What was the main message of season 2

2»

Comments

  • Yeah but amongst the crazyness there is messages.

    CrazyGeorge posted: »

    There is no message its just a bunch of horrible things that happened. You can't make meaning out of crazy, trust me I've tried.

  • GROWTH

    • Becoming a bigger and better person for the sake of your future and the future of others close to you.
    • Do what you truly believe is best for survival.
    • Be the kind of person that everyone needs to look up to.

    That last one might sound silly considering the fact that Clementine is a child. But her maturity, honestly speaking, is very admirable and at times very inspirational.

  • Is it all about survival, or are you willing to make sacrifices for the ones you love?

  • It's very certain in my opinion. They were barely even through with the second season before giving not-so-subtle hints she would be returning (EI: saying the ending you picked would be important for the next season and that she isn't ready "yet" to leave AJ). It doesn't necessarily dictate the income on a monetary perspective but it's been proven that they can and will get there money's worth by having the character present, even with lackluster presentation. Why take a chance on something new when you have something that can and will rake in your cash? Why go buy a new lawn mower that might decrease your mowing time when the lawn mower you have now is extremely fast?

    Sure, there will be some people who refuse to buy the game if the story moves away from Clementine, but I don't think that group of people would be substantial enough to actually essentially force Telltale's hand in writing their story in a way that they otherwise wouldn't want to.

    At this point it isn't about the writing. It's about the money. Which brings us back to the "proven cash cow" vs. the potentially profitable option. The number of people who have voiced their discontent with removing Clementine from the story is overwhelming. It would most probably hurt their bottom line, and that isn't something they will be willing to chance. This is hardly a group of writers looking to pave their name in the gaming history books anymore, that was the first season, the second has proven a monetary driven companies approach to the success of the first group's paving.

    If they simply can not put together a reasonable script that they feel is up to their working standards, then they aren't going to just risk doing that for the sake of making sure that the die hard Clementine fans stay on board.

    I beg to differ. As long as Clementine is present and the writers claim the script is all for the development of Clementine then the fans will bite. You can fish with a plastic worm so long as it looks appetizing. It isn't about the writing (or script), it's about the money.

    Telltale is at (for the most part) their peak. They will scrounge what they can before their inevitable fall. I can't blame them, I can only be disappointed.

    Anyways, been nice chatting. Back to my drink.

    Belan posted: »

    I don't know man, I'm not so sure that Clementine coming back for Season Three is such a certainty. Its not as if her character is so absolu

  • I liked Nick despite his flaws.

    TheCatWolf posted: »

    That stealing is good!!!

  • Because I refused to forgive. Personally I think the ending where Clem shows mercy on a starving family and starts rebuilding a family is the 'best' ending for her, but I'm playing from a meta perspective and thus figure that I want to avoid having either Jane or Kenny alive for any reason.

    Rousey4000 posted: »

    You let them both die.

  • Family and Friends

    Alt text

    Alt text

    Alt text

    VS Survival and Depression

    Alt text

    Alt text

    also, I hint of forgivness. But IMO It's all about this motherfucker.

    Alt text

    Alt text

    Whats that you say? Kenny, Jane, and Rebecca are better?

    Alt text

    CLEM CERTAINLY DOESN'T AGREE!

  • edited December 2014

    Alt text

    Meaning? okay. You've got a blank canvas. Wait no, a torn, ripped and disturbed blank canvas. Now try and paint your picture. I dare you.

  • Jane didn't really seem to care for Luke as much as he did her.

    Huh, Accurate.

  • edited December 2014

    Did you just make a meme to respond to me? Omg.

  • Yep.

    Did you just make a meme to respond to me? Omg.

  • I agree Luke was my favourite character in S2.

    Family and Friends VS Survival and Depression also, I hint of forgivness. But IMO It's all about this motherfucker. Whats that you say? Kenny, Jane, and Rebecca are better? CLEM CERTAINLY DOESN'T AGREE!

  • You can't make meaning out of crazy, trust me I've tried.

    If you don't have the answers, look deeper. There's an answer for everything.

    You're calling it crazy, while others can flawlessly describe it and reveal the message.

    CrazyGeorge posted: »

    You can't make meaning out of crazy Your message.

  • This is like the best thing i've seen on this thread. To bad i've seen it before, can't remember the offical poster though.

  • Everyone must do horrible things to survive.

    You always have a choice.

    Everyone must do horrible things to survive. Two years into the ZA and there will not be many good guy's left.

  • edited December 2014

    (EI: saying the ending you picked would be important for the next season and that she isn't ready "yet" to leave AJ)

    Where was that ever said? I definitely would be more on board with you had I ever heard anything about this.

    It doesn't necessarily dictate the income on a monetary perspective but it's been proven that they can and will get there money's worth by having the character present, even with lackluster presentation. Why take a chance on something new when you have something that can and will rake in your cash?

