I'm not judging you. You are saying you were in the army for 6 years, and that's why you want to kill people with only the threat of prison… more stopping you. So what you're telling me is that if there was anarchy you would murder people. I believe in right, and wrong. Do you?
why should Larry have to forgive him just because of the apocalypse
Lee saved Larry's life. If it wasn't for lee, Larry would of been dead in that drugstore. All Larry knows is that he was convicted murderer, people are convicted of crimes they don''t commit every day. How did Larry know Lee wasn't falsely accused, he made a choice to kill Lee and leave him behind.
Larry was just trying to protect his group the best way he knew how. Lee is a convicted murderer, he got a life sentence, why should Larry h… moreave to forgive him just because of the apocalypse. Larry was right about Duck too, in the sense that if he had been bit in the drug store he would have killed all of them, because as we seen in the box car walker Duck is a force to be reckoned with. I think it would have been really interesting if players got to experience the story from Larry's perspective, and I bet a lot of us would choose to do things the same way he did.
Alright then. I'm sorry if I offended you. That wasn't my intent. Still why would it be the "main" reason. Shouldn't your main reason be "I don't want to hurt other people"? I also believe in defending myself, loved ones, and property.
You are saying you were in the army for 6 years, and that's why you want to kill people with only the threat of prison stopping you
… moreWhere did i say it was the only thing? I said it was the main thing.
So what you're telling me is that if there was anarchy you would murder people.
I would do what i needed to do, to protect myself and my property.
I believe in right, and wrong. Do you?
I am religious so yeah... Obviously.
Lee didn't give Larry any reason to think he was innocent. Lee attempted to hide his identity in a place where people would probably already know who he was and never tried to offer any explanation for his actions. Also we know that Lee is in fact guilty. We don't know anything about the trial though, maybe Lee plead guilty, or maybe it was really obvious to the public that Lee was guilty. Imagine if Lee was OJ Simpson you'd probably totally agree with Larry. One more thing too, Larry probably didn't know that Lee was doing all that work to bust into the pharmacy his condition being what it was.
why should Larry have to forgive him just because of the apocalypse
Lee saved Larry's life. If it wasn't for lee, Larry would of bee… moren dead in that drugstore. All Larry knows is that he was convicted murderer, people are convicted of crimes they don''t commit every day. How did Larry know Lee wasn't falsely accused, he made a choice to kill Lee and leave him behind.
Like I said, I'm indifferent to him. I don't hate him, but I don't love him either. Frankly, I could care less about him, I just wanted insight onto why so many people on the forums love his character.
Let me clarify. According to the lore the flesh of the corpse is supposed to be extremely toxic to the bugs, and parasites that would normally consume it.
That consume corpses are repelled by the virus
That doesn't really make sense to me. I mean a maggot is going to eat the zombie. Its not going to think about the virus.
If Lee turned out to be bad Larry would have been totally right to tell the group about Lee's past. Larry's mostly just got an abrasive attitude, and when you think about it he is actually easier to reason with than Kenny. At the drug store during the argument Larry can keep his self together, actually sounding calm while explaining to everyone that Duck is going to eat his mom's face. Also Larry only says that you dragged your feet because you weren't fast enough to keep him from eating, and that seems like a reasonable thing to be pissed about.
Larry a good guy, he was an asshole at the drug store, knocked Lee on his ass, threatened to tell everyone your secret, even if you fed him,… more he's an asshole to you, he blames everything on you, and tells you that you dragged your feet even when you were direct. The only good thing about him was that he had charm coming out of his ass.
Alright then. I'm sorry if I offended you. That wasn't my intent. Still why would it be the "main" reason. Shouldn't your main reason be "I don't want to hurt other people"? I also believe in defending myself, loved ones, and property.
Lee didn't give Larry any reason to think he was innocent. Lee attempted to hide his identity in a place where people would probably already… more know who he was and never tried to offer any explanation for his actions. Also we know that Lee is in fact guilty. We don't know anything about the trial though, maybe Lee plead guilty, or maybe it was really obvious to the public that Lee was guilty. Imagine if Lee was OJ Simpson you'd probably totally agree with Larry. One more thing too, Larry probably didn't know that Lee was doing all that work to bust into the pharmacy his condition being what it was.
If Lee turned out to be bad Larry would have been totally right to tell the group about Lee's past. Larry's mostly just got an abrasive atti… moretude, and when you think about it he is actually easier to reason with than Kenny. At the drug store during the argument Larry can keep his self together, actually sounding calm while explaining to everyone that Duck is going to eat his mom's face. Also Larry only says that you dragged your feet because you weren't fast enough to keep him from eating, and that seems like a reasonable thing to be pissed about.
