They could´ve done so much more. I still feel robbed of an ending with my favourite character in S2 (besides Clem, obviously).
I´m Still. Very. Bitter.
It's a forum on a video game. Writing about how much you like/dislike characters is sort of the point. It's to express your own opinion and see how other people react.
I find it sad that people are wasting their time and energy to write essays on how much they hate or like a certain character. It's a freaking video game. I hate to break this to you, but these are not real people. It's just a bunch of pixels.
@InfiniteDawn Where are you guys? Lilacsbloom & ABigBadWolf heeelp!
@fallandir Lilacsbloom my love! Save meeeee!
[Superma… moren theme]
[Runs up steps dramatically]
Aw crap, my shoelaces are undone!
Crap, crap, crap...okay, alright here we goooo...
ALRIGHT WHICH ONE OF YOU DAMN SISSY FANS DARES TO MAKE A POST ABOUT LUKE WITH OPINIONS THAT DIFFER FROM MIIIIIINE!?
Actually Sialark kinda said much of everything that I'd agree on. Luke's a good guy, but he has flaws and he hecks up, just like Kenny does. He tries his best, and that's what I like about him. He's not an asshole like Troy, if he messes up he admits it and tries to do better. Even when he got caught out for the food thing at Carver's and Kenny gets beaten up as a result, Luke owns up to it being his fault to the group, and it was! He was so focused on getting the others out, he didn't put himself first for like what Sialark said, he tried to play… [view original content]
I miss Nick, I bet his corpse and that fence are getting on well.
Asking the important questions. I'll take a spinoff to see this.
She was a child who most likely had autism
Telltale has actually confirmed that she has PTSD.
Depending on player choices, again, if Clem decides to listen to Luke's advice on Matthew's death and not tell Walter -This gets Nick killed!
Actually, this is based on what you tell Walter when he asks "Is, uh, is Nick a good man?" Staying silent or saying that he's like everyone else results in Walter letting him die, while telling him that Nick's a good man makes Walter forgive him.
I find it sad that people are wasting their time and energy to write essays on how much they hate or like a certain character. It's a freaking video game. I hate to break this to you, but these are not real people. It's just a bunch of pixels.
It's a forum on a video game. Writing about how much you like/dislike characters is sort of the point. It's to express your own opinion and see how other people react.
@InfiniteDawn Where are you guys? Lilacsbloom & ABigBadWolf heeelp!
@fallandir Lilacsbloom my love! Save meeeee!
[Superma… moren theme]
[Runs up steps dramatically]
Aw crap, my shoelaces are undone!
Crap, crap, crap...okay, alright here we goooo...
ALRIGHT WHICH ONE OF YOU DAMN SISSY FANS DARES TO MAKE A POST ABOUT LUKE WITH OPINIONS THAT DIFFER FROM MIIIIIINE!?
Actually Sialark kinda said much of everything that I'd agree on. Luke's a good guy, but he has flaws and he hecks up, just like Kenny does. He tries his best, and that's what I like about him. He's not an asshole like Troy, if he messes up he admits it and tries to do better. Even when he got caught out for the food thing at Carver's and Kenny gets beaten up as a result, Luke owns up to it being his fault to the group, and it was! He was so focused on getting the others out, he didn't put himself first for like what Sialark said, he tried to play… [view original content]
Actually, this is based on what you tell Walter when he asks "Is, uh, is Nick a good man?" Staying silent or saying that he's like everyone else results in Walter letting him die, while telling him that Nick's a good man makes Walter forgive him.
But it is influenced by Luke saying not to tell Walter.
I miss Nick, I bet his corpse and that fence are getting on well.
Asking the important questions. I'll take a spinoff to see this.
… more She was a child who most likely had autism
Telltale has actually confirmed that she has PTSD.
Depending on player choices, again, if Clem decides to listen to Luke's advice on Matthew's death and not tell Walter -This gets Nick killed!
Actually, this is based on what you tell Walter when he asks "Is, uh, is Nick a good man?" Staying silent or saying that he's like everyone else results in Walter letting him die, while telling him that Nick's a good man makes Walter forgive him.
Actually, this is based on what you tell Walter when he asks "Is, uh, is Nick a good man?" Staying silent or saying that he's like everyone … moreelse results in Walter letting him die, while telling him that Nick's a good man makes Walter forgive him.
But it is influenced by Luke saying not to tell Walter.
ALRIGHT WHICH ONE OF YOU DAMN SISSY FANS DARES TO MAKE A POST ABOUT LUKE WITH OPINIONS THAT DIFFER FROM MIIIIIINE!?
HAHAHA! This made me laugh!
If you pay attention to that scene, he's pacing around and stressing out because of the idea of Clementine being bitten and not wanting to go through the idea of having to put a bite victim this young down.
I admitted that I do miss minor body language like this due to Asperger's. Probably should've put that in my post but I thought it was irrelevant at the time. I sometimes forget that I do actually process things a little differently and miss body language that replaces words. Most of my Luke issues arose from significant events and dialogue. That's why I said I took 25% off my Luke hate when @sialark had proved that I had missed that.
But back to the "why'd you kill a dog!?" well it's known for a fact Luke is a pansy
Must be, because I love dogs but if one was attacking me, I'd punch it too. I know Luke didn't know this but Clem didn't intentionally kill Sam or it was a mercy kill since he was pretty fucked by that point. That didn't bother me at all because Luke didn't know the circumstance of the dogs death, but it was the way he said it. It was like he was intentionally being mad at Clementine just because she was bitten. But like I said, I'm not good at that "tone" stuff so probably interpreted it wrong.
the walkers can smell Rebecca [take a shower lady] and nobody else
HAHAHA so nasty! But I agree on that. It was just the whole idea that because of that situation happening, why they thought it would be a great idea to do it there. I mostly blame Jane since she offered, but why would Luke accept. I know it's the apocalypse and pretty much the only thing to do is just sex... But it wasn't exactly the best time. It just threw me off because it was really out of character for Luke (well at least the character Telltale tried to portray rather inconsistently). I know it was to make a statement that "Oh man this worlds so shit, good guys screw up (no pun... actually yeah, pun) but like I said. It was just an extremely dramatic change in Luke. We can say that he just lost his whole group but he had already lost his family. Maybe Nick was just that awesome. I get the idea that there's only so much loss a person can take, but usually at that point they want to die... not have sex. Sort of see my issue here..? I'm just trying to flesh out my thought process so you can understand how I think.
I wish I could say Luke was a well developed character and played an important role in Season 2 throughout...but he didn't and wasn't. Fact is, Nick was much more developed and I too related to him and Sarah too. What little development Luke got was the scene before he died and it felt like 'death development' more than anything and didn't add much in layers to him apart from the fact he's Jack from the Titanic.
I think this is one of my biggest problem with Luke. That characters like Nick and Sarah, who were realistic and rather developed, got unjustified deaths and shelved for characters like Luke who were not fully fleshed out. I mentioned that I felt like I never knew who Luke was because Telltale never gave us anything until just before his death, and like you mention... It felt more like a death development rather then a character one. I feel it was to bring feels back to Luke's death because he had messed up just before during that incident with Jane. As much as I hate Jane, her character makes sense and I know why she was alive until the end. She was tough and unaffected, mentioning how she left her sister behind. Luke deserved to be there until (almost) the end because although he wasn't completely heartless, he was mentally tough as he had lost his whole family during the apocalypse and I think that would cause a lot of people to just break. But then we get weird things that contradict Luke's apparent toughness. Don't kill dogs... Don't kill Carver...
It threw me off quite a bit. Also this happened quite often. It would make sense to me if he gradually became colder as the season progressed but I mention in my post about his morals alternating back and forth quickly throughout different parts.
HAHAHA! Jack from titanic. I have no soul and that movie doesn't make me cry because I sit there dumbfounded that Rose doesn't die as well. She was soaking wet on a wardrobe exposed to the cold air and losing body heat... I thought Jack would have a better (still would die, but at least a little better) chance at surviving because water retains heat better, even though it was freezing which is why he'd still die. But now I'm just getting off track, hahah.