    Sure, they can definitely get their money's worth just by having Clementine around. That doesn't mean that moving away from her story is a risky move to make. Clementine + lackluster presentation = Known value, Good new characters + good presentation = x. That hardly sounds negative to me. With Telltale's growing popularity, I really don't think they have to worry about moving on from Clementine in a dollars sense. Its The Walking Dead. People are going to buy it for the same reason that they bought Season One in the first place (before they knew anything about Clementine) + there is now an even larger audience.

    Speaking of taking risks, why would we just assume that the known value for what we saw in Season Two would stay consistent for Season Three? If the presentation/writing is questionable or lackluster, could the story not risk going stale? Could an interest in a Season Four be damaged? It could be argued that a new story is fresh and exciting. Also, new-coming Telltale customers would not have had to have played Season One or Two in order to play the game, which could potentially open up room for more sales.

    Obviously if what you said above is true then all of this talk is hypothetical, but I just thought I would elaborate anyway. I'm not really trying to argue for either outcome, just raising questions. Telltale could certainly continue on with Clem's story in Season Three and do a great job with it. I'm simply a little skeptical of the direction.

    I beg to differ. As long as Clementine is present and the writers claim the script is all for the development of Clementine then the fans will bite. You can fish with a plastic worm so long as it looks appetizing. It isn't about the writing (or script), it's about the money. Telltale is at (for the most part) their peak. They will scrounge what they can before their inevitable fall. I can't blame them, I can only be disappointed.

    I'm sure Telltale doesn't share your mindset though. I don't think they're of the mind that they're going to cash grab before collapsing. They're a growing company, and they have their long term future in mind. I agree with you in the fact that the fans will bite if the current story of Clementine is continued, but there are potential long term risks to that (if they can't make a good showing of it), as I detailed above. All in all there are questions for both sides of the equation.

    Viva-La-Lee posted: »

    It's very certain in my opinion. They were barely even through with the second season before giving not-so-subtle hints she would be returni

  • The alone ending is suicide though.

    Bokor posted: »

    Because I refused to forgive. Personally I think the ending where Clem shows mercy on a starving family and starts rebuilding a family is t

  • edited December 2014

    Where was that ever said? I definitely would be more on board with you had I ever heard anything about this.

    There were some Q&A's concerning those point. I'm not sure if you're one of those "links or it didn't happen people", but I don't have the links. They were just in threads on the boards.

    Sure, they can definitely get their money's worth just by having Clementine around. That doesn't mean that moving away from her story is a risky move to make. Clementine + lackluster presentation = Known value, Good new characters + good presentation = x.

    X is unknown. Known value is known, and good. The cabin group were new characters. People wouldn't have responded well to the season if Clementine was Gil. And they know this, so why would they risk it?

    Its The Walking Dead. People are going to buy it for the same reason that they bought Season One in the first place (before they knew anything about Clementine) + there is now an even larger audience.

    To an extent. They made out the way they did because of the masterful work. Look at Survival Instinct. It's a The Walking Dead title, but it was horribly received (rightly so). Season two would have been little different if not for them leaching off of their beautiful character. With success comes expectations. Expectations that can be squandered by loosing themselves from the status quo and falling short. Expectations that can be surpassed by the creation of something newer and better. Or expectations that can be pushed to the wayside by negating anything that could provide friction to the situation. Even if the chances of failing or succeeding are 50/50 exactly (but again, look at season two for proof) it doesn't make sense for them to play a betting game when they have rigged dice.

    Could an interest in a Season Four be damaged?

    In regards to the prior point that I didn't link: It's an easy assumption to come to that they would make more than enough to make the creation of S3 worth it, look at the reception for another season now, then imagine it when they show a screen cap of Clementine hacking a zombie in half while balancing the baby on her knee (shivers).

    Now onto the point I did link. Yes. It could definitely hurt the chances of a request for a Clementine oriented S4. But that doesn't matter at that point because they got the Cha-Ching for the previous season. It's in their pockets at that point, and then if the demand ceases they move to another group / protagonist / timeframe / etcetera.

    Timeline - *Request for Clementine in S3 --> Obliged --> Money Pocketed --> Discontent with Clementine in general --> Obliged and Restarted Story --> Money Pocketed --> Continue the Life Cycle

    It could be argued that a new story is fresh and exciting. Also, new-coming Telltale customers would not have had to have played Season One or Two in order to play the game, which could potentially open up room for more sales.

    And when TellTale feels it would be more beneficial to stray the path than trot on trotted ground that will happen. It will be marketed as just that, also. "New place, new events, new people! Yay!!" But when the trotted ground is still paved in gold and gems it's a bit disadvantageous to wonder into the woods in search of a road made solidly of gold and gems.

    Obviously if what you said above is true then all of this talk is hypothetical, but I just thought I would elaborate anyway. I'm not really trying to argue for either outcome, just raising questions. Telltale could certainly continue on with Clem's story in Season Three and do a great job with it. I'm simply a little skeptical of the direction.

