
Comments
No, I meant it's funny how you say in one sentence 'didn't hate it that much' and then in the same sentence 'fantastic actually'
From 'Meh' to 'Wooooooot!' in a few words.
And I also liked 'Amid The Ruins' from Day 1.
OK, sorry about that.
For what?
Never mind.
Of course you'd think the Luke part was well done.
Heh, hehehee.
heh
GOD FUCKING DAMN IT
Ok
Oh you made the thread... Good job, good job!
Even though you are a fgt, I agree. B]
"Look into your heart, Green."
"You know it to be true."
Thanks skrub :]
Nice opinion. But it's still the worst of season two.
That's great.
I don't speak Russian, but I did notice that Vitaly suddenly didn't sound like some American guy reading off a script. Now I know why! Thanks, dojo! I guess I was annoyed because their accents were so bad I was confused: actual Russians, or just pretending? Why would they pretend?
Green, you're right that only Buricko had tattoos, but he had enough for like six people just on his scalp. I doubt if Telltale meant to use a stereotype, and really, it was a pretty small thing--but it was still kind of an eye-roller.
There are no compelling cases or defenses being made here. I mean, your whole defense of Sarah and Nick's inevitable deaths were that they were inevitable deaths. Really? That's supposed to change our minds? Nope.
Nick's and Sarah's deaths were bad because there was clearly a conscious effort to give them both character and depth before this, only for it all to get squandered because plans clearly changed or Telltale themselves let their dislike of characters (supposedly for Sarah) get in the way. The fact that people can literally only defend it with "Sometimes people just die" is exactly what's wrong with the deaths. That's a bullshit line of reasoning to justify shitty writing and an insulting lack of closure.
Telltale just didn't respect these characters, and that's what pisses me off. You can tell they friggin' love Kenny and respect the hell out of him, but Sarah and Nick, who they'd been developing so well and gained such an audience? They gave that audience who grew attached to them a big middle finger and played it off as "Welp, the apocalypse is harsh". Yeah, that was true in season 1 too, and guess what? There were no deaths that felt insulting or like characterization had been uselessly squandered. Every death served a purpose, and the characters that died didn't even need "heroic moments" (which people like to pretend we were asking for for Sarah and Nick) for their deaths to have meaning. That's what happens when one season is written competently, and the other with blatant disregard for good characterization.
Ultimately, this is the biggest sore spot. The rest of the things you mentioned seem to hinge upon what happens in episode 5 to give them any meaning, which doesn't say good things about Amid the Ruins that it can't hook us on its own. Plus, for stuff like Mike and Bonnie, their later treachery was only shocking because the writing was shitty there too. And since Luke's whole deal with Kenny amounted to nothing in the end, that pretty much means that all the drama building up between them in ATR was a waste of time. Luke has no real impact on the story anymore once he died, aside from the flimsy idea that his death is what caused the group to implode, because it then pushes the focus on Jane and Kenny instead, so that's even less of a reason to praise ATR.
We all have our opinions, and mine is that Amid the Ruins remains one of the worst episodes of the series for the reasons I've given, even though I don't agree with others that it's the worst of the season, but only because it's beaten by In Harm's Way.
No, but a death that squanders character development, making everything beforehand largely a waste of time is an example of ZOMG Bad Writingz. With Nick's fate as it is and his character being utterly wasted in episodes 3 and 4, what was the point of saving him in 2? I'll tell you: There is none. People can only defend it with "You prove that you didn't give up on him", which is just reaching since it doesn't have an impact on a single thing in-story. Sarah's death, on top of being wrought with unfortunate implications about the writers and their views on mental illness, is turned into a vehicle for Jane to get development. Oh, how wonderful. The Crawford wannabe gets development, and the innocent girl who is clearly fighting hard to keep going despite her crippling condition and mental state dies horribly with little to no mourning except from Rebecca if you choose to let her die at the trailer home. There's nothing that we learn or feel from that except that only the assholes survive, the very cliche that season 1 never fell into.
Molly's character was done, served her purpose as the insider from Crawford who hated their methods, revealed her back story to us, and left to be a loner once again. Nothing felt incomplete with her.
Carley had left a huge mark on Lee's story by presenting him with the possibility to reveal his past, which is a pretty significant moment for him. Her death was an appropriate shock and came at a time in which her character had served an important purpose as Lee's friend and even a moral compass of sorts.
Doug's death mostly banks on pure shock value. However, Doug had been progressively getting stronger up until that point, raising a gun to fight, becoming more argumentative to protect Ben, and then dying for him. He died a hero, thus it wasn't unfulfilling.