Luke is still one of my favorite characters, and I would've trusted him a lot more with Clem and A.J than I do Kenny or Jane
I would've liked a Luke VS Kenny through the whole season. I think Jane's introduction caused a massive halt on Luke's development and that's Telltale's fault for just forgetting about other characters to focus on new ones. This is also when Luke's character starts making absolutely zero sense to me. I sort of grasped who he was shaping to be but by Episode 3, I was completely lost.
That's all I have to say >.< thank you for not ripping out my spleen. And it's fine, not everybody has to like every character put on screen.
I wouldn't do that, too much effort and too messy heheheh. Thanks for that good summary, I'm giving you a shout out in my post to make sure everyone sees this comment. Although it stands out with those GIFS and screenshots
I was getting comments about you burning my post, etc. Etc. So I was expecting a really cliché and generic "Fuck you!" comment which wouldn't have helped anyone.
A lot of my Luke problems are things I have missed or didn't interpret like most people did. I know some people were getting really mad with some comments I made in the post but it wasn't written in a serious tone at all. Forget that written words read differently hahaha. But 95% of the post was written out of pure frustration with the changes in Luke's character constantly. I'm pretty sensitive to personality shifts like that, they're overwhelming. Although all characters had their written flaws, most changes in characters were gradual or there was a significant event that would occur, giving players an idea of why they act the way they do. I just didn't see that in Luke. Maybe I just can't read between the lines...
Anyway, good comment again! Cheers!
@InfiniteDawn Where are you guys? Lilacsbloom & ABigBadWolf heeelp!
@fallandir Lilacsbloom my love! Save meeeee!
[Superma… moren theme]
[Runs up steps dramatically]
Aw crap, my shoelaces are undone!
Crap, crap, crap...okay, alright here we goooo...
ALRIGHT WHICH ONE OF YOU DAMN SISSY FANS DARES TO MAKE A POST ABOUT LUKE WITH OPINIONS THAT DIFFER FROM MIIIIIINE!?
Actually Sialark kinda said much of everything that I'd agree on. Luke's a good guy, but he has flaws and he hecks up, just like Kenny does. He tries his best, and that's what I like about him. He's not an asshole like Troy, if he messes up he admits it and tries to do better. Even when he got caught out for the food thing at Carver's and Kenny gets beaten up as a result, Luke owns up to it being his fault to the group, and it was! He was so focused on getting the others out, he didn't put himself first for like what Sialark said, he tried to play… [view original content]
So you are saying that Luke is a dumb and we should never listen to him...
If the decision isn't influenced by Luke then what's the point of that whole scene with Luke saying "Don't tell Walter!" and "So it's okay to get Nick killed?"
I get why Luke says this, because he was protecting his friend, but dismissing that Luke doesn't help at all in the players decision is just unrealistic. We are, as people, always being influenced by the people around us.
It's just very unfortunate that Luke's idea happens to get Nick killed...
So you are saying that Luke is a dumb and we should never listen to him...
If that was an attempt to troll, you failed terribly.
If the decision isn't influenced by Luke then what's the point of that whole scene with Luke saying "Don't tell Walter!" and "So it's okay to get Nick killed?"
Hold up. I misunderstood what you meant before.
I thought you meant that Walter's decision influences whether or not you agreed not to tell him or not, not what you're saying here.
We are, as people, always being influenced by the people around us. It's just very unfortunate that Luke's idea happens to get Nick killed...
Luke doesn't influence your choice to say whether or not Nick is a good guy. Luke's idea doesn't influence Walter's decision at all, it's like I said, straight up, "Is Nick a good guy or not?" not "Does Luke not wanting you to tell me about Matthew make Nick a good guy or not?"
So you are saying that Luke is a dumb and we should never listen to him...
If the decision isn't influenced by Luke then what's the point… more of that whole scene with Luke saying "Don't tell Walter!" and "So it's okay to get Nick killed?"
I get why Luke says this, because he was protecting his friend, but dismissing that Luke doesn't help at all in the players decision is just unrealistic. We are, as people, always being influenced by the people around us.
It's just very unfortunate that Luke's idea happens to get Nick killed...
Oh wow... looks like I'm a little late to the party on this one. I guess I've been away from this part of the forum for too long.
Well, first off I'd like to say it's your own opinion if you don't like Luke, and if you don't, I'm not going to sway you to change your mind, especially if you're so adamantly against him, you'd make a giant thread like this explaining why you hate him so much. Which to be honest, isn't really the most constructive type of thread you can post on a forum, since they usually just start a whole string of arguments and don't really add anything aside from the fact that you're telling people you don't like Luke. I personally really hate Bonnie and Kenny, and could honestly make a giant post explaining my reasonings for both, but I won't do it because it's my own personal opinion, and I don't think it's fair to those that like them to see their characters getting hated on.
I feel like most of the things I can say about Luke, I have already said in the past in other threads and posts on this forum, and others on here have also said as well, but for the most part I feel most of your issues with Luke come from the fact that he was under-utilized in season 2, to the point where you hardly got enough time to spend with him to understand where he was coming from or what he was thinking at moments such as episode 4 with Jane or how he reacts to certain things. The under-utilization of his character also led to him basically not doing much this entire season, because let's face it, everything else was handed to Kenny or Jane for the sake of that final choice in episode 5. Even characters like Nick and Sarah became sidelined for their respective "arcs". Also since he was pretty much sidelined for these two characters, I think the writers didn't bother to spend much time on him when his character was actually apologizing for stuff, so to you his apologies felt "generalized", which I think was just a flaw in the writing this season since a lot of stuff this season felt very generalized.
I do find it a bit reaching that you are saying Luke has no sympathies or morals, since for the most part I thought he was one of the few characters this season that tried to keep their morals (not wanting to kill Carver even though he hated him), and was pretty sympathetic to Clem when they first met. It's just the plot moved too fast and he kept "moving" as Nick put it, for his sympathies to actually feel like they meant much to his character. I do agree Luke can be a bit critical of people, which is one of his character flaws, and I think it comes from the fact that Telltale wanted to characterize him as a leader type character, or a "moral compass" if you want to think of him in that way, but it just made him look kinda insensitive at many points in the game, and his character did feel very inconsistent in episode 4.
That being said, I do very much like Luke as a character, and personally he is my favourite character aside from Clem and Lee, and was my favourite in season 2, but I'll admit he wasn't perfect, and definitely could've been written better. I was very angry at him for his treatment of Sarah during episode 4, seeing as how I can relate to her anxiety, and his reaction to his best friend's death was very underwhelming to me, not to mention his thing with Jane left me really disappointed him, but aside from those screw ups, which honestly every character should have to be interesting, I still liked him a lot as a character, and felt there was great potential to buildup that sibling relationship they hinted at between him and Clem. I also found it interesting how they were focusing on a "nice guy" archetype in a ZA for once rather than the super badass middle aged guy, that seems to be super prominent in recent media, not saying that the nice guy thing hasn't been done before, but I was starting to get tired of the "Joel" type characters. I also found it super interesting that at first glance he seemed like this typical "hero" type character, but through his actions later on in the story, he just proved heroes couldn't exist in the ZA, and he ran into a lot of moral conflict over it... but again that wasn't expanded upon since the plot felt very much catered towards Kenny and Jane later on in the season.
I just think that most of the issues with Luke's character come from Telltale deciding not to do anything with him, aside from trying to fake people out by thinking we'd have to choose between him or Kenny in the end, that made him weaker as a character than he could've been. He's still one of my favourite characters though, and was happy with what we did get of him, but it seems it wasn't enough for you, or a few others, to like him. Which is cool, you're free to have your own opinion, but I still think it is a little unnecessary to make a whole thread dedicated to it.
If that was an attempt to troll, you failed terribly.
