Take off your rose-tinted glasses
As someone who only actually started playing The Walking Dead Game a few months back when three episodes of Season 2 were already released, I honestly don't understand the huge amount of praise that Season 1 receives and the negativity surrounding the second season. I completed Season 1 in one day and immediately played through the second season the day after, and everything seemed to flow extremely well for me. While I do agree the season has its flaws such as Nick and Luke's neglected death sequences I don't think there are really any major issues at all. The first season wasn't perfect either, but both are, as far as I'm concerned, utter masterpieces that I absolutely adore and will likely always remember.
Perhaps the issue is that too many of you look at the first season with rose-tinted glasses, and are slightly blinded by all your nostalgia... There's ultimately far too much criticism and hate plaguing this forum, and not enough friendly discussion, and I think we should take some time to focus on the many, many positive aspects of the second season. It was still enjoyable and I'd, believe it or not, personally go as far as to say it was superior to the first season. I at least liked it more.
Comments
I only wear shades.
I agree 100% People keep nitpicking at season 2 saying "Oh it's terrible i hate it blah blah blah" But honestly it wasn't. It was fantastic all round , I think it's just because the haters are very LOUD about it.
The haters are simply a very vocal minority.
I'll admit I preferred Season 1, but I still think Season 2 was fantastic, and for me there was no major faults. 'Minor' being Nick's second death, etc.
Let me first say criticism isn't hate. Criticism is feedback given to the creators in order to improve what they do. That being said, I don't think Season 2 was the worst thing ever but I don't think it was as great as Season 1 was so am I one of those with Sarah glasses? Nope. I'm just a dude who enjoys video games that tell wonderful stories, The Walking Dead included. Season 1 was full of authentic characters, each who added themselves to the story and each person mattered and their absence was largely felt when they died. Season 2 lacked the fleshing out of characters that Season 1 excelled at, just my opinion.
Can I ask why do you consider Season 2 better than Season 1? I just don't see it personally for me.
no. no to S2 being better than S1. but yes to everything else you said. yes s2 has flaw but the way some talk about s2 it seems like it was the damn ET game. but overall I don't rank them as different games, I see it as a whole and I think this game (S1&S2) has been a master piece.
I agree, in terms of flow, season 2 is superior to one.
I loved playing as Clementine and being able to shape her development in different ways, and as well as that I felt the pacing in the second season was great and packed with emotion.
And yes, I'm aware of the meaning and purpose of criticism, but it's all I've ever seen for months on end on these forums. You haven't been here for long so I imagine you want to get your quips with the season out into the open and don't mind all the constant criticism-related threads, but God, it really is tiring after a while. >_<
Too much of one thing just gets annoying yeah? And I didn't mean to imply you were dumb or anything, just wanted to get my opinion out there like you said. But, yes I'd imagine constant criticisms about repeating topics would get boring and irritating but that's just part of being part of this community as everyone joins at different times and will bring back old threads and ideas. Ah well, I guess that's what the long wait between Seasons will be.
Yeah, very true. I have ABSOLUTELY no issue with threads that criticize the game, but when the same topics are repeatedly recycled I naturally get a tad irritated. :P I've noticed you posting a lot and you make a lot of good points... It helps when someone's polite about their critique and isn't a colossal twat like some people are.
Why?
Lot of delusional people in here, S1 is better in almost every way possible.
I really don't understand how some people prefer season 2 over season 1. Just because we play as Clementine? That really makes no sense.
but.. but nobody can disagree witht the shepard!
Ok , I have to disagree with you there.
As someone who was on the forum for season 1, I have to point out that all of the criticism is the same as before. Now the old issues are justified and held up as a gold standard and season 2's elements are said to be as bad as what earlier people said season 1's elements were. So it's not rose tinted nostalgia glasses so much as its people complaining for no reason.
In short, welcome to the internet where no one is happy.
Yeah. At the end of the day there's a huge majority that's remained silent due to enjoying the second season, and as far as professional reviews go, S2's also done amazingly. I suppose I shouldn't let it get to me as much.
So... two details make season 2 better that season 1?
K
So... Two details make season 2 better that season 1?
K
Well, yeah. The protagonist and pacing of a series is pretty damn important, bro.
Well, leaving aside that you can shape Lee´s development more that Clem´s development, leaving aside that the pace and brillance of No Time Left has not since be equaled and that Season 1 actually took the time to properly pace things and Season 2 is just one big rush...
