I think listening to the fans too much can be a bad move too. It's supposed to be the apocalypse world, so some unexpected deaths are fine by me, they're better than if the company starts doing what the fans want and just keep the character alive but then have no idea what to do with him.
Not hardly. Killing a fan favorite seconds into the season was a bad move. Had him and Christa replaced Al and Becca it would have been more emotional and had more of an effect if Carver killed Omid
These "xxx's death was stupid" my God, I hope these comments don't influence the writers to do something stupid, you shouldn't encourage these comments or the writers will get pressured and cater to the fans' demands so much that they'll keep a character alive and unnecessarily drag him through the story without knowing what to do with him anymore. It's the apocalypse, there are going to be heartbreaks and sudden deaths, the writers can't give you everything, or it may get ugly, please just deal with it.
Doing something no one wants that insults the character and writes them off in a way that wasn't deserving would be an even worse move. Omid and Christa would have fit like Cinderella's slipper in Alvin and Becca's position with a few things tweaked. It would have been a conclusive to both characters and their deaths would have been much more effective and emotional
I think listening to the fans too much can be a bad move too. It's supposed to be the apocalypse world, so some unexpected deaths are fine b… morey me, they're better than if the company starts doing what the fans want and just keep the character alive but then have no idea what to do with him.
"wasn't deserving"
This is what I'm talking about. Nobody 'deserves' any kind of deaths here just because fans like them more or less, I'm not asking that Lee should have died by falling to his death while jumping to a rooftop, but you guys ask for too much, the way they're doing things right now look fine by me. What if they listened to you about keeping Omid alive and then have no idea what to do with him just because he doesn't fit in their story anymore, cause that's probably what's going to happen if they just keep him alive because it brings $$$. Then you'll go and whine "They should have given Omid a bigger role, blah blah" Stop overdoing the "he deserves this, she didn't deserve that" I like how the some deaths/events are unpredictable even for a fairly loved character, and I'm sure you do too.
Doing something no one wants that insults the character and writes them off in a way that wasn't deserving would be an even worse move. Omid… more and Christa would have fit like Cinderella's slipper in Alvin and Becca's position with a few things tweaked. It would have been a conclusive to both characters and their deaths would have been much more effective and emotional
Omid wasn't the only shitty death this season Nick, Luke, Sarah, but it was the most anticlimatic. I talked about out this unpredictable thing in the context of Kenny vs Jane. That was a terrible move. It came out of no where. Luke vs Kenny was deffinitley their first thought. Almost ruining a story for the sake of being unpredictable is ridiculous. Thats your definition of fine?
"wasn't deserving"
This is what I'm talking about. Nobody 'deserves' any kind of deaths here just because fans like them more or less, I'm … morenot asking that Lee should have died by falling to his death while jumping to a rooftop, but you guys ask for too much, the way they're doing things right now look fine by me. What if they listened to you about keeping Omid alive and then have no idea what to do with him just because he doesn't fit in their story anymore, cause that's probably what's going to happen if they just keep him alive because it brings $$$. Then you'll go and whine "They should have given Omid a bigger role, blah blah" Stop overdoing the "he deserves this, she didn't deserve that" I like how the some deaths/events are unpredictable even for a fairly loved character, and I'm sure you do too.
By pointing out a character's death is stupid, people aren't saying "Bring this character back to life right now" they are saying "If you're going to kill off characters, make sure it is done in a way that has an effect on the plot instead of just throwing them out because you can't think of anything better to do with them or you want to shock the audience" It may be an apocalypse, but this is also a story and the 'anyone can die' theme is pretty much a given, so there should be more purpose to killing off a character besides just that.
These "xxx's death was stupid" my God, I hope these comments don't influence the writers to do something stupid, you shouldn't encourage the… morese comments or the writers will get pressured and cater to the fans' demands so much that they'll keep a character alive and unnecessarily drag him through the story without knowing what to do with him anymore. It's the apocalypse, there are going to be heartbreaks and sudden deaths, the writers can't give you everything, or it may get ugly, please just deal with it.