Umm no. That's seriously what it sounds like you're suggesting because you dismiss that whole significant scene where we have to choose whether to show Nick the photo or not.
I thought you meant that Walter's decision influences whether or not you agreed not to tell him or not, not what you're saying here.
What I'm saying here is exactly my point. Although the whole scene with Luke and Nick ultimately narrows down to "Is Nick a good guy?" No matter how you go about it, depending on your choice before and whether to (A) Listen to Luke, hide the truth, not tell Nick. Or (B) Show Nick the photo, get him to apologise.
If Nick comes out asking what's going on and both Nick and Clementine have been convinced by Luke not to tell Walter about Matthew, Nick says he doesn't know anything about it.
Walter clearly doesn't believe him so this is why he doesn't save Nick.
This idea not to tell Walter in order to protect Nick was originally suggested by Luke, you can't deny that. Luke says, Don't tell and Clem says, We should tell. Then when Nick comes into the scene asking what's up? The player is given a very defined choice. Show or Don't Show...
I'm not pulling shit out of thin air here. I can't exactly do that.
I'm just telling you how that whole scenario plays out.
So you are saying that Luke is a dumb and we should never listen to him...
If that was an attempt to troll, you failed terribly.
… more If the decision isn't influenced by Luke then what's the point of that whole scene with Luke saying "Don't tell Walter!" and "So it's okay to get Nick killed?"
Hold up. I misunderstood what you meant before.
I thought you meant that Walter's decision influences whether or not you agreed not to tell him or not, not what you're saying here.
We are, as people, always being influenced by the people around us. It's just very unfortunate that Luke's idea happens to get Nick killed...
Luke doesn't influence your choice to say whether or not Nick is a good guy. Luke's idea doesn't influence Walter's decision at all, it's like I said, straight up, "Is Nick a good guy or not?" not "Does Luke not wanting you to tell me about Matthew make Nick a good guy or not?"
No, it's not... Luke just says not to tell Walter what happened on the bridge out of fear of what Walter might do if he found out Nick killed Matthew, which to be fair, Luke hardly knew Walter, so he wouldn't know how Walter would react. You can lie to Walter, but if you still tell him Nick's a good man, he still saves Nick's life. Luke never says that Nick isn't a good man, or to outright tell Walter that Nick isn't a good man, so I don't see how that's influenced by him.
Actually, this is based on what you tell Walter when he asks "Is, uh, is Nick a good man?" Staying silent or saying that he's like everyone … moreelse results in Walter letting him die, while telling him that Nick's a good man makes Walter forgive him.
But it is influenced by Luke saying not to tell Walter.
I was starting to get tired of the "Joel" type characters.
Aww I do love Joel though. I think him and Kenny are pretty different. Sort of.
You are a little late to the band wagon haha, that's alright. This post blew up pretty quickly. You probably didn't take the time to read through all the comments which is completely fine so I'll just break it down to save some time.
I admitted that I had probably failed to interpret certain scenes correctly as I didn't mention in the post that I do have Asperger's, because I never find it relevant to mention because I don't deem it as a "syndrome". I hope you can understand that I wouldn't necessarily be like "Oh hi there, here's my post! I'm an aspie! LOLOLOL!" Because that's just dumb. @sialark mentioned that because of this I had missed some body language that supported Luke's behaviour. So I did end up taking 25% off my Luke hate (Although I did call it I hate Luke, It's more of an extreme dislike, but "I extremely dislike Luke" was just a little weird as a title). @Lilacsbloom also helped with their comment, it complimented sialark's comment nicely and also helped clear up some other issues.
As far as my abrupt post and etc, etc... I did go on to say that although 95% of this post was legitimate issues with the character, it wasn't a 100% seriously written post, and written words are read differently by different people. Also too that my language (shit, bloody, fuck) is all said light heartedly, I wasn't forming veins in my forehead as I wrote it which some people assume I did. It's mostly just cultural difference as I realise this is a U.S based website and that's why my posts from 11 in the morning the next day say I posted yesterday at 3 pm. But back to my point... Most Australians use abrupt language normally. An Australian comedian, Carl Barron, even said that Australia's probably the only country where some one would start a sentence with "Get fucked..." Not in aggression, just as a conversation starter. This doesn't speak for all the Aussie society, but a large majority. By the way, we don't talk like this to random people on the street. We have some dignity hahaha.
I'm not making assumptions about your nationality but I'm just trying to explain why my post is written the way it is. It's extremely colloquial because I wrote it off the top of my head
As far as avoiding making posts about personal opinions, I'm one of those rare human beings who like hearing others opinions. If that opinion goes beyond "I hate that character/ thing because I just do", then I'm always intrigued to read on, even if I love what the person is criticising. Sometimes flaws are pointed out that I haven't noticed, but if I love that thing and I know why then it doesn't offend me... Why should it?
That's why I've been genuinely grateful to constructive comments like yours, sialark and Lilacsbloom, because it helps me out a lot. They actually achieved something and helped me understand certain things.
Also with the opinion thing, there was so much Luke love that I thought I'd just write something for people who don't like him or those who do and maybe were interested in knowing why someone doesn't like him. Which I see no problem with. I personally love the character Nick and I'd be all up for a post that displays the opinion of someone who doesn't like him.
As far as my comments go to other people, I haven't argued once with somebody about their personal opinion unless they've brought up issues about something I've said or said something really out of touch, with no support to their argument.
I realise that most comments have been everything I've said in my post but written from the way they perceived it and that's 100% fine.
So yeah... Just thought I'd save you and others some time if you didn't read through all the comments because there's quite a bit now.
95% being GIF files.
Btw, I wasn't starting an argument at all. Like I said, written words are read differently so read this as if I was a girl scout and not a dickhead.
Oh wow... looks like I'm a little late to the party on this one. I guess I've been away from this part of the forum for too long.
Well, … morefirst off I'd like to say it's your own opinion if you don't like Luke, and if you don't, I'm not going to sway you to change your mind, especially if you're so adamantly against him, you'd make a giant thread like this explaining why you hate him so much. Which to be honest, isn't really the most constructive type of thread you can post on a forum, since they usually just start a whole string of arguments and don't really add anything aside from the fact that you're telling people you don't like Luke. I personally really hate Bonnie and Kenny, and could honestly make a giant post explaining my reasonings for both, but I won't do it because it's my own personal opinion, and I don't think it's fair to those that like them to see their characters getting hated on.
I feel like most of the things I can say… [view original content]
My main issue is with the (show photo) / (Don't show photo) option.
Which I believe the players decision is influenced by Luke and Clementines conversation from moments earlier.
And because of bad Telltale writing, you're right, it never actually factors into the overall decision.
But to say that Luke doesn't influence the decision if you choose not to tell Walter just doesn't add up to me. Because then that whole conversation and choice is just pointless. (Even though ends up being).
Bad Telltale, bad...
No, it's not... Luke just says not to tell Walter what happened on the bridge out of fear of what Walter might do if he found out Nick kille… mored Matthew, which to be fair, Luke hardly knew Walter, so he wouldn't know how Walter would react. You can lie to Walter, but if you still tell him Nick's a good man, he still saves Nick's life. Luke never says that Nick isn't a good man, or to outright tell Walter that Nick isn't a good man, so I don't see how that's influenced by him.
Honestly, I don´t see a need to be rude to explain why you feel a certain way or why you interpreted a situation as you did but this falls flat on a lot of people.
I did mention in a comment that this was a cultural/ not hearing my tone issue. So my bad on that part. I didn't write this is pure rage with veins forming on my forehead, like some people seem to think. But I understand why a lot of people perceived it that way. Maybe if they heard it come straight from my mouth then more people would be less offended by it.
I mean, I love Luke but I´m not going to skin someone alive if they don´t. It´s basically the same logic as beating someone up because they like apples and you don´t...it´s silly.
For this reason exactly, this is why I've been rather civil to Luke fans and most have actually helped clear up issues that I had with the character.