Chuck's death came after he made arguably the biggest impact on Clementine by persuading Lee to train her, ensuring her survival. His death was a real shock and I understand why it felt unfulfilling to some, but he had left his mark on the story and his final act was saving Clementine's life and going out like a hero. Again, not unfulfilling.
All quite different from Nick and Sarah's fates.
They didn't have to survive the whole season, nor did they need heroes' deaths. Carley's death was a horrible shock and she most certainly didn't die a hero's death, but that doesn't make her dying when she did and how she did badly written or a ruination of her character. Hell, even letting Ben die at Crawford holds a lot of emotion, mourning, and serious moral questions which the game throws right into your face, and deservedly so.
Nick and Sarah, on the other hand, were squandered characters by writers who didn't respect what had been done with them up until that point. Like I said in another reply, Nick was reduced to some dude standing off in the distance after we saved him, rendering our choice absolutely useless before he even died. We're not asking for heroism, we're asking for actual consideration of the characters. Nick didn't get that, and that's BS, full stop.
Sarah's isn't as egregious a case since she does get some actual focus in the episode, but only enough so that everything we ever did for Sarah and what Sarah did for us can be made a mockery of with her fate which is used to essentially prove the Carver/Crawford/Jane philosophies correct. Let's go back to Ben for a second. Like I said, leaving him behind is treated with the judgment you deserve. Choosing to let Sarah die due to her "true nature", on the other hand? "Meh... sucks, I guess. So what's next?"
The problem isn't that our choices meant nothing, necessarily. We're all used to that by now. The problem is that these character arcs now feel meaningless because they didn't lead to anything. All the shock deaths in season 1 still led to something. I mean, hell, even Brie got a more heartfelt mourning from Vernon, and that was him saying that he didn't feel much pain anymore, for god's sake. The sentiment is heartbreaking and sets the tone brilliantly. Sarah? Doesn't even succeed in setting a tone. It just... happens, and that's it. And from a writer's point of view, that's just no way to treat a character you bother to put into a story and give attention to to begin with.
Are you serious? "they're just characters" woopty fucking doo lets just treat them like shit since they're just characters because character development and themselves are fucking useless since TWDG focuses on GAMEPLAY!!!!!
You should go work at telltale with that kind of attitude, they'll accept you. But it's you anyways, I didn't expect anything.
I want to say something about the writing of Jane. It feels like they just stuff Jamie's story there to show Jane's past. She's silent in E3 and then in E4 she suddenly can't stop talking about her sister. Sometimes the topic seems to come out of nowhere, because it doesn't join well with what they're doing/talking about at that time. It's not like Molly's story, which is just brought up naturally with her strange action and the tape. And there's hardly any foreshadowing, proof or follow-up, which makes someone even question if Jamie does exist. Well the question is paranoid but it shows how the story feels fancied.
Thank you George.
Even though I sometimes disagree with your statements, usually without saying so, I'm glad we can agree to disagree with some of OP's points. To be honest I really don't have the patience to counter-argument this post (hear me out). Every time I say Amid the Ruins sucked I add a 'in my opinion' or 'to me', so I'm not forcing anyone to hate the episode. However I, for one, but not alone, really did hate Amid the Ruins for multiple reasons, many of which have been thoroughly and extensively discussed in other, already forgotten topics.
I agree, I don't think it would of taken much to put some extra dialogue into the game for Nick and Sarah, and extra Dialogue regarding their deaths, I mean shit if you get nick killed in episode 2, Luke never mentions him until episode 5 right?
First, Doug's death wasn't a horrible shock to me. I know something like this was gonna happen sooner or later. Problem is, most of people expected to see Nick sacryficing himself to protect Luke, or Sarah using gun found under the house to save Clementine from walkers. They were comparing Nick to Luke and Sarah to Clementine, expected something that was incompatible with the nature of these characters. I've never said I approved how Nick was reduced to become some dude, but then again, I see here the story about the realism, and what real person would do, if somebody really close to him died in front of his eyes. Most of people forced to live in the apocalypse would be like Nick, Sarah, Reggie, Ben.
And that's what this is about.
That's why Green wrote up this Masterpost.
This episode was bad and you should feel bad for defending it.
I can see some reasonable arguments for why people didn't like Amid the Ruins.
But that still doesn't stopped me from enjoying it and become emotionally invested in it.