Maybe they were meant to die there, not just because "they wanted to throw them out", it's the apocalypse, some characters dying suddenly is possible, now I wouldn't like say Lee to die because he fell off a roof, but you guys ask for too much. I'm pretty sure if main characters keep on living you guys will complain "Totally predictable, blah blah" TTG is good, but they're not good enough to just cater to the sudden demands of people who have no idea what it is like to be in their position, and instantly make an epic story out of that. I too wished Molly had stuck around, and I still hope she comes back, but I don't easily label her leaving the group as "disappointing writing, wasting so much potential, the fans don't deserve that"
By pointing out a character's death is stupid, people aren't saying "Bring this character back to life right now" they are saying "If you're… more going to kill off characters, make sure it is done in a way that has an effect on the plot instead of just throwing them out because you can't think of anything better to do with them or you want to shock the audience" It may be an apocalypse, but this is also a story and the 'anyone can die' theme is pretty much a given, so there should be more purpose to killing off a character besides just that.
Maybe, but Carver had no need to kill Omid and we wouldn't have had the whole Rebecca baby thing which was why Carver came after the cabin group in the first place. It was good to set the tone for season 2, even if it did leave you feeling sick.
I would have prefered it if Christa had been shot and you were left with Omid. Or maybe your earlier interactions with them could dictate who went in there to try and save you. I don't know- obviously I didn't like Omid dying, but they couldn't keep too many of season 2's characters alive because they wanted to introduce you to a whole new bunch of people.
Not hardly. Killing a fan favorite seconds into the season was a bad move. Had him and Christa replaced Al and Becca it would have been more emotional and had more of an effect if Carver killed Omid
Kenny V Jane was different- all throughout the Season they'd built up a sort of rivalry between Luke and Kenny, and then all of a sudden it changed. Omid's death came right at the beginning of the season, so his death couldn't be anticlimactic because the season hadn't even got started when he died. His death was unpredictable, yes, but at least they hadn't made him a central character and then killed him off (like they did with Luke). As I said, it set the tone for season 2 and it was, in my opinion, a good way to open up season 2 (obviously I'm sad he died, but like Luke I wouldn't want him to become a central character only to be suddenly dropped). The Kenny V Jane and Omid's death scenarios are different things.
I agree completely that the whole Kenny V Jane thing was ridiculous- I am yet to come across one person on this forum who's said they liked it.
Omid wasn't the only shitty death this season Nick, Luke, Sarah, but it was the most anticlimatic. I talked about out this unpredictable thi… moreng in the context of Kenny vs Jane. That was a terrible move. It came out of no where. Luke vs Kenny was deffinitley their first thought. Almost ruining a story for the sake of being unpredictable is ridiculous. Thats your definition of fine?
True, but after the huge role he had in season 1 I wouldn't want to see him in a "caretaker", secondary role. Plus, it'd be very hard to pull off if he wasn't the main character- the decisions you made as Lee would have to (somehow) carry over into Lee's character, and the Lee of season 2 could be completely different to the Lee of season 1.
I would save Lee since I really liked him and he was a great leader, I wanted him to look after Clementine in S2 but, like you said his deat… moreh went well with the finale so I would save Luke since his death was kind of ridiculous, also I just want to see him back again and I think he would be a good 'caretaker' for Clementine and AJ
Good points there. I think everyone liked Pete, and his death really saddened me.
It would have been good if you had to choose between Nick and Pete. I don't think I'd bring him back for Season 3 but if i had had a choice between him and Nick I would've chosen Pete in a heartbeat. Shame.
I think I would want to save Pete. I agree with you that Luke died pointlessly, and his death was a disservice, but I think having Pete arou… morend might've solved some of the issues the group had. Pete seemed to be a smart, rational guy who thought things through, and I think he and Kenny might've gotten along. The two of them could've become friends, and perhaps Pete might've been able to talk some sense into him when he was acting irrational. I also just really liked Pete, as he was the first one who trusted Clem, and stood up for her. He was a really good guy, and I think he had the potential to become somewhat like Lee to Clem, a fatherly figure, as well as a rational friend to Kenny. Things might've gone a bit smoother with the group if Pete had lived.