It also stands to reason if Arvo hadent got his Russian friends to ambush Clem and the group and lied about us robbing him that none of this would have ever happened.
Ever notice how some people will omit a specific fact in order to make a point?
If Jane had never tried to rob Arvo on the balcony then it never would have happened....Any of it, the ambush wouldn't have happened. We have to trace it back to the beginning which was Jane.
It also stands to reason if Arvo hadent got his Russian friends to ambush Clem and the group and lied about us robbing him that none of this would have ever happened.
Ever notice how some people will omit a specific fact in order to make a point?
I guess this is a determinant issue.. In my play through, it was I (Clem) that was given the option to take the med's not Jane. I did not, but Arvo still told his people we robbed him, thus the lie!
Meaning it goes back to being Arvo's fault, not Jane's. And as I said, isnt it the player playing Clem that decides to take the med's or not? Does that option ever actually fall upon Jane??
If Jane had never tried to rob Arvo on the balcony then it never would have happened....Any of it, the ambush wouldn't have happened. We have to trace it back to the beginning which was Jane.
(I hate both Kenny and Jane just FYI)
That is true and I also didn't steal the meds. The thing is that Jane still stole his gun, threatened to steal his stuff, then almost blew his brains out if Clem wouldn't have stopped her. Jane started that shit, Arvo kept it going but Jane started it.
I guess this is a determinant issue.. In my play through, it was I (Clem) that was given the option to take the med's not Jane. I did not, … morebut Arvo still told his people we robbed him, thus the lie!
Meaning it goes back to being Arvo's fault, not Jane's. And as I said, isnt it the player playing Clem that decides to take the med's or not? Does that option ever actually fall upon Jane??
I'm the same way. For me its a defense mechanism, i make jokes about everything to downplay the emotional importance of a situation. Its a coping method i developed.
It also stands to reason if Arvo hadent got his Russian friends to ambush Clem and the group and lied about us robbing him that none of this would have ever happened.
Ever notice how some people will omit a specific fact in order to make a point?
Jane threatend Arvo with shooting his brain's out to try to ensure he wouldn't return. It was to keep herself and the group safe. However Arvo took that is on him. Keeping his gun was to ensure he wouldn't have simply used it to shoot her and Clem right there on the spot. They let him go free with his med's. Right?????
Then Arvo, with his group, surround's our group and said they want all our things. They had intended to rob us after we let him go. Right?????
Did Jane start it? perhap's but let him go unharmed and with the drug's that were so important to him. But as you said, Arvo kept it going and took it far beyond what Jane did in keeping his gun, to keep herself and Clem safe.
That is true and I also didn't steal the meds. The thing is that Jane still stole his gun, threatened to steal his stuff, then almost blew h… moreis brains out if Clem wouldn't have stopped her. Jane started that shit, Arvo kept it going but Jane started it.
Jane threatend Arvo with shooting his brain's out to try to ensure he wouldn't return. It was to keep herself and the group safe. However … moreArvo took that is on him. Keeping his gun was to ensure he wouldn't have simply used it to shoot her and Clem right there on the spot. They let him go free with his med's. Right?????
Then Arvo, with his group, surround's our group and said they want all our things. They had intended to rob us after we let him go. Right?????
Did Jane start it? perhap's but let him go unharmed and with the drug's that were so important to him. But as you said, Arvo kept it going and took it far beyond what Jane did in keeping his gun, to keep herself and Clem safe.
Let me clarify. According to the lore the flesh of the corpse is supposed to be extremely toxic to the bugs, and parasites that would normally consume it.
Let me clarify. According to the lore the flesh of the corpse is supposed to be extremely toxic to the bugs, and parasites that would normally consume it.
Ever notice how some people will omit a specific fact in order to make a point?
As people have started the first link was with Jane. Not sure how we got so far off topic though.
Jane and Clem did let Arvo leave, and with the med's for his sister.
Was Arvo with his group that returned with the intention of robbing us that lead to the shootout and everything else!
Okay so this started with "if Jane haden't robbed Arvo, then If Jane just let Arvo leave and now it's If Jane haden't been aggressive". I realize that no matter how the actual situation was presented you're still going to alter or twist it to maintain your point, but If I may make a suggestion.. Go to Youtube or replay the game yourself because you seem to have forgotten some of the detail's
How about, If Arvo never walked up to the platform in the first place, none of this would have happened. It may not be a valid comment but I can still make it to maintain my point too!