I loved the development of Jane in this chapter and, by the end of it, I was ready to go with her. In fact, I think I asked to go with her (that was a choice, wasn't it?). They got me attached to her incredibly quickly and that's a testament to the writing in this episode. In fact I got jealous when her and Luke got it on - not in a weird sexual way (given Clem is a kid, obviously) but just in the closeness of the characters. I wanted Clem and Jane to be a team and so Luke was suddenly a part of that without Clem.
So I think pulling all that off in one episode was great.
I loved Nick's death. It came as a complete shock and, for me, sums up the bleakness of this season overall. Nobody values life like they should any more and you leave and when you come back, not everyone will be alive. In this case, they didn't make it to where they were supposed to be and to find Nick like that was heartbreaking because there was absolutely nothing we could have done.
Oddly the bigger death issue for me was Sarah because I think it deserved more weight than it was given. In contrast to my views on the Nick death, it felt wrong to me that it was so matter of fact. That was one death I thought needed more drama and more of a come down time afterwards.
Where the episode fell down in my opinion was in not giving the baby birth the drama it deserved. This was true in ep5 too (the baby food issue is just one example) where the danger and implications of keeping a newborn alive in this situation didn't really come into it, which is weird given the build up to this plot point. I don't know who wrote the episodes but it felt like someone sowed the seed of that birth thinking it could lead to huge dramatic potential and the person who ultimately handled it fumbled it or just didn't know or care about babies. Giving birth to a baby in a walker-infested environment without the proper resources should have been a bigger deal in my opinion.
But the searching for supplies led to a few nice moments and I felt we got to know Mike a bit better. The raccoon bit was great.
Probably one of my biggest criticisms of this episode would be one I'd level at others but was even more important for ep5 in a five episode series - I didn't feel any sense of satisfaction on completion of the episode and there didn't seem to be a clear goal of any sort to lead to the next one. The driving motivations were weak and episodes just seemed to end mid-action in this season. Given we were moving on to the last episode, I don't think it felt like we were building to a climax (hence probably my feeling that the end of ep5 was rushed and weird).
So it wasn't the strongest episode for me but it was probably more coherent for me than the end of ep5. Hard to say which one I found weaker. But there were definitely things in this episode that I liked and I do think the Jane development was spot-on in this episode.
Thanks I really appreciate that bud
Also as you can examine this is the perfect example of being blinded by Nick's and Sarah's death.
Yeah that was a choice to go with her but you aren't actually able to go with her.
When exactly did I say that? Lol
My biggest beef is that he is trying to state his opinion as fact. That is not true. He can't say the deaths were "little" things because everyone is different. To him it might have been small, where someone else could look at the same situation, and those two instances ruin the entire episode/game.
Everyone is different, and has a different way of looking at things.
It isn't. They've done so much better. Doug, Carley and Ben in S1 were determinants that gave us the illusion of choice. They talked after we saved them and they even had a huge impact on the plot. If we saved Ben for Ep5, he didn't feel determinant. He felt like he was supposed to be in the episode. That's good determinant writing
Nick and Sarah were developed though. It's lazy to spend an ep focusing heavily on a character e.g. Ep2 for Nick, Ep3 for Sarah, only to kill them for shock value. The comics aren't even that bad. When they have a character and an arc, they develop that arc
Amid the Ruins is my favorite episode of season 2 right after No Going Back, I never understood all the hate it received.
Nick was one of those deaths that just happened, rather than seeming to be for shock value. And that does happen in the comics and has happened a lot over the years. A favourite character is there one second and gone the next. One particular character taking an arrow to the eye out of nowhere jumps to mind.
Sarah's was a bit odd and it felt like something was missing to me. Unlike Nick, Sarah's character seemed to be going somewhere in particular. Her death could have been designed to be a reminder that no character is ever safe but I'm not sure it was that deliberate. There were a few strange changes in direction in ep 4 and 5 like that.
Alright, you have a point there, but for me however it's still the worst episode of Season 2. You have to admit Telltale could've put a bit more of an effort in it.
I'm talking about Nick and Sarah, not the other Determinants...
I thought Nick was going places tbh. His arc seemed to be growing up like Uncle Pete wanted, and if he had to be killed I'd say it should be determinant e.g. give him the watch and be supportive, he makes Uncle Pete proud heroically, don't give him the watch and act less supportive to him and he's stuck in the fence. The character taking an arrow had completed a few arcs imo
C'mon, Gary.
This post isn't like you
They could have put more effort into it, but that would have just made it better for me, the only thing I see wrong with it is the Nick and Sarah death which I don't think are that bad, just being blown way out of proportion.
Go play Call Of Duty Multiplayer, and Minecraft so you can respawn, then you won't have to worry about character deaths.