Yeah, I really liked him. It was really saddening thta he died the way he did. I would've prefereed if he, or Clem, had at least tried to cut the leg off, maybe rip some strips of cloth from of their shirts and wrap it tightly around before they cut it off, so the blood flow stopped.
Good points there. I think everyone liked Pete, and his death really saddened me.
It would have been good if you had to choose between Ni… moreck and Pete. I don't think I'd bring him back for Season 3 but if i had had a choice between him and Nick I would've chosen Pete in a heartbeat. Shame.
True, but after the huge role he had in season 1 I wouldn't want to see him in a "caretaker", secondary role. Plus, it'd be very hard to pul… morel off if he wasn't the main character- the decisions you made as Lee would have to (somehow) carry over into Lee's character, and the Lee of season 2 could be completely different to the Lee of season 1.
I didn't like the way her death was so determinant. Sarita...well, she was bit and going to die, but at least they could have let Sarah live into episode 5, and maybe she could have died there somehow. Maybe she could have found Mike and them leaving instead of Clem, and then Arvo might have shot her. She was destined to die, but killing her twice in one episode? That was too obviously deterministic.
I'd save Sarah, she got an illogical second death in the same episode she deemed the determinant status like Sarita and TellTale's staff just laughed her death up with that IGNorant person.
I agree with your point, but I think your over estimating the power of this forum a bit:)
Telltale are not going to be influenced by a few people on a forum talking about whether they liked something or not. They know what they're doing, and are gambling with too much money to start listening to fans. By starting this thread I wasn't criticizing the writers at all, I was just asking a general question and of course I don't want them bringing back characters because of fans pressure- if you look at my posts, I'm a huge advocate for not bringing people back from the dead all the time (eg; Christa). I don't mind people dying, if they don't it'll ruin the realism.
I would only complain about Luke's death because of the way they built he and Kenny's rivalry up and then suddenly dropped it- it was as if the writers had suddenly changed their minds and tried to somehow make Jane Kenny's rival in 2 episodes. That was poor writing- if Luke's death had been done better then I wouldn't mind, but the fact that it was so poorly done is my major complaint.
Also, no one has been saying that they would want such and such to come back- this discussion is about "if you could save one character"- it's a general question, not a petition to Telltale demanding that they bring back Luke or Nick or whoever. And besides, the whole point of this forum is so that people can discuss TWD, not so the writers can see what we all want. They make the games, they choose what it's about, and all we do is argue amongst ourselves about whether we like it or not. We have no say in how the game is made, and in my opinion that's a very good thing.
On this forum there has been a bit of an uproar about them making a Minecraft game. But will they listen? No. Why? Because they've got a plan and their going to stick to it, no matter what other people think. If they have the confidence to make a game that no one asked for, then I have confidence that they know what they're doing. The same applies to TWD.
These "xxx's death was stupid" my God, I hope these comments don't influence the writers to do something stupid, you shouldn't encourage the… morese comments or the writers will get pressured and cater to the fans' demands so much that they'll keep a character alive and unnecessarily drag him through the story without knowing what to do with him anymore. It's the apocalypse, there are going to be heartbreaks and sudden deaths, the writers can't give you everything, or it may get ugly, please just deal with it.
Why Molly? I mean she was okay, but I wasn't that bothered about her.
We are consumers of the game, they are the producers of the content. We have no say, will never have any say, and that's the way it should be with TWD. They know what they're doing.
Can I also point out that no one is asking for anything here; this discussion is about "if" you could bring a person back, and people are discussing this topic knowing that of course they're is no way they'll actually come back. No one is directly asking Telltale to bring back Luke or Nick or whoever. No one is asking for too much, no one is asking for anything. They are just stating an opinion which they know will never effect the writers and will never be a possibility. An opinion isn't automatically a request!