Arvo came up to the deck, Jane hid and so did Clem. Clem got spotted by Arvo, Arvo asked to just be able to leave. Jane then jumped Arvo and took his gun and held him at gunpoint (Aggressive). She then told Clem to check the bag. Clem checks and could either take his meds or not, Jane ordered her to take the bag. After you pick Arvo either thanks you or says you're not nice. Jane then no matter what grabs him and puts a gun to his head but Clem stops her. He then leaves.
I didn't twist anything, I've been saying the same thing this entire time. Jane should have let Arvo leave before being aggressive. You obviously didn't understand the first way of explaining it so I tried to reword it and again you didn't understand. Now do you understand?
Okay so this started with "if Jane haden't robbed Arvo, then If Jane just let Arvo leave and now it's If Jane haden't been aggressive". I r… moreealize that no matter how the actual situation was presented you're still going to alter or twist it to maintain your point, but If I may make a suggestion.. Go to Youtube or replay the game yourself because you seem to have forgotten some of the detail's
How about, If Arvo never walked up to the platform in the first place, none of this would have happened. It may not be a valid comment but I can still make it to maintain my point too!
Jane jumped Arvo because he was holding a gun to Clem. That's justified but you call it aggressive. Perhap's it was done in an aggressive manner but was intended to protect Clem so I see it as completely justified. The choice on what to do with him was left up to Clem. Clem's options are (Don't do it.. What are you doing?.. and Is it safe to let him go?) The option's were not Jane's, all she did was warn him "don't you EVER come around here again".
So I still don't see how this entire interaction was Jane's fault. What I see is, we didn't steal the med's from Arvo, we didn't hurt him, and we did in fact let him leave. Giving the gun back to him would have been foolish as he could have very well just shot Jane and Clem.
What did happen, was Arvo got his group, found our's, jumped us with AK47's, lied about us robbing him, and said they wanted all of our thing's, after we let him go with the med's for his sister. The entire shootout was Arvo's fault, his sister being killed and his friends death's were on his hand's.
Here's what happened...
Arvo came up to the deck, Jane hid and so did Clem. Clem got spotted by Arvo, Arvo asked to just be able to leave… more. Jane then jumped Arvo and took his gun and held him at gunpoint (Aggressive). She then told Clem to check the bag. Clem checks and could either take his meds or not, Jane ordered her to take the bag. After you pick Arvo either thanks you or says you're not nice. Jane then no matter what grabs him and puts a gun to his head but Clem stops her. He then leaves.
I didn't twist anything, I've been saying the same thing this entire time. Jane should have let Arvo leave before being aggressive. You obviously didn't understand the first way of explaining it so I tried to reword it and again you didn't understand. Now do you understand?
Arvo said he is leaving and he didn't want to shoot Clem (Don't bring up E5 because that's different). What Jane was doing was selfish and to the very end it was selfish, she could have handled it much better.
Jane jumped Arvo because he was holding a gun to Clem. That's justified but you call it aggressive. Perhap's it was done in an aggressive … moremanner but was intended to protect Clem so I see it as completely justified. The choice on what to do with him was left up to Clem. Clem's options are (Don't do it.. What are you doing?.. and Is it safe to let him go?) The option's were not Jane's, all she did was warn him "don't you EVER come around here again".
So I still don't see how this entire interaction was Jane's fault. What I see is, we didn't steal the med's from Arvo, we didn't hurt him, and we did in fact let him leave. Giving the gun back to him would have been foolish as he could have very well just shot Jane and Clem.
What did happen, was Arvo got his group, found our's, jumped us with AK47's, lied about us robbing him, and said they wanted all of our thing's, after we let him go with the med's for his sister. The entire shootout… [view original content]
No going back? The plague killed like 60% of all life on Earth. At one point from natural disasters the human population was estimated to be at 10,000, and yet here we are now.
I was referencing episode 4, on the platform, Arvo did say "I don't want to shoot anyone, especially a little girl" that is true but he was still aiming a gun at Clem and Jane disarmed him. How was that selfish? She was protecting Clem. She didn't hit him or shoot him or cause him any harm. She did warn him to never come around here again. But guess what? He did and with friend's.
Could she have handled it better? perhap's but that is irrelevant as that would have required dialogue and action's that were not included in the game. You cannot say what they "should have done" if it wasn't ever an option. That's like saying Kenny should have just let Rebecca shoot Carver. Maybe a lot of people would have chosen that option but it wasn't an option so it's invalid.
Who cause the shootout? How about if we blame Rebecca for coming back as a Walker, or how about Clem/Kenny for firing the first shot? or Arvo for returning to rob us?