Seriously. Most threads that even mention Kenny or Jane end up in a discussion. And neither side wins.
Honestly, I don´t see a need to be… more rude to explain why you feel a certain way or why you interpreted a situation as you did but this falls flat on a lot of people. Obviously people are different and aren´t going to think the same way and that´s perfectly okay as long as people can be polite and explain themselves without offending others.
I mean, I love Luke but I´m not going to skin someone alive if they don´t. It´s basically the same logic as beating someone up because they like apples and you don´t...it´s silly.
Honestly, I don´t see a need to be rude to explain why you feel a certain way or why you interpreted a situation as you did but this falls f… morelat on a lot of people.
I did mention in a comment that this was a cultural/ not hearing my tone issue. So my bad on that part. I didn't write this is pure rage with veins forming on my forehead, like some people seem to think. But I understand why a lot of people perceived it that way. Maybe if they heard it come straight from my mouth then more people would be less offended by it.
I mean, I love Luke but I´m not going to skin someone alive if they don´t. It´s basically the same logic as beating someone up because they like apples and you don´t...it´s silly.
For this reason exactly, this is why I've been rather civil to Luke fans and most have actually helped clear up issues that I had with the character.
Sorry if you misinterpreted what I was saying, but I was in no way saying you were starting any arguments or anything of the sort, I was just pointing out that by making a "hate thread", it could lead to such things, which it hasn't, because I did read most of the posts (I just didn't read the super long ones) before commenting, and didn't see any arguments prior to my post. I was just questioning the point of making it, when you didn't particularly have anything constructive in mind when posting it from what I saw, other than listing reasons for why you personally hate Luke. And I had no problems with the language you used, I'm not even from the U.S. myself, but eh... pretty much the same culture.
And I wasn't saying that you should avoid posts about personal opinions, I actually do like to hear what some people personally think as well, especially if it differs from my own, because like I said, I may not like some characters, but I understand the reasons of why others would like them, so I won't put them down for it just because I personally view something differently. I was just saying that by titling this thread "I hate Luke..." and then going on and on about how much you hate him... it's not really the most inviting thing for a good discussion. I'm glad my feedback did help you if it did though, and your comments about not being able to read some of Luke's body language correctly does shed some new light for me on understanding why some people might not like him, because I never even thought of that until now. So I do like that we were able to discuss this civilly, and both got something out of it, so sorry if I came off a bit defensive in my earlier post, it's just that there have been a good number of Luke hate threads in the past on these forums, and some of them were just not the most constructive...
And I do like Joel too, and definitely don't think he's that similar to Kenny, it's just... too much of anything can get tiresome. And haha, I didn't think you were a dickhead at all, so no worries.
I was starting to get tired of the "Joel" type characters.
Aww I do love Joel though. I think him and Kenny are pretty different. So… morert of.
You are a little late to the band wagon haha, that's alright. This post blew up pretty quickly. You probably didn't take the time to read through all the comments which is completely fine so I'll just break it down to save some time.
I admitted that I had probably failed to interpret certain scenes correctly as I didn't mention in the post that I do have Asperger's, because I never find it relevant to mention because I don't deem it as a "syndrome". I hope you can understand that I wouldn't necessarily be like "Oh hi there, here's my post! I'm an aspie! LOLOLOL!" Because that's just dumb.
@sialark mentioned that because of this I had missed some body language that supported Luke's behaviour. So I did end up taking 25% off my Luke hate (Although I did call it I hate Luke, It's more of an ex… [view original content]
It didn't really influence players at all, because showing the photo to Nick has no influence on what happens when you confront Walter. I didn't show Nick the photo in my first playthrough, but I still told Walter the truth about Matthew, and then Nick comes out and still tells the truth, which I think could indicate that Luke does eventually tell him if you don't, or it was actually an oversight by Telltale. Plus the majority of people still told Walter Nick was a good person, so it didn't sway many (if any) people to not save Nick, so Luke in no way had any influence.
Whether or not Nick is saved is up to you as the player, nothing else factors into it. I think you might be a bit confused about how the choice worked, because the only thing that causes Nick to die is telling Walter he's a bad person, nothing else. But for the most part, yes, the whole showing Nick the photo or not is pretty pointless... just like almost all the choices this season.
My main issue is with the (show photo) / (Don't show photo) option.
Which I believe the players decision is influenced by Luke and Clementi… morenes conversation from moments earlier.
And because of bad Telltale writing, you're right, it never actually factors into the overall decision.
But to say that Luke doesn't influence the decision if you choose not to tell Walter just doesn't add up to me. Because then that whole conversation and choice is just pointless. (Even though ends up being).
Bad Telltale, bad...
Umm no. That's seriously what it sounds like you're suggesting because you dismiss that whole significant scene where we have to choose whether to show Nick the photo or not.
Please, pin-point how that influences Walter's decision on whether or not Nick is a good guy like we were discussing. Oh right, it doesn't.
What I'm saying here is exactly my point. Although the whole scene with Luke and Nick ultimately narrows down to "Is Nick a good guy?" No matter how you go about it, depending on your choice before and whether to (A) Listen to Luke, hide the truth, not tell Nick. Or (B) Show Nick the photo, get him to apologise. If Nick comes out asking what's going on and both Nick and Clementine have been convinced by Luke not to tell Walter about Matthew, Nick says he doesn't know anything about it. Walter clearly doesn't believe him so this is why he doesn't save Nick.
You do realize that the reason why Luke didn't want that to happen is because he didn't want Walter hurting or killing Nick. He did it with good intentions so another member of his group didn't have to die. I know how the scene plays out, I just didn't know that showing the photo or not influenced it. But, I'm pretty sure that if Clementine doesn't show Nick the photo, but says to Walter "Nick shot him", then Nick will confess. So technically, it's not fully influenced on Luke showing the photo or not.
If that was an attempt to troll, you failed terribly.
Umm no. That's seriously what it sounds like you're suggesting because you dis… moremiss that whole significant scene where we have to choose whether to show Nick the photo or not.
I thought you meant that Walter's decision influences whether or not you agreed not to tell him or not, not what you're saying here.
What I'm saying here is exactly my point. Although the whole scene with Luke and Nick ultimately narrows down to "Is Nick a good guy?" No matter how you go about it, depending on your choice before and whether to (A) Listen to Luke, hide the truth, not tell Nick. Or (B) Show Nick the photo, get him to apologise.
If Nick comes out asking what's going on and both Nick and Clementine have been convinced by Luke not to tell Walter about Matthew, Nick says he doesn't know anything about it.
Walter clearly doesn't believe him so this is why he doesn't save Nick.
This… [view original content]
So to all who commented, there were some really great comments that resolved issues that I had with Luke.
It's actually caused me to reconsider the way I initially perceived Luke and in honour of those great commenters, I am self grilling this original post and putting myself in my place.
I mostly blame Jane since she offered, but why would Luke accept. I know it's the apocalypse and pretty much the only thing to do is just sex... But it wasn't exactly the best time. It just threw me off because it was really out of character for Luke (well at least the character Telltale tried to portray rather inconsistently). I know it was to make a statement that "Oh man this worlds so shit, good guys screw up (no pun... actually yeah, pun) but like I said. It was just an extremely dramatic change in Luke. We can say that he just lost his whole group but he had already lost his family. Maybe Nick was just that awesome. I get the idea that there's only so much loss a person can take, but usually at that point they want to die... not have sex. Sort of see my issue here..? I'm just trying to flesh out my thought process so you can understand how I think.
I try to think of it like this: maybe Luke just hadn't had sex in ages! XD
We know him and Bonnie were a thing before the cabin group left Carver's. And we're not sure of how long they were at the cabin, it could've been weeks or even months. Combine that with losing everybody in such a short frame of time and then your best friend, I can imagine Luke emotionally wasn't doing well. So when pretty eyed Jane offered when nobody was around and for what would be a quick 'roll in the hay' that would make sense why he'd jump to that, because he was in a weak frame of mind and that really shows when he snaps at Kenny on how "look around you, everything is shit! so forgive me for wanting to enjoy one moment of something else!" and again at the campfire when he mentions wanting to forget everything for a little while. Maybe he just wanted a temporally escape.