Maybe they were meant to die there, not just because "they wanted to throw them out", it's the apocalypse, some characters dying suddenly is… more possible, now I wouldn't like say Lee to die because he fell off a roof, but you guys ask for too much. I'm pretty sure if main characters keep on living you guys will complain "Totally predictable, blah blah" TTG is good, but they're not good enough to just cater to the sudden demands of people who have no idea what it is like to be in their position, and instantly make an epic story out of that. I too wished Molly had stuck around, and I still hope she comes back, but I don't easily label her leaving the group as "disappointing writing, wasting so much potential, the fans don't deserve that"
It didn't feel right that Sarah wasn't listening to Bonnie telling her to go inside, despite the fact she listens to Bonnie calling her if Mike helps Kenny. The story forced her death but I think she could've survived the whole season, she wanted to survive but TellTaleGames never gave her that chance because they wanted to kill her off as they've said in an interview -.-.
I didn't like the way her death was so determinant. Sarita...well, she was bit and going to die, but at least they could have let Sarah live… more into episode 5, and maybe she could have died there somehow. Maybe she could have found Mike and them leaving instead of Clem, and then Arvo might have shot her. She was destined to die, but killing her twice in one episode? That was too obviously deterministic.
Why Molly? I mean she was okay, but I wasn't that bothered about her.
We are consumers of the game, they are the producers of the content… more. We have no say, will never have any say, and that's the way it should be with TWD. They know what they're doing.
Can I also point out that no one is asking for anything here; this discussion is about "if" you could bring a person back, and people are discussing this topic knowing that of course they're is no way they'll actually come back. No one is directly asking Telltale to bring back Luke or Nick or whoever. No one is asking for too much, no one is asking for anything. They are just stating an opinion which they know will never effect the writers and will never be a possibility. An opinion isn't automatically a request!
Like I said they could have altered it. Carver could show an interest in Christa and see a need to get rid of Omid because he's "weak" and the child would need a strong father. Carver killing Omid would have been an awesome introduction, like when Negan killed Glenn. I didn't give a damn about Alvin and we didn't have enough time to get to know him. The only problem I could see was if Kenny named him OJ. Now that can cause a problem.
Maybe, but Carver had no need to kill Omid and we wouldn't have had the whole Rebecca baby thing which was why Carver came after the cabin g… moreroup in the first place. It was good to set the tone for season 2, even if it did leave you feeling sick.
I would have prefered it if Christa had been shot and you were left with Omid. Or maybe your earlier interactions with them could dictate who went in there to try and save you. I don't know- obviously I didn't like Omid dying, but they couldn't keep too many of season 2's characters alive because they wanted to introduce you to a whole new bunch of people.
Well, everything about the game you talk with other people is a discussion. And I don't believe that if a new fan favorite appears, fans won't start to demand that another Luke or Nick doesn't happen.
I agree with your point, but I think your over estimating the power of this forum a bit:)
Telltale are not going to be influenced by a fe… morew people on a forum talking about whether they liked something or not. They know what they're doing, and are gambling with too much money to start listening to fans. By starting this thread I wasn't criticizing the writers at all, I was just asking a general question and of course I don't want them bringing back characters because of fans pressure- if you look at my posts, I'm a huge advocate for not bringing people back from the dead all the time (eg; Christa). I don't mind people dying, if they don't it'll ruin the realism.
I would only complain about Luke's death because of the way they built he and Kenny's rivalry up and then suddenly dropped it- it was as if the writers had suddenly changed their minds and tried to somehow make Jane Kenny's rival in 2 episodes. That was poor writing- if Luke's dea… [view original content]
I agree with you that Lee had a hero's death. His story ended up there. I would say Katjaa, she was always nice and if she would have lived, Kenny wouldn't be so broken.
Comments
1: Doug
2: Lilly
3: Duck
I'd save Sarah. She had so much character development and it all went to waste.
Second one would be Nick for the same reason.
Jaime of course
#UnpopularChoice
I think listening to the fans too much can be a bad move too. It's supposed to be the apocalypse world, so some unexpected deaths are fine by me, they're better than if the company starts doing what the fans want and just keep the character alive but then have no idea what to do with him.
These "xxx's death was stupid" my God, I hope these comments don't influence the writers to do something stupid, you shouldn't encourage these comments or the writers will get pressured and cater to the fans' demands so much that they'll keep a character alive and unnecessarily drag him through the story without knowing what to do with him anymore. It's the apocalypse, there are going to be heartbreaks and sudden deaths, the writers can't give you everything, or it may get ugly, please just deal with it.
