I'm going to say I don't care whether or not she makes an appearance or is even a part of the story. In season 2 I enjoyed the other characters more than I liked Clem, they were all much more interesting in my opinion. I wouldn't mind seeing some new characters that could run into older characters, because to me this series doesn't rely on Clem or any other character, it's about everyone.
I wouldn't mind seeing her but I just don't care who our characters are, so long as the story is good, I'm satisfied.
I agree with the OP that Clem should be the the primary character for Season 3, and beyond... the fact she is still so young means the window is there for many more stories. I think Clem, like other gaming greats such as Lara Croft and Shepard (Mass Effect), are characters people/fans get easily attached to, and I, personally, think writing her out, or not using her, would be a mistake because fans of her story could lose interest in TWD. Just imo.
So, anyway, when do you think we can expect Season 3?
So would I... If they continue the 2-3 year jumps, for example, per-season we could follow Clem through her teens and in to adulthood, like I said, the windows is there for potentially lots more stories following Clem. The one character I would do away with is the baby, I think having that in the next game will hinder what you (or they) will be able to do... I think it would also be cool to have a more identifiable choice for where you take Clem... does she become more of a good character thinking of others and helping out like Lee, or does she go down a darker road, for example, like Carver. (Personally, I tried to take her down a darker road in one playthru to see what would happen, but the choices in the game didn't make it all that easy)
Wait so you saying that you expect a story, which is based off an unrealistic event, to be realistic? Not only that but you also believe the characters of this unrealistic story based of an unrealistic event should behave realistically?
I think what you're saying is that it's not scientifically possible for an 11 year old girl to mature as much as Clem has, even in the apoca… morelypse, I guess now you're making some sense. Ok, I don't know about a fact like that and you're probably the first person I've seen who has made this argument, so I don't know how to respond here. But 99% of the fans didn't find anything scientifically wrong with Clem, so you could be just another poster I'm wasting my time with.
Yes. Why wouldn't I? Realism after an unrealistic event. You make is sound like it's weird or impossible or shouldn't be expected, I find that peculiar.
Wait so you saying that you expect a story, which is based off an unrealistic event, to be realistic? Not only that but you also believe the characters of this unrealistic story based of an unrealistic event should behave realistically?
Again expecting something realistic in an unrealistic storyline is kinda strange don't you think? They're giving Clem a behavior and personality that's keeping her alive. Realistically speaking, if Clem's behavior mimicked the average 11 yr old it would be unrealistic for her to still be alive.
I definitely expect realism. Realism from a game based on the realism of people in an unreal apocalyptic event. By your logic I shouldn't pl… moreay Game of Thrones either because it has dragons and those aren't realistic. The title has little to do with it.
I don't think they were trying to make her an adult. I think they were trying to make her a PC who would be fun and eventful to play as and by trying to accomplish this goal they prompted her to the status of an adult-like PC. One capable of doing whatever the writers felt would be "bad ass" of "totally rad." Which isn't what I was looking for, wasn't realistic, and was wholly baseline or below in my honest opinion.
No not impossible but just not common. And when realism is introduced into an unrealistic scenario it's never to the extent where you can imagine something like that actually being possible. Do you see what I'm saying? I honestly have no idea how else to word it lol. I'm sorry if it doesn't makes sense. I guess it's just me but when I'm playing something unrealistic I never expect realism.
Yes. Why wouldn't I? Realism after an unrealistic event. You make is sound like it's weird or impossible or shouldn't be expected, I find that peculiar.
You do realize the fallacy in your argument, right? This experience takes place in our world. When the unrealistic event takes place in the world we know then why wouldn't it be held to the same principles of our world? The entire zombie, and normally the entire post apocalyptic genre, are actually so largely popular because it doesn't alter the people and the scientific laws that we know. So we get to see how we as individuals and groups and whatnot would react to the situation realistically. So yes, I expect realism.
No not impossible but just not common. And when realism is introduced into an unrealistic scenario it's never to the extent where you can im… moreagine something like that actually being possible. Do you see what I'm saying? I honestly have no idea how else to word it lol. I'm sorry if it doesn't makes sense. I guess it's just me but when I'm playing something unrealistic I never expect realism.