But yes, Jane took advantage of him a little bit. And afterwards when she took off Luke got really upset about that, I think he wanted to get to know her more. But if Jane hadn't offered I don't think believe it would've happened, Luke is weak of will when it comes to leather boobs and fine bootys XP
Sorry, making jokes here, but, I didn't mind it too much because Luke was being painted too clean cut and I was actually happy when it happened all "Yes! Finally a big flaw to you! You are weak of will when it comes to porkchops boy!" but I think too, it shows he youth in a way, he's in a 20's and most leaders you'd suspect of being a bit older for that, so seeing him heck up like that, I liked because it's something for him to of learned from.
...why am I laughing?
But then we get weird things that contradict Luke's apparent toughness. Don't kill dogs... Don't kill Carver... It threw me off quite a bit.
Well if you think about it, that part can be excused. Luke and Carver did work together for a while in that community, we don't know how far that went but maybe even after when things got bad and Carver started thinking to how he did at that point in the game about the strong needing to survive and such, Luke couldn't bring himself to kill him because of that history. But the dog, maybe Luke just liked dogs, and it was like you said before he knew the dog had attacked Clem, but he did calm down a bit after learning that.
I would've liked a Luke VS Kenny through the whole season. I think Jane's introduction caused a massive halt on Luke's development and that's Telltale's fault for just forgetting about other characters to focus on new ones. This is also when Luke's character starts making absolutely zero sense to me. I sort of grasped who he was shaping to be but by Episode 3, I was completely lost.
You know, that's probably why I got annoyed. Not really Episode 3 because I could excuse him not being there as much since he was in hiding, but the later episodes, Luke just didn't seem to be as important and I remember thinking 'why are they giving Jane so much screen time? What about Luke and the others?' and it wasn't just a little bit of screen time, it was lots as if they were quickly slotting in as much time as they could with Jane where it wasn't even subtle, and I initially thought "Oh maybe they're just setting her up for Season 3, like maybe she's going to come back and that's why they had her and Luke pork because that's another character to her to know." and now I look back and realize "Oh, so you were rushing all this in with Jane for a surprise that didn't need to be there and had to rewrite a character who originally you wrote cold and who barely said anything to Clem in Episode 3, bravo." I don't hate Jane, I just hate they put her in Luke's place when they had already established him and by then the story had progressed too far to include her as a key player. And I guess I'm annoyed too, because I would've liked to of seen her come back and not potentially be dead now, which sucks
The sibling thing they attempted with Jane and Clementine too, it just never resonated as strong. In fact if you removed Jane's sister back story on her sister, there would be little sibling dynamic between them. That's what I really liked about Luke out of most the cast, he really came across as this older brother to me and you didn't need about a tragic past on him with a dead sister or family to make that connection, it was right there on screen and it worked so well, and that's probably why cutting him out of it and putting Jane there felt secondary or third in compasion to me. And ask yourself: how often do you see that in a game with an older brother and younger sister type bond? It was really refreshing and I wish they'd stuck with that and used Episode 4 to develop Luke instead and keep him to a final decision between him and Kenny, however that decision would've played out or if anybody died or not [I always thought it'd be like the table scene, where you'd just have to go to one of them, I never imagined anything violent like knives being stabbed into chests.]
I think if they had stuck with that, it would've made the game for me and I think lot of others too, since that Luke vs Kenny business everybody was hyped for it. The whole thing now just leaves me in disbelief sometimes in a sort of "what the hell were they thinking?" because picking between Jane and Kenny was like picking between two similar people, because both will do what they have to in order to survive. It would've been the same if it'd been between picking two people similar like Luke; there's no tough decision it's just as case of "I don't know"and that was honestly how I was. I didn't care when that final decision came up, I found it harder to decide who to sit with at a table in Episode 2 than who to save in that moment, I just didn't care anymore because they had taken out what I'd seen as one of the important parts of the equation. It'd be like in Season 1, you as Lee bonded with Clementine, and then suddenly boom she's dead and you got Duck. Remember Duck? You bonded with him so well don't remember? Who cares about Clem when you got a Ducky.
Choosing between Kenny and Luke would've felt more like picking between family and what kind of path do I want for my Clementine and A.J until the next season 'survival or humanity' and I think that would've been a more interesting subject to talk about with people in what they viewed was more important to have in a zombie apocalypse and the pros and cons of these characters.
But you're right, Luke started changing a bit too, like he was in the background at times when he would've said something. Like when Arvo is gettin beaten up, Luke says nothing. Now I know Luke would no way just stay silent about that, he would've spoken up. It seemed like at times too Mike took most of his lines of protest on that, or even Jane appearing shocked over stabbing a man in the neck who was shooting at the group, when just two episodes before she shot Troy in the dick for threatening to do the same thing and didn't flinch. the whole "I tried to pretend it was a walker" line, seemed like something that could've come straight out Luke's mouth rather than hers.
I'm going on a bit though, sorry. But yeah the whole Season was just inconsistent, at least in comparing it to the first two episodes. But I'm glad to have been of help to you I do wish they could've developed Luke's character better and if he'd really had to die, I wish it could've been in some sort of decision with Kenny instead of in that stupid lake...is it sad I still hope he's going to be okay? XD people go ice fishing during an apocalypse right?
ALRIGHT WHICH ONE OF YOU DAMN SISSY FANS DARES TO MAKE A POST ABOUT LUKE WITH OPINIONS THAT DIFFER FROM MIIIIIINE!?
HAHAHA! This mad… moree me laugh!
If you pay attention to that scene, he's pacing around and stressing out because of the idea of Clementine being bitten and not wanting to go through the idea of having to put a bite victim this young down.
I admitted that I do miss minor body language like this due to Asperger's. Probably should've put that in my post but I thought it was irrelevant at the time. I sometimes forget that I do actually process things a little differently and miss body language that replaces words. Most of my Luke issues arose from significant events and dialogue. That's why I said I took 25% off my Luke hate when @sialark had proved that I had missed that.
But back to the "why'd you kill a dog!?" well it's known for a fact Luke is a pansy
Must be, because I love dogs but if one was at… [view original content]
I mostly blame Jane since she offered, but why would Luke accept. I know it's the apocalypse and pretty much the only thing to do is just se… morex... But it wasn't exactly the best time. It just threw me off because it was really out of character for Luke (well at least the character Telltale tried to portray rather inconsistently). I know it was to make a statement that "Oh man this worlds so shit, good guys screw up (no pun... actually yeah, pun) but like I said. It was just an extremely dramatic change in Luke. We can say that he just lost his whole group but he had already lost his family. Maybe Nick was just that awesome. I get the idea that there's only so much loss a person can take, but usually at that point they want to die... not have sex. Sort of see my issue here..? I'm just trying to flesh out my thought process so you can understand how I think.
I try to think of it like this: maybe Luke just hadn't had sex in ages! XD
We … [view original content]
people go ice fishing during an apocalypse right?
Yep they do it all the time, Luke's fine. :P
I always agree with everything you say in your posts, your interpretations and summaries are very good.
Comments
Still. Very. Bitter. With You.
First two episodes,he was cool. Sort of like a big brother type character. Rest of the season he was useless.
It's a forum on a video game. Writing about how much you like/dislike characters is sort of the point. It's to express your own opinion and see how other people react.
This post was...Beautiful
Asking the important questions. I'll take a spinoff to see this.
Telltale has actually confirmed that she has PTSD.
Actually, this is based on what you tell Walter when he asks "Is, uh, is Nick a good man?" Staying silent or saying that he's like everyone else results in Walter letting him die, while telling him that Nick's a good man makes Walter forgive him.
Needs more shag carpeting.