Doing something no one wants that insults the character and writes them off in a way that wasn't deserving would be an even worse move. Omid and Christa would have fit like Cinderella's slipper in Alvin and Becca's position with a few things tweaked. It would have been a conclusive to both characters and their deaths would have been much more effective and emotional
"wasn't deserving"
This is what I'm talking about. Nobody 'deserves' any kind of deaths here just because fans like them more or less, I'm not asking that Lee should have died by falling to his death while jumping to a rooftop, but you guys ask for too much, the way they're doing things right now look fine by me. What if they listened to you about keeping Omid alive and then have no idea what to do with him just because he doesn't fit in their story anymore, cause that's probably what's going to happen if they just keep him alive because it brings $$$. Then you'll go and whine "They should have given Omid a bigger role, blah blah" Stop overdoing the "he deserves this, she didn't deserve that" I like how the some deaths/events are unpredictable even for a fairly loved character, and I'm sure you do too.
Omid wasn't the only shitty death this season Nick, Luke, Sarah, but it was the most anticlimatic. I talked about out this unpredictable thing in the context of Kenny vs Jane. That was a terrible move. It came out of no where. Luke vs Kenny was deffinitley their first thought. Almost ruining a story for the sake of being unpredictable is ridiculous. Thats your definition of fine?
By pointing out a character's death is stupid, people aren't saying "Bring this character back to life right now" they are saying "If you're going to kill off characters, make sure it is done in a way that has an effect on the plot instead of just throwing them out because you can't think of anything better to do with them or you want to shock the audience" It may be an apocalypse, but this is also a story and the 'anyone can die' theme is pretty much a given, so there should be more purpose to killing off a character besides just that.
Maybe they were meant to die there, not just because "they wanted to throw them out", it's the apocalypse, some characters dying suddenly is possible, now I wouldn't like say Lee to die because he fell off a roof, but you guys ask for too much. I'm pretty sure if main characters keep on living you guys will complain "Totally predictable, blah blah" TTG is good, but they're not good enough to just cater to the sudden demands of people who have no idea what it is like to be in their position, and instantly make an epic story out of that. I too wished Molly had stuck around, and I still hope she comes back, but I don't easily label her leaving the group as "disappointing writing, wasting so much potential, the fans don't deserve that"
If I was to exclude Lee, I'd bring back Chuck. He was one wise old man I liked a lot.
Maybe, but Carver had no need to kill Omid and we wouldn't have had the whole Rebecca baby thing which was why Carver came after the cabin group in the first place. It was good to set the tone for season 2, even if it did leave you feeling sick.
I would have prefered it if Christa had been shot and you were left with Omid. Or maybe your earlier interactions with them could dictate who went in there to try and save you. I don't know- obviously I didn't like Omid dying, but they couldn't keep too many of season 2's characters alive because they wanted to introduce you to a whole new bunch of people.
Yeah, he was.
Kenny V Jane was different- all throughout the Season they'd built up a sort of rivalry between Luke and Kenny, and then all of a sudden it changed. Omid's death came right at the beginning of the season, so his death couldn't be anticlimactic because the season hadn't even got started when he died. His death was unpredictable, yes, but at least they hadn't made him a central character and then killed him off (like they did with Luke). As I said, it set the tone for season 2 and it was, in my opinion, a good way to open up season 2 (obviously I'm sad he died, but like Luke I wouldn't want him to become a central character only to be suddenly dropped). The Kenny V Jane and Omid's death scenarios are different things.
I agree completely that the whole Kenny V Jane thing was ridiculous- I am yet to come across one person on this forum who's said they liked it.
True, but after the huge role he had in season 1 I wouldn't want to see him in a "caretaker", secondary role. Plus, it'd be very hard to pull off if he wasn't the main character- the decisions you made as Lee would have to (somehow) carry over into Lee's character, and the Lee of season 2 could be completely different to the Lee of season 1.
Good points there. I think everyone liked Pete, and his death really saddened me.