Again expecting something realistic in an unrealistic storyline is kinda strange don't you think? They're giving Clem a behavior and persona… morelity that's keeping her alive. Realistically speaking, if Clem's behavior mimicked the average 11 yr old it would be unrealistic for her to still be alive.
"why wouldn't it be held to the same principles of our world?"
Well maybe because we don't have dead bodies walking around and attacking people?
"it doesn't alter the people and the scientific laws that we know."
Yeah uh I'm pretty sure, scientifically speaking, the human brain stops functioning after death. So yeah you're completely wrong when you say stories within this genre don't alter scientific law. It's the very opposite. This genre and other sci fi genres are popular because they DO alter people and scientific laws.
You do realize the fallacy in your argument, right? This experience takes place in our world. When the unrealistic event takes place in the … moreworld we know then why wouldn't it be held to the same principles of our world? The entire zombie, and normally the entire post apocalyptic genre, are actually so largely popular because it doesn't alter the people and the scientific laws that we know. So we get to see how we as individuals and groups and whatnot would react to the situation realistically. So yes, I expect realism.
Simply because you responded to me in like 5 different spots. And yes it would be unrealistic for an 11 yr old to behave like a child and survive in this scenario. That might explain why there's aren't too many children in general in the walking dead storyline.
Why do you have this conversation going on in like 5 different spots? 1 is fine.
It wouldn't be unrealistic for an 11 year old to be alive. The things she does are not realistic.
Simply because you responded to me in like 5 different spots. And yes it would be unrealistic for an 11 yr old to behave like a child and su… morervive in this scenario. That might explain why there's aren't too many children in general in the walking dead storyline.
"why wouldn't it be held to the same principles of our world?"
Well maybe because we don't have dead bodies walking around and attacking … morepeople?
"it doesn't alter the people and the scientific laws that we know."
Yeah uh I'm pretty sure, scientifically speaking, the human brain stops functioning after death. So yeah you're completely wrong when you say stories within this genre don't alter scientific law. It's the very opposite. This genre and other sci fi genres are popular because they DO alter people and scientific laws.
I'm saying right now that the baby will have some role for Christa when we find her and it will be a character which will eventually die to add in some drama. There is no way they will jump 15+ years in the future just to play with the baby.
I would like to think they would do a follow up episode like the one they did with season 1 and curtail all the choices made and continue with season 3, that's a great way to continue I personally think.
We've had father figures... mother figures (somewhat)... what about a friend? Clementine is one tough cookie, and extremely unique. But what if the new protagonist is a kid in the same situation? I understand that we've already played from the kid angle, but maybe if there is a short time-jump so Clem is a little older and the new child protagonist is older as well, it might interesting to see how preteens, who don't know what it's like to fall in love and just be hormonal and young, handle the apocalypse. Maybe Clem herself could fall in love? Or that crappy 'love' you experience when you're thirteen.
The first few episodes might be just about the new boy (or girl?) and how life has been for them in this hell of a world, and then they meet up? I don't know about you guys, but I think watching two clever thirteen/fourteen year-old best friends, slicing and hacking their way through life, would be super cool.
Enough father figures. Besides, if Clem had any family left she would have mentioned them at some point. This is a real ass-pull.
Chris… moreta was pretty much third-place in terms of the bond she left with Clem, even though the writers never really seemed to acknowledge that the woman literally kept Clem alive far longer than anyone else so far.
i completely agree, The end of Season 1 opened a door for season 2 to continue as clem.
season 2 was great, and agree with you 100%, it would be only fair for us to continue playing as clem, now that the gamers feel so attached to the character.
i want to take part of the decision clem makes as a teenager, and how these will continue to mold her to the adult she will become.
I love the walking dead series Telltale has given us, and i cant wait for the 3rd season, Clem has to be the main character no matter what.
Hehe, yeah, the only thing I really like about it is this...
"We hope players feel like Clementine has grown significantly over the season and she is now ready for the world, even if that world is harsh and has forced Clem to leave her childhood behind."