    I'm glad you did. I'll do some meager searching for those posts or look for the real links myself, but I have a short attention span sooo...... SQUIRREL

    And I am also skeptical, but more so of the overall handling of the series and the carelessness of the writing than the continuation of her story. If they could make it better via another protagonist and story then they could make a better story out of Clementine and her story, but that's just my view.

    I'm sure Telltale doesn't share your mindset though. I don't think they're of the mind that they're going to cash grab before collapsing.

    Yeah, drunk me didn't know what he was saying at that point.

    Belan posted: »

    (EI: saying the ending you picked would be important for the next season and that she isn't ready "yet" to leave AJ) Where was that

  • The alone ending actually ended her story completely. You didn't see it, but just as she walked into the herd little AJ decided he was hungry after hardly eating for 9 days and they were both torn to shreds.

    Rousey4000 posted: »

    The alone ending is suicide though.

  • Right........ are you a fan of crop circle theology by chance?

    Rousey4000 posted: »

    Yeah but amongst the crazyness there is messages.

  • Yeah, if you're being logical.

    The writers actually intended to make us be amazed by Clem's "badassery" while bemoaning how lonely she is. I suppose making Clem act truly pragmatically (by not ruining a baby's immune system and walking headfirst into an easily avoidable horde of zombies) would have deprived the ending of its shock value.

    Viva-La-Lee posted: »

    The alone ending actually ended her story completely. You didn't see it, but just as she walked into the herd little AJ decided he was hungry after hardly eating for 9 days and they were both torn to shreds.

  • Thanks for putting the awful image in my head.

    Viva-La-Lee posted: »

    The alone ending actually ended her story completely. You didn't see it, but just as she walked into the herd little AJ decided he was hungry after hardly eating for 9 days and they were both torn to shreds.

  • You're welcome. In reality the dastardly duo would have been torn asunder long before that clip. So what does that make the clip? A painted mural of what may have been in the eyes of a child exhaling their final breath? The best pieced together images in the mind of a
    passerby surveying the remnants of what must have been, at one time, a tiny, beautiful child carrying an even tinier, probably less beautiful child?

    Rousey4000 posted: »

    Thanks for putting the awful image in my head.

  • Sometimes you have to kill the closest for survival

  • Sometimes its hard to do all 3.

    GROWTH * Becoming a bigger and better person for the sake of your future and the future of others close to you. * Do what you truly be

  • It is. But what really matters isn't, "Can I do it." What matters is, "Do I want to do it." It's your inner drive that fuels you.

    Rousey4000 posted: »

    Sometimes its hard to do all 3.

  • Yeah sometimes you have to make a tough decision for the better of the group.

    It is. But what really matters isn't, "Can I do it." What matters is, "Do I want to do it." It's your inner drive that fuels you.

  • He was awesome ;_;

    Rousey4000 posted: »

    I agree Luke was my favourite character in S2.

  • CrazyGeorgeCrazyGeorge Banned
    edited December 2014

    If two people get into a car crash and die, i can say it was just a terrible accident. Where someone might find meaning in it. Its all subjective though, if you believe in fate,.

    You can't make meaning out of crazy, trust me I've tried. If you don't have the answers, look deeper. There's an answer for everything. You're calling it crazy, while others can flawlessly describe it and reveal the message.

  • Fate? No. With meaning I would say that there's always a reason behind it, a cause, a source, whatever you like to call it. People express themselves diffrently, and not everyone has the same answer.

    Example:
    There's a button on a website that will take you to another page. You click it and you noticed what it did. Hereby you state: "This button brought me to another page." while there's a lot behind it:

    • It's a DOM element
    • It's a HTML tag capable of holding HTML attributes
    • It sends data to the server which will be processed by PHP
    • There might be some Javascript involved to handle client side functions
    • The button link (the href attribute) has been dynamically created by calculating the amount of pages / current page etc.
    • and there's more to tell....

    This is just a example;

    If you would say: "two people died in a horrible car crash. I saw it on the news.", then there could be a lot more behind it. Things that you're not aware of because you don't possess that kind of knowledge / information.

    Where someone might find meaning in it.

    People could say "it's fate", or "it happend because..." etc. Without meaning there's no subject. Without subject, it doesn't exists.

    CrazyGeorge posted: »

    If two people get into a car crash and die, i can say it was just a terrible accident. Where someone might find meaning in it. Its all subjective though, if you believe in fate,.

  • Thats some advanced computer knowledge bro.

    Fate? No. With meaning I would say that there's always a reason behind it, a cause, a source, whatever you like to call it. People express t

  • I like you.

    I submit to your persuasive argument,

    now its time to go roll a "tobacco" cigarette.

    Fate? No. With meaning I would say that there's always a reason behind it, a cause, a source, whatever you like to call it. People express t

Sign in to comment in this discussion.