Arvo said he is leaving and he didn't want to shoot Clem (Don't bring up E5 because that's different). What Jane was doing was selfish and to the very end it was selfish, she could have handled it much better.
Who caused the shootout? Jane.
I wonder what would've happened if they had met, Larry is a big giant ass but I don't think he would have fit in with Carver's group. I'm thinking he would have been shot trying to tear Carver's head off.
Would of made a better story imo.
but it would be awesome if there were some way to play the game and be best friends with Larry.
… more
I know right. I liked him, he kind of reminded me of my dad. Always yelling, never with a smile on his face. Same reason why i liked Carver.
Comments
Where did i say it was the only thing? I said it was the main thing.
I would do what i needed to do, to protect myself and my property.
I am religious so yeah... Obviously.
Lee saved Larry's life. If it wasn't for lee, Larry would of been dead in that drugstore. All Larry knows is that he was convicted murderer, people are convicted of crimes they don''t commit every day. How did Larry know Lee wasn't falsely accused, he made a choice to kill Lee and leave him behind.
Because it's Nate! You have to love Nate!
Alright then. I'm sorry if I offended you. That wasn't my intent. Still why would it be the "main" reason. Shouldn't your main reason be "I don't want to hurt other people"? I also believe in defending myself, loved ones, and property.
Lee didn't give Larry any reason to think he was innocent. Lee attempted to hide his identity in a place where people would probably already know who he was and never tried to offer any explanation for his actions. Also we know that Lee is in fact guilty. We don't know anything about the trial though, maybe Lee plead guilty, or maybe it was really obvious to the public that Lee was guilty. Imagine if Lee was OJ Simpson you'd probably totally agree with Larry. One more thing too, Larry probably didn't know that Lee was doing all that work to bust into the pharmacy his condition being what it was.
Like I said, I'm indifferent to him. I don't hate him, but I don't love him either. Frankly, I could care less about him, I just wanted insight onto why so many people on the forums love his character.
Let me clarify. According to the lore the flesh of the corpse is supposed to be extremely toxic to the bugs, and parasites that would normally consume it.
There's really only one big reason I hate Nate.
Nate you muthafucka.
If Lee turned out to be bad Larry would have been totally right to tell the group about Lee's past. Larry's mostly just got an abrasive attitude, and when you think about it he is actually easier to reason with than Kenny. At the drug store during the argument Larry can keep his self together, actually sounding calm while explaining to everyone that Duck is going to eat his mom's face. Also Larry only says that you dragged your feet because you weren't fast enough to keep him from eating, and that seems like a reasonable thing to be pissed about.
I feel the same way. His character made me feel uneasy however he was an interesting character. I don't worship him though.
I almost never go looking for trouble, usually I'm just walking around and I see players just kill each other. I find it hilarious.
I think its personal for everyone. I think that ship has sailed.
No i wouldn't because i have no faith in the American Justice system. Zero.
Quick question, what happens if you side with Larry on throwing Duck out. Does Kenny punch you in the face and Larry save you LOL?
It also stands to reason if Arvo hadent got his Russian friends to ambush Clem and the group and lied about us robbing him that none of this would have ever happened.
Ever notice how some people will omit a specific fact in order to make a point?
I'm not a big fan. I've explained why to numerous people... He reminds me of some not so nice people in my life. :P
If Jane had never tried to rob Arvo on the balcony then it never would have happened....Any of it, the ambush wouldn't have happened. We have to trace it back to the beginning which was Jane.
(I hate both Kenny and Jane just FYI)
I wish, Kenny still saves you, but it would be awesome if there were some way to play the game and be best friends with Larry.
I guess this is a determinant issue.. In my play through, it was I (Clem) that was given the option to take the med's not Jane. I did not, but Arvo still told his people we robbed him, thus the lie!
Meaning it goes back to being Arvo's fault, not Jane's. And as I said, isnt it the player playing Clem that decides to take the med's or not? Does that option ever actually fall upon Jane??
Joking about a person he has recently escaped....
That is true and I also didn't steal the meds. The thing is that Jane still stole his gun, threatened to steal his stuff, then almost blew his brains out if Clem wouldn't have stopped her. Jane started that shit, Arvo kept it going but Jane started it.
? So what.
I'm the same way. For me its a defense mechanism, i make jokes about everything to downplay the emotional importance of a situation. Its a coping method i developed.
As people have started the first link was with Jane. Not sure how we got so far off topic though.
Would of made a better story imo.
I know right. I liked him, he kind of reminded me of my dad. Always yelling, never with a smile on his face. Same reason why i liked Carver.