Why do you think that?
Actually I've replayed both seasons multiple times. Also through and through as you did. Season one is most definitely better. It does have flaws, but not nearly as many (and as significant) as season two has.
Yeah, it seems you've still got those glasses on.
Because we see Clementine's emotional integrity tested multiple times and are actually able to completely change her attitude towards survival, keeping your Lee's previous teachings in mind which made for a very immersive experience and gave leeway (pardon the pun) for some awesome role-playing
It was a big rush. Not shit. It's years into the apocalypse, things happen. I fail to see how that's a negative. People have got to move. There were no irritating train puzzles or pointless interactions with wooden fences in the second season which is what I like.
No Time Left was emotional, there's no doubt about that, but it felt very short and lacked the fucking plain terror I experienced during No Going Back.
This is just my opinion.
As have I. This is all a matter of pure opinion so I don't hope to change anyone's mind. I just loved seeing Clem's development... I thought it was done masterfully; Everything from her visual design as an eleven year old to the person she became at the end, and that's the main thing I enjoyed in the second season. Season 2's characters were likeable too. People are angry about their deaths because they were fond of them, after all.
Season 1 has flaws, but Season 2 is MUCH WORSE. The writing is a bit more tighter in S1, the characters actually finish their character arcs in a satisfying way, the story and characters are consistent, the antagonists are better written. Season 1 is not perfect, some of the writing is a bit generic and some character's actions are a bit questionable, but it's nowhere near as bad as the inconsistent sloppy writing of Season 2. The illusion of choice is MUCH BETTER implemented, and characters actually change their attitudes depending on the choices you make, detrimental characters leave some kind of impact, and most of the deaths are fulfilling and satisfying. I'm not wearing glasses, Season 2 is just has more problems than Season 1.
While much of it is opinion much of it is not. A good story can be objectively identified by character arcs, flow of speech, lack of plot holes, continuity, etc.
Whether someone enjoys the season despite the inconsistencies and various flaws is opinion, however, and I definitely did.
I'm sorry, but no one is unhappy that characters died, everyone is unhappy that the writing and characters just aren't up to speed. Nick and Sarah are nowhere near Carley and Doug, both Carley and Doug actually served a purpose in the story and before they died, they left some kind of impact, Carley convinces Lee to share his shady past and Doug sacrifices himself for Ben, what the hell do Nick and Sarah do? Writing is definitely almost gotten worse in a few spots, and Characters aren't very developed nor do you get any time to get truly invested in them.
Perhaps. But from an objective perspective the better story can be identified.
Well, I guess "big rush" story telling that doesn't even give you much time to get invested into characters or get fully immersed in the story is your cup of tea then. I understand puzzles, but Telltale did not need to dumb down alot of the immersion, not to mention that the S2 episodes are VERY SHORT, why don't you take off your glasses then since I think S2 is inferior to S1.
People have their own tastes regarding genre and theme in every medium of entertainment. I don't think the quality of a story can ever be objectively identified. Everything is subjective. I personally didn't care much for Braveheart or Tolkien's novels, for example, regardless of the fact they're praised for being supposedly exceptional.
Nick made Clem feel like she was part of the group with the whole "us guys" conversation or not depending on how you feel, but Nick did die trying to look for help. Sarah represented the point that no matter how hard you try you can't save everyone.
Cool, I'm happy with your opinion and understand why that is. I just explained myself to AlanSpencer because he seemed to be getting rather arsy when it came to my reasoning.
I got more attached to Nick for example than I ever did Katjaa, and more attached to Pete than I did Shawn. I don't think investment in characters is as overly poor as people claim it is.
For one, Shawn was a one off character and has nothing in common with Pete, and Kat and Nick aren't even the same, so bad comparison there. Pete was fine, Nick was fine until episode 3 where the entire season went downhill.
For me, season 1 was better. More character development, more hubs, and deaths had more meaning and weren't so cheap.
You're missing the point. Braveheart is regarded as a well written story due to the things I previously listed (and others) whether you enjoy it or not. It is a better and more well written story than others and this can be objectively founded whether you liked it or not. The same can be said for TTG TWD.
No, you're never going to convince me that Nick and Sarah's death weren't cheap and lazily written, you don't just kill off characters when their character arcs were JUST going somewhere, that's bad writing, especially compared to the S1.