Makes me think she'll be returning in some form, but maybe that's wishful thinking.
I've sorta just been lurking the community occasionally rather than joining in, don't have much time to post now that I've found a job. :P Will probably always be around to some extent up until Season 3 when I'll be super active again.
I don't agree with you on that.That's exactly why it changes. Because those that stay alive can contribute to a group in some way and know how to protect themselves. A child isn't always inferior. Depending on what the subject is, maybe usually, but Clementine has shown herself to be even more useful than any adult. You can't think of the traditional adult/child roles of the world before it went to shit. Two years later...all that matters is how much someone can contribute. Clementine is alive still because the people around her don't treat her only as some helpless child that they have to protect. They want to protect her, but they rely on her as well. The people that stay alive are those that utilize every resource they can and that includes human resources--of course you wouldn't want to count on 8 yr old Clementine save your life, but 11 yr old Clem would be great to have around. Clem can tell Walter that everyone underestimates her because of her size, to which he candidly says she probably uses that to her advantage...which we've seen demonstrated a few times. Not every child would be completely helpless or useless...the ones that are, as we've seen, don't last very long....Clem couldn't rely on bruts protect herself, but being smart is a big part of staying alive...and Clem isn't like other kids in the Walking Dead...she was orphaned at a young age and while she's had adult role models and caretakers (Lee, Christa and Omid), she essentially had to raise herself. Anyone in that position wouldn't behave like a normal child-for better or worse...in Clementine's case it was for better. She's emotionally resilient...and like Luke said about Jane, "she's tempered by hardship"...where other people crack under the pressure and get either themselves and/or others killed b/c of their post traumatic negligence. She's always been the youngest person surrounded by adults, which is going to mature one faster...there are many things that make people different from one another, but ultimately we're all human beings, right? Same concept in the walking dead except all that really matter is how useful someone is. Obviously you wouldn't want to rely on someone like Clem from season one, but because she's looked at as just a short person, that's allowed her to stay alive. Plenty of children around the world learn martial arts or are smarter than their parents, and shouldn't be classified as inferior. Inferiority depends on the context at hand. And you may want to use a child as a last resort, but not with that rag-tag group of crippled fucks.
People take that way to literally. You aren't just alive. There are many things that make you different from every other living person in th… moree world and that doesn't change because it's easier to die. A child is inferior to an adult. No sane person would put important decisions or actions in the hands of a child unless it was suited for then (small spaces) or absolutely no other options (.... more small spaces).
I don't agree with you on that.That's exactly why it changes.
So Carver, the baby, Kenny, Lee, Christa, Brenda St. John, and Clementine are all the same (at their respective "alive" times)? I don't think so. To that extent all the frogs and horses and deer still alive are no different than Clementine because they are still living. That is simply not true.
Because those that stay alive can contribute to a group in some way and know how to protect themselves.
In different ways, and not even always.
A child isn't always inferior.
Not always. When it's a single child surrounded by 5 or 6 completely capable adults then, yes, they are.
Depending on what the subject is, maybe usually, but Clementine has shown herself to be even more useful than any adult.
Right, but only because the writing team could not put you into the shoes of an child effectively. Every time she is alone she nearly dies or screws up in a major way, yet as soon as she is in a group she is the most effective member at virtually everything? How 'bout, no.
. You can't think of the traditional adult/child roles of the world before it went to shit. Two years later...all that matters is how much someone can contribute.
Yes and no. If they can contribute then that's awesome, but to think a child can contribute more than a variety of adults is asinine.
Clementine is alive still because the people around her don't treat her only as some helpless child that they have to protect. They want to protect her, but they rely on her as well.
I agree with this. There is a huge difference between sheltering someone and having them do most everything that needs doing, though.
The people that stay alive are those that utilize every resource they can and that includes human resources--of course you wouldn't want to count on 8 yr old Clementine save your life, but 11 yr old Clem would be great to have around.
I wouldn't want my life in the hands of an 8 year old or an 11 year old. Utilizing them when it is prudent or worthwhile is one thing, but another to utilize them for everything (for the sake of a more interesting PC mind you).