Jane threatend Arvo with shooting his brain's out to try to ensure he wouldn't return. It was to keep herself and the group safe. However Arvo took that is on him. Keeping his gun was to ensure he wouldn't have simply used it to shoot her and Clem right there on the spot. They let him go free with his med's. Right?????
Then Arvo, with his group, surround's our group and said they want all our things. They had intended to rob us after we let him go. Right?????
Did Jane start it? perhap's but let him go unharmed and with the drug's that were so important to him. But as you said, Arvo kept it going and took it far beyond what Jane did in keeping his gun, to keep herself and Clem safe.
I always go looking for trouble. Ever break someones leg on purpose so you can use them as bait? It works every time.
Right now its like 16 degrees here in Ohio, AKA Wellington, and its cold as shit. We got way too much snow/ice for this time of year.
If Jane just let Arvo leave then it would be okay...
Jane and Clem did let Arvo leave, and with the med's for his sister.
Was Arvo with his group that returned with the intention of robbing us that lead to the shootout and everything else!
It stands to reason if Kenny didn't take Arvo hostage in the first place, he wouldn't of shot Clementine.
Maybe we've strayed off topic a bit, but just to respond to your statement.
Okay let me rephrase that...If Jane didn't be aggressive to Arvo in the first place then maybe it would be okay...
Okay so this started with "if Jane haden't robbed Arvo, then If Jane just let Arvo leave and now it's If Jane haden't been aggressive". I realize that no matter how the actual situation was presented you're still going to alter or twist it to maintain your point, but If I may make a suggestion.. Go to Youtube or replay the game yourself because you seem to have forgotten some of the detail's
How about, If Arvo never walked up to the platform in the first place, none of this would have happened. It may not be a valid comment but I can still make it to maintain my point too!
Here's what happened...
Arvo came up to the deck, Jane hid and so did Clem. Clem got spotted by Arvo, Arvo asked to just be able to leave. Jane then jumped Arvo and took his gun and held him at gunpoint (Aggressive). She then told Clem to check the bag. Clem checks and could either take his meds or not, Jane ordered her to take the bag. After you pick Arvo either thanks you or says you're not nice. Jane then no matter what grabs him and puts a gun to his head but Clem stops her. He then leaves.
I didn't twist anything, I've been saying the same thing this entire time. Jane should have let Arvo leave before being aggressive. You obviously didn't understand the first way of explaining it so I tried to reword it and again you didn't understand. Now do you understand?
Jane jumped Arvo because he was holding a gun to Clem. That's justified but you call it aggressive. Perhap's it was done in an aggressive manner but was intended to protect Clem so I see it as completely justified. The choice on what to do with him was left up to Clem. Clem's options are (Don't do it.. What are you doing?.. and Is it safe to let him go?) The option's were not Jane's, all she did was warn him "don't you EVER come around here again".
So I still don't see how this entire interaction was Jane's fault. What I see is, we didn't steal the med's from Arvo, we didn't hurt him, and we did in fact let him leave. Giving the gun back to him would have been foolish as he could have very well just shot Jane and Clem.
What did happen, was Arvo got his group, found our's, jumped us with AK47's, lied about us robbing him, and said they wanted all of our thing's, after we let him go with the med's for his sister. The entire shootout was Arvo's fault, his sister being killed and his friends death's were on his hand's.
Arvo said he is leaving and he didn't want to shoot Clem (Don't bring up E5 because that's different). What Jane was doing was selfish and to the very end it was selfish, she could have handled it much better.
Who caused the shootout? Jane.
People become different in za after everything they have to do to survive. No going back.
I was referencing episode 4, on the platform, Arvo did say "I don't want to shoot anyone, especially a little girl" that is true but he was still aiming a gun at Clem and Jane disarmed him. How was that selfish? She was protecting Clem. She didn't hit him or shoot him or cause him any harm. She did warn him to never come around here again. But guess what? He did and with friend's.
Could she have handled it better? perhap's but that is irrelevant as that would have required dialogue and action's that were not included in the game. You cannot say what they "should have done" if it wasn't ever an option. That's like saying Kenny should have just let Rebecca shoot Carver. Maybe a lot of people would have chosen that option but it wasn't an option so it's invalid.
Who cause the shootout? How about if we blame Rebecca for coming back as a Walker, or how about Clem/Kenny for firing the first shot? or Arvo for returning to rob us?
I wonder what would've happened if they had met, Larry is a big giant ass but I don't think he would have fit in with Carver's group. I'm thinking he would have been shot trying to tear Carver's head off.
By your logic, every big predators (bears, lions etc.) should be killed, because they are possibly a threat to us.