It would have been good if you had to choose between Nick and Pete. I don't think I'd bring him back for Season 3 but if i had had a choice between him and Nick I would've chosen Pete in a heartbeat. Shame.
Yeah, I really liked him. It was really saddening thta he died the way he did. I would've prefereed if he, or Clem, had at least tried to cut the leg off, maybe rip some strips of cloth from of their shirts and wrap it tightly around before they cut it off, so the blood flow stopped.
He had a lot of potential, like I said.
That's why I chose Luke:P
I didn't like the way her death was so determinant. Sarita...well, she was bit and going to die, but at least they could have let Sarah live into episode 5, and maybe she could have died there somehow. Maybe she could have found Mike and them leaving instead of Clem, and then Arvo might have shot her. She was destined to die, but killing her twice in one episode? That was too obviously deterministic.
Sorry, who is she again? Do you mean Jane?
I agree with your point, but I think your over estimating the power of this forum a bit:)
Telltale are not going to be influenced by a few people on a forum talking about whether they liked something or not. They know what they're doing, and are gambling with too much money to start listening to fans. By starting this thread I wasn't criticizing the writers at all, I was just asking a general question and of course I don't want them bringing back characters because of fans pressure- if you look at my posts, I'm a huge advocate for not bringing people back from the dead all the time (eg; Christa). I don't mind people dying, if they don't it'll ruin the realism.
I would only complain about Luke's death because of the way they built he and Kenny's rivalry up and then suddenly dropped it- it was as if the writers had suddenly changed their minds and tried to somehow make Jane Kenny's rival in 2 episodes. That was poor writing- if Luke's death had been done better then I wouldn't mind, but the fact that it was so poorly done is my major complaint.
Also, no one has been saying that they would want such and such to come back- this discussion is about "if you could save one character"- it's a general question, not a petition to Telltale demanding that they bring back Luke or Nick or whoever. And besides, the whole point of this forum is so that people can discuss TWD, not so the writers can see what we all want. They make the games, they choose what it's about, and all we do is argue amongst ourselves about whether we like it or not. We have no say in how the game is made, and in my opinion that's a very good thing.
On this forum there has been a bit of an uproar about them making a Minecraft game. But will they listen? No. Why? Because they've got a plan and their going to stick to it, no matter what other people think. If they have the confidence to make a game that no one asked for, then I have confidence that they know what they're doing. The same applies to TWD.
Why Molly? I mean she was okay, but I wasn't that bothered about her.
We are consumers of the game, they are the producers of the content. We have no say, will never have any say, and that's the way it should be with TWD. They know what they're doing.
Can I also point out that no one is asking for anything here; this discussion is about "if" you could bring a person back, and people are discussing this topic knowing that of course they're is no way they'll actually come back. No one is directly asking Telltale to bring back Luke or Nick or whoever. No one is asking for too much, no one is asking for anything. They are just stating an opinion which they know will never effect the writers and will never be a possibility. An opinion isn't automatically a request!
He was good. A shame he died so early
It didn't feel right that Sarah wasn't listening to Bonnie telling her to go inside, despite the fact she listens to Bonnie calling her if Mike helps Kenny. The story forced her death but I think she could've survived the whole season, she wanted to survive but TellTaleGames never gave her that chance because they wanted to kill her off as they've said in an interview -.-.
So you really think next time a fan favorite character comes fans won't pressure TTG enough so that another Luke doesn't happen ?
Like I said they could have altered it. Carver could show an interest in Christa and see a need to get rid of Omid because he's "weak" and the child would need a strong father. Carver killing Omid would have been an awesome introduction, like when Negan killed Glenn. I didn't give a damn about Alvin and we didn't have enough time to get to know him. The only problem I could see was if Kenny named him OJ. Now that can cause a problem.
yas jane's sister she's always crying about...
Well, everything about the game you talk with other people is a discussion. And I don't believe that if a new fan favorite appears, fans won't start to demand that another Luke or Nick doesn't happen.
Season one: Doug, Carley and Ben
Season two: Nick
I agree with you that Lee had a hero's death. His story ended up there. I would say Katjaa, she was always nice and if she would have lived, Kenny wouldn't be so broken.