JK this is a really good art style though. You should probably source it.
I would source it, but I really don't have one. Someone on here posted it and said it wasn't theirs, I just keep it for... business stuff.
Oh honey, I've been crushing on her since 2010 when she first joined NXT.
The hypocrisy is strong with this one.
Unfortunately no one's allowed to have opinions anymore.
MY HERO!
Faints
But it is influenced by Luke saying not to tell Walter.
Did a little digging, found the artist.
http://vk.com/vashashina
They have quite a bit of TWDG fanart, actually.
Thanks, I'm going to look on their page a bit more for... business stuff.
No it's not.
It's straight up; "Is Nick a good man or not?"
Nothing else influences it.
HAHAHA! This made me laugh!
I admitted that I do miss minor body language like this due to Asperger's. Probably should've put that in my post but I thought it was irrelevant at the time. I sometimes forget that I do actually process things a little differently and miss body language that replaces words. Most of my Luke issues arose from significant events and dialogue. That's why I said I took 25% off my Luke hate when @sialark had proved that I had missed that.
Must be, because I love dogs but if one was attacking me, I'd punch it too. I know Luke didn't know this but Clem didn't intentionally kill Sam or it was a mercy kill since he was pretty fucked by that point. That didn't bother me at all because Luke didn't know the circumstance of the dogs death, but it was the way he said it. It was like he was intentionally being mad at Clementine just because she was bitten. But like I said, I'm not good at that "tone" stuff so probably interpreted it wrong.
HAHAHA so nasty! But I agree on that. It was just the whole idea that because of that situation happening, why they thought it would be a great idea to do it there. I mostly blame Jane since she offered, but why would Luke accept. I know it's the apocalypse and pretty much the only thing to do is just sex... But it wasn't exactly the best time. It just threw me off because it was really out of character for Luke (well at least the character Telltale tried to portray rather inconsistently). I know it was to make a statement that "Oh man this worlds so shit, good guys screw up (no pun... actually yeah, pun) but like I said. It was just an extremely dramatic change in Luke. We can say that he just lost his whole group but he had already lost his family. Maybe Nick was just that awesome. I get the idea that there's only so much loss a person can take, but usually at that point they want to die... not have sex. Sort of see my issue here..? I'm just trying to flesh out my thought process so you can understand how I think.
I think this is one of my biggest problem with Luke. That characters like Nick and Sarah, who were realistic and rather developed, got unjustified deaths and shelved for characters like Luke who were not fully fleshed out. I mentioned that I felt like I never knew who Luke was because Telltale never gave us anything until just before his death, and like you mention... It felt more like a death development rather then a character one. I feel it was to bring feels back to Luke's death because he had messed up just before during that incident with Jane. As much as I hate Jane, her character makes sense and I know why she was alive until the end. She was tough and unaffected, mentioning how she left her sister behind. Luke deserved to be there until (almost) the end because although he wasn't completely heartless, he was mentally tough as he had lost his whole family during the apocalypse and I think that would cause a lot of people to just break. But then we get weird things that contradict Luke's apparent toughness. Don't kill dogs... Don't kill Carver...
It threw me off quite a bit. Also this happened quite often. It would make sense to me if he gradually became colder as the season progressed but I mention in my post about his morals alternating back and forth quickly throughout different parts.
HAHAHA! Jack from titanic. I have no soul and that movie doesn't make me cry because I sit there dumbfounded that Rose doesn't die as well. She was soaking wet on a wardrobe exposed to the cold air and losing body heat... I thought Jack would have a better (still would die, but at least a little better) chance at surviving because water retains heat better, even though it was freezing which is why he'd still die. But now I'm just getting off track, hahah.
I would've liked a Luke VS Kenny through the whole season. I think Jane's introduction caused a massive halt on Luke's development and that's Telltale's fault for just forgetting about other characters to focus on new ones. This is also when Luke's character starts making absolutely zero sense to me. I sort of grasped who he was shaping to be but by Episode 3, I was completely lost.
I wouldn't do that, too much effort and too messy heheheh. Thanks for that good summary, I'm giving you a shout out in my post to make sure everyone sees this comment. Although it stands out with those GIFS and screenshots
I was getting comments about you burning my post, etc. Etc. So I was expecting a really cliché and generic "Fuck you!" comment which wouldn't have helped anyone.
A lot of my Luke problems are things I have missed or didn't interpret like most people did. I know some people were getting really mad with some comments I made in the post but it wasn't written in a serious tone at all. Forget that written words read differently hahaha. But 95% of the post was written out of pure frustration with the changes in Luke's character constantly. I'm pretty sensitive to personality shifts like that, they're overwhelming. Although all characters had their written flaws, most changes in characters were gradual or there was a significant event that would occur, giving players an idea of why they act the way they do. I just didn't see that in Luke. Maybe I just can't read between the lines...
Anyway, good comment again! Cheers!
So you are saying that Luke is a dumb and we should never listen to him...
If the decision isn't influenced by Luke then what's the point of that whole scene with Luke saying "Don't tell Walter!" and "So it's okay to get Nick killed?"
I get why Luke says this, because he was protecting his friend, but dismissing that Luke doesn't help at all in the players decision is just unrealistic. We are, as people, always being influenced by the people around us.
It's just very unfortunate that Luke's idea happens to get Nick killed...
If that was an attempt to troll, you failed terribly.
Hold up. I misunderstood what you meant before.
I thought you meant that Walter's decision influences whether or not you agreed not to tell him or not, not what you're saying here.
Luke doesn't influence your choice to say whether or not Nick is a good guy. Luke's idea doesn't influence Walter's decision at all, it's like I said, straight up, "Is Nick a good guy or not?" not "Does Luke not wanting you to tell me about Matthew make Nick a good guy or not?"
Oh wow... looks like I'm a little late to the party on this one. I guess I've been away from this part of the forum for too long.
Well, first off I'd like to say it's your own opinion if you don't like Luke, and if you don't, I'm not going to sway you to change your mind, especially if you're so adamantly against him, you'd make a giant thread like this explaining why you hate him so much. Which to be honest, isn't really the most constructive type of thread you can post on a forum, since they usually just start a whole string of arguments and don't really add anything aside from the fact that you're telling people you don't like Luke. I personally really hate Bonnie and Kenny, and could honestly make a giant post explaining my reasonings for both, but I won't do it because it's my own personal opinion, and I don't think it's fair to those that like them to see their characters getting hated on.
I feel like most of the things I can say about Luke, I have already said in the past in other threads and posts on this forum, and others on here have also said as well, but for the most part I feel most of your issues with Luke come from the fact that he was under-utilized in season 2, to the point where you hardly got enough time to spend with him to understand where he was coming from or what he was thinking at moments such as episode 4 with Jane or how he reacts to certain things. The under-utilization of his character also led to him basically not doing much this entire season, because let's face it, everything else was handed to Kenny or Jane for the sake of that final choice in episode 5. Even characters like Nick and Sarah became sidelined for their respective "arcs". Also since he was pretty much sidelined for these two characters, I think the writers didn't bother to spend much time on him when his character was actually apologizing for stuff, so to you his apologies felt "generalized", which I think was just a flaw in the writing this season since a lot of stuff this season felt very generalized.
I do find it a bit reaching that you are saying Luke has no sympathies or morals, since for the most part I thought he was one of the few characters this season that tried to keep their morals (not wanting to kill Carver even though he hated him), and was pretty sympathetic to Clem when they first met. It's just the plot moved too fast and he kept "moving" as Nick put it, for his sympathies to actually feel like they meant much to his character. I do agree Luke can be a bit critical of people, which is one of his character flaws, and I think it comes from the fact that Telltale wanted to characterize him as a leader type character, or a "moral compass" if you want to think of him in that way, but it just made him look kinda insensitive at many points in the game, and his character did feel very inconsistent in episode 4.
That being said, I do very much like Luke as a character, and personally he is my favourite character aside from Clem and Lee, and was my favourite in season 2, but I'll admit he wasn't perfect, and definitely could've been written better. I was very angry at him for his treatment of Sarah during episode 4, seeing as how I can relate to her anxiety, and his reaction to his best friend's death was very underwhelming to me, not to mention his thing with Jane left me really disappointed him, but aside from those screw ups, which honestly every character should have to be interesting, I still liked him a lot as a character, and felt there was great potential to buildup that sibling relationship they hinted at between him and Clem. I also found it interesting how they were focusing on a "nice guy" archetype in a ZA for once rather than the super badass middle aged guy, that seems to be super prominent in recent media, not saying that the nice guy thing hasn't been done before, but I was starting to get tired of the "Joel" type characters. I also found it super interesting that at first glance he seemed like this typical "hero" type character, but through his actions later on in the story, he just proved heroes couldn't exist in the ZA, and he ran into a lot of moral conflict over it... but again that wasn't expanded upon since the plot felt very much catered towards Kenny and Jane later on in the season.
I just think that most of the issues with Luke's character come from Telltale deciding not to do anything with him, aside from trying to fake people out by thinking we'd have to choose between him or Kenny in the end, that made him weaker as a character than he could've been. He's still one of my favourite characters though, and was happy with what we did get of him, but it seems it wasn't enough for you, or a few others, to like him. Which is cool, you're free to have your own opinion, but I still think it is a little unnecessary to make a whole thread dedicated to it.
Umm no. That's seriously what it sounds like you're suggesting because you dismiss that whole significant scene where we have to choose whether to show Nick the photo or not.
What I'm saying here is exactly my point. Although the whole scene with Luke and Nick ultimately narrows down to "Is Nick a good guy?" No matter how you go about it, depending on your choice before and whether to (A) Listen to Luke, hide the truth, not tell Nick. Or (B) Show Nick the photo, get him to apologise.
If Nick comes out asking what's going on and both Nick and Clementine have been convinced by Luke not to tell Walter about Matthew, Nick says he doesn't know anything about it.
Walter clearly doesn't believe him so this is why he doesn't save Nick.
This idea not to tell Walter in order to protect Nick was originally suggested by Luke, you can't deny that. Luke says, Don't tell and Clem says, We should tell. Then when Nick comes into the scene asking what's up? The player is given a very defined choice. Show or Don't Show...
I'm not pulling shit out of thin air here. I can't exactly do that.
I'm just telling you how that whole scenario plays out.
No, it's not... Luke just says not to tell Walter what happened on the bridge out of fear of what Walter might do if he found out Nick killed Matthew, which to be fair, Luke hardly knew Walter, so he wouldn't know how Walter would react. You can lie to Walter, but if you still tell him Nick's a good man, he still saves Nick's life. Luke never says that Nick isn't a good man, or to outright tell Walter that Nick isn't a good man, so I don't see how that's influenced by him.
Aww I do love Joel though. I think him and Kenny are pretty different. Sort of.
You are a little late to the band wagon haha, that's alright. This post blew up pretty quickly. You probably didn't take the time to read through all the comments which is completely fine so I'll just break it down to save some time.
I admitted that I had probably failed to interpret certain scenes correctly as I didn't mention in the post that I do have Asperger's, because I never find it relevant to mention because I don't deem it as a "syndrome". I hope you can understand that I wouldn't necessarily be like "Oh hi there, here's my post! I'm an aspie! LOLOLOL!" Because that's just dumb.
(Although I did call it I hate Luke, It's more of an extreme dislike, but "I extremely dislike Luke" was just a little weird as a title).
@sialark mentioned that because of this I had missed some body language that supported Luke's behaviour. So I did end up taking 25% off my Luke hate
@Lilacsbloom also helped with their comment, it complimented sialark's comment nicely and also helped clear up some other issues.
As far as my abrupt post and etc, etc... I did go on to say that although 95% of this post was legitimate issues with the character, it wasn't a 100% seriously written post, and written words are read differently by different people. Also too that my language (shit, bloody, fuck) is all said light heartedly, I wasn't forming veins in my forehead as I wrote it which some people assume I did. It's mostly just cultural difference as I realise this is a U.S based website and that's why my posts from 11 in the morning the next day say I posted yesterday at 3 pm. But back to my point... Most Australians use abrupt language normally. An Australian comedian, Carl Barron, even said that Australia's probably the only country where some one would start a sentence with "Get fucked..." Not in aggression, just as a conversation starter. This doesn't speak for all the Aussie society, but a large majority. By the way, we don't talk like this to random people on the street. We have some dignity hahaha.
I'm not making assumptions about your nationality but I'm just trying to explain why my post is written the way it is. It's extremely colloquial because I wrote it off the top of my head
As far as avoiding making posts about personal opinions, I'm one of those rare human beings who like hearing others opinions. If that opinion goes beyond "I hate that character/ thing because I just do", then I'm always intrigued to read on, even if I love what the person is criticising. Sometimes flaws are pointed out that I haven't noticed, but if I love that thing and I know why then it doesn't offend me... Why should it?
That's why I've been genuinely grateful to constructive comments like yours, sialark and Lilacsbloom, because it helps me out a lot. They actually achieved something and helped me understand certain things.
Also with the opinion thing, there was so much Luke love that I thought I'd just write something for people who don't like him or those who do and maybe were interested in knowing why someone doesn't like him. Which I see no problem with. I personally love the character Nick and I'd be all up for a post that displays the opinion of someone who doesn't like him.
As far as my comments go to other people, I haven't argued once with somebody about their personal opinion unless they've brought up issues about something I've said or said something really out of touch, with no support to their argument.
I realise that most comments have been everything I've said in my post but written from the way they perceived it and that's 100% fine.
So yeah... Just thought I'd save you and others some time if you didn't read through all the comments because there's quite a bit now.
95% being GIF files.
Btw, I wasn't starting an argument at all. Like I said, written words are read differently so read this as if I was a girl scout and not a dickhead.
My main issue is with the (show photo) / (Don't show photo) option.
Which I believe the players decision is influenced by Luke and Clementines conversation from moments earlier.
And because of bad Telltale writing, you're right, it never actually factors into the overall decision.
But to say that Luke doesn't influence the decision if you choose not to tell Walter just doesn't add up to me. Because then that whole conversation and choice is just pointless. (Even though ends up being).
Bad Telltale, bad...
I did mention in a comment that this was a cultural/ not hearing my tone issue. So my bad on that part. I didn't write this is pure rage with veins forming on my forehead, like some people seem to think. But I understand why a lot of people perceived it that way. Maybe if they heard it come straight from my mouth then more people would be less offended by it.
For this reason exactly, this is why I've been rather civil to Luke fans and most have actually helped clear up issues that I had with the character.
Oh, I wasn´t accusing you, sorry if it sounded like it. I was speaking generally, it happens a lot around here.
Wish people could always be civil, this shows how much it can help, really. It´s refreshing to see!
This thread is becoming TL;DR but man it looks intense.
Sorry if you misinterpreted what I was saying, but I was in no way saying you were starting any arguments or anything of the sort, I was just pointing out that by making a "hate thread", it could lead to such things, which it hasn't, because I did read most of the posts (I just didn't read the super long ones) before commenting, and didn't see any arguments prior to my post. I was just questioning the point of making it, when you didn't particularly have anything constructive in mind when posting it from what I saw, other than listing reasons for why you personally hate Luke. And I had no problems with the language you used, I'm not even from the U.S. myself, but eh... pretty much the same culture.
And I wasn't saying that you should avoid posts about personal opinions, I actually do like to hear what some people personally think as well, especially if it differs from my own, because like I said, I may not like some characters, but I understand the reasons of why others would like them, so I won't put them down for it just because I personally view something differently. I was just saying that by titling this thread "I hate Luke..." and then going on and on about how much you hate him... it's not really the most inviting thing for a good discussion. I'm glad my feedback did help you if it did though, and your comments about not being able to read some of Luke's body language correctly does shed some new light for me on understanding why some people might not like him, because I never even thought of that until now. So I do like that we were able to discuss this civilly, and both got something out of it, so sorry if I came off a bit defensive in my earlier post, it's just that there have been a good number of Luke hate threads in the past on these forums, and some of them were just not the most constructive...
And I do like Joel too, and definitely don't think he's that similar to Kenny, it's just... too much of anything can get tiresome. And haha, I didn't think you were a dickhead at all, so no worries.
It didn't really influence players at all, because showing the photo to Nick has no influence on what happens when you confront Walter. I didn't show Nick the photo in my first playthrough, but I still told Walter the truth about Matthew, and then Nick comes out and still tells the truth, which I think could indicate that Luke does eventually tell him if you don't, or it was actually an oversight by Telltale. Plus the majority of people still told Walter Nick was a good person, so it didn't sway many (if any) people to not save Nick, so Luke in no way had any influence.
Whether or not Nick is saved is up to you as the player, nothing else factors into it. I think you might be a bit confused about how the choice worked, because the only thing that causes Nick to die is telling Walter he's a bad person, nothing else. But for the most part, yes, the whole showing Nick the photo or not is pretty pointless... just like almost all the choices this season.
Come guys! Can't we all just go back to having Jane V Kenny flamewars again? JK
Please, pin-point how that influences Walter's decision on whether or not Nick is a good guy like we were discussing. Oh right, it doesn't.
You do realize that the reason why Luke didn't want that to happen is because he didn't want Walter hurting or killing Nick. He did it with good intentions so another member of his group didn't have to die. I know how the scene plays out, I just didn't know that showing the photo or not influenced it. But, I'm pretty sure that if Clementine doesn't show Nick the photo, but says to Walter "Nick shot him", then Nick will confess. So technically, it's not fully influenced on Luke showing the photo or not.
Luke fans vs Luke haters reminds me of this:
More like this.
Ummm... too much? : I
Actually, more like this.
Or this...
Oh, wait, definitely this!
And when the Luke fans own the haters and go out with a major insult;
So to all who commented, there were some really great comments that resolved issues that I had with Luke.
It's actually caused me to reconsider the way I initially perceived Luke and in honour of those great commenters, I am self grilling this original post and putting myself in my place.
I try to think of it like this: maybe Luke just hadn't had sex in ages! XD
We know him and Bonnie were a thing before the cabin group left Carver's. And we're not sure of how long they were at the cabin, it could've been weeks or even months. Combine that with losing everybody in such a short frame of time and then your best friend, I can imagine Luke emotionally wasn't doing well. So when pretty eyed Jane offered when nobody was around and for what would be a quick 'roll in the hay' that would make sense why he'd jump to that, because he was in a weak frame of mind and that really shows when he snaps at Kenny on how "look around you, everything is shit! so forgive me for wanting to enjoy one moment of something else!" and again at the campfire when he mentions wanting to forget everything for a little while. Maybe he just wanted a temporally escape.
But yes, Jane took advantage of him a little bit. And afterwards when she took off Luke got really upset about that, I think he wanted to get to know her more. But if Jane hadn't offered I don't think believe it would've happened, Luke is weak of will when it comes to leather boobs and fine bootys XP
Sorry, making jokes here, but, I didn't mind it too much because Luke was being painted too clean cut and I was actually happy when it happened all "Yes! Finally a big flaw to you! You are weak of will when it comes to porkchops boy!" but I think too, it shows he youth in a way, he's in a 20's and most leaders you'd suspect of being a bit older for that, so seeing him heck up like that, I liked because it's something for him to of learned from.
...why am I laughing?
Well if you think about it, that part can be excused. Luke and Carver did work together for a while in that community, we don't know how far that went but maybe even after when things got bad and Carver started thinking to how he did at that point in the game about the strong needing to survive and such, Luke couldn't bring himself to kill him because of that history. But the dog, maybe Luke just liked dogs, and it was like you said before he knew the dog had attacked Clem, but he did calm down a bit after learning that.
You know, that's probably why I got annoyed. Not really Episode 3 because I could excuse him not being there as much since he was in hiding, but the later episodes, Luke just didn't seem to be as important and I remember thinking 'why are they giving Jane so much screen time? What about Luke and the others?' and it wasn't just a little bit of screen time, it was lots as if they were quickly slotting in as much time as they could with Jane where it wasn't even subtle, and I initially thought "Oh maybe they're just setting her up for Season 3, like maybe she's going to come back and that's why they had her and Luke pork because that's another character to her to know." and now I look back and realize "Oh, so you were rushing all this in with Jane for a surprise that didn't need to be there and had to rewrite a character who originally you wrote cold and who barely said anything to Clem in Episode 3, bravo." I don't hate Jane, I just hate they put her in Luke's place when they had already established him and by then the story had progressed too far to include her as a key player. And I guess I'm annoyed too, because I would've liked to of seen her come back and not potentially be dead now, which sucks
The sibling thing they attempted with Jane and Clementine too, it just never resonated as strong. In fact if you removed Jane's sister back story on her sister, there would be little sibling dynamic between them. That's what I really liked about Luke out of most the cast, he really came across as this older brother to me and you didn't need about a tragic past on him with a dead sister or family to make that connection, it was right there on screen and it worked so well, and that's probably why cutting him out of it and putting Jane there felt secondary or third in compasion to me. And ask yourself: how often do you see that in a game with an older brother and younger sister type bond? It was really refreshing and I wish they'd stuck with that and used Episode 4 to develop Luke instead and keep him to a final decision between him and Kenny, however that decision would've played out or if anybody died or not [I always thought it'd be like the table scene, where you'd just have to go to one of them, I never imagined anything violent like knives being stabbed into chests.]
I think if they had stuck with that, it would've made the game for me and I think lot of others too, since that Luke vs Kenny business everybody was hyped for it. The whole thing now just leaves me in disbelief sometimes in a sort of "what the hell were they thinking?" because picking between Jane and Kenny was like picking between two similar people, because both will do what they have to in order to survive. It would've been the same if it'd been between picking two people similar like Luke; there's no tough decision it's just as case of "I don't know"and that was honestly how I was. I didn't care when that final decision came up, I found it harder to decide who to sit with at a table in Episode 2 than who to save in that moment, I just didn't care anymore because they had taken out what I'd seen as one of the important parts of the equation. It'd be like in Season 1, you as Lee bonded with Clementine, and then suddenly boom she's dead and you got Duck. Remember Duck? You bonded with him so well don't remember? Who cares about Clem when you got a Ducky.
Choosing between Kenny and Luke would've felt more like picking between family and what kind of path do I want for my Clementine and A.J until the next season 'survival or humanity' and I think that would've been a more interesting subject to talk about with people in what they viewed was more important to have in a zombie apocalypse and the pros and cons of these characters.
But you're right, Luke started changing a bit too, like he was in the background at times when he would've said something. Like when Arvo is gettin beaten up, Luke says nothing. Now I know Luke would no way just stay silent about that, he would've spoken up. It seemed like at times too Mike took most of his lines of protest on that, or even Jane appearing shocked over stabbing a man in the neck who was shooting at the group, when just two episodes before she shot Troy in the dick for threatening to do the same thing and didn't flinch. the whole "I tried to pretend it was a walker" line, seemed like something that could've come straight out Luke's mouth rather than hers.
I'm going on a bit though, sorry. But yeah the whole Season was just inconsistent, at least in comparing it to the first two episodes. But I'm glad to have been of help to you
I do wish they could've developed Luke's character better and if he'd really had to die, I wish it could've been in some sort of decision with Kenny instead of in that stupid lake...is it sad I still hope he's going to be okay? XD people go ice fishing during an apocalypse right?
Yep they do it all the time, Luke's fine. :P
I always agree with everything you say in your posts, your interpretations and summaries are very good.
Thank you
Oh lawd shit bout to go down!!