Clem can tell Walter that everyone underestimates her because of her size, to which he candidly says she probably uses that to her advantage...which we've seen demonstrated a few times.
Yes, more empty words to make her heroic venture seem more tame and realistic.
Not every child would be completely helpless or useless...the ones that are, as we've seen, don't last very long....Clem couldn't rely on bruts protect herself, but being smart is a big part of staying alive...and Clem isn't like other kids in the Walking Dead...she was orphaned at a young age and while she's had adult role models and caretakers (Lee, Christa and Omid), she essentially had to raise herself.
I'm not suggesting she is helpless or useless. And she hasn't essentially raised herself. As you pointed out she has always had someone to care for her. Look at the start of S2, she couldn't make a fucking fire! She has had direct assistance from an adult since she stepped out of her tree house.
She's always been the youngest person surrounded by adults, which is going to mature one faster...
Okay? I'm getting the feeling you're missing the point being made.
there are many things that make people different from one another, but ultimately we're all human beings, right?
And all birds are birds. Despite all of their differing attributes, right?
And to reiterate an above point: Having her capable of all her heroics is one thing (wrong, but whatever), but to have a random group of adults be okay with it, and more so expect these things of her, is an idiotic other.
I don't agree with you on that.That's exactly why it changes. Because those that stay alive can contribute to a group in some way and know h… moreow to protect themselves. A child isn't always inferior. Depending on what the subject is, maybe usually, but Clementine has shown herself to be even more useful than any adult. You can't think of the traditional adult/child roles of the world before it went to shit. Two years later...all that matters is how much someone can contribute. Clementine is alive still because the people around her don't treat her only as some helpless child that they have to protect. They want to protect her, but they rely on her as well. The people that stay alive are those that utilize every resource they can and that includes human resources--of course you wouldn't want to count on 8 yr old Clementine save your life, but 11 yr old Clem would be great to have around. Clem can tell Walter that everyone underestimates her beca… [view original content]
I made an account just so I could get in on this conversation. I'm a 22 year old male (not sure if that matters) and I just finished season 2. Absolutely loved it. Like some have said, I'm more attached to Clementine as I ever have to any character in any form of media. With all due respect, I can't figure out why some are even suggesting TT should end Clementine's story. The way I see it, Clementine IS The Walking Dead, and ending her ends the series. It's the equivalent of killing off Rick in the comics (haven't read any) or in the TV show; there's just no point after that. She's just a kid and there's so many more possibilities. If they move on from Clementine I'll have a difficult time caring about the protagonist. In fact, I could see myself hating a new protagonist because I cared for Clementine that much and would hate so see anyone take her place. WE ARE Clementine. We've watched her grow up, and now it's time to put the lessons she's learned to the test.
Lee's absence in season 2 was painful but it was painful in the writers' intent; I missed him and wished he was still in the game to sort all of this stuff out, not painful in the way of "wow, this game is missing something without Lee." Clementine's absence would be just the opposite, it would take everything away from the game.
It's a major cop-out to say TT can't continue Clem's story because the multiple endings. These are creative people, it's their job to figure this stuff out. That is wayyyyyy to easy of an excuse. As some have mentioned, a DLC episode can be introduced that will get Clem to the same point for everyone so we can neatly start season 3. I think that would be the best option.
I apologize if this comment isn't structured or worded the best, I had a lot of thoughts and just wanted to let them out there haha.
Hehe, yeah, the only thing I really like about it is this...
"We hope players feel like Clementine has grown significantly over the seaso… moren and she is now ready for the world, even if that world is harsh and has forced Clem to leave her childhood behind."
Makes me think she'll be returning in some form, but maybe that's wishful thinking.
I've sorta just been lurking the community occasionally rather than joining in, don't have much time to post now that I've found a job. :P Will probably always be around to some extent up until Season 3 when I'll be super active again.
I also strongly disagree with anyone who says that Clementine's story came to a satisfying conclusion at the end of season 2. Really? I've followed Clementine for hours upon hours through season 1 and 2, I've protected her and cared for her and cried for her (not gonna lie) through it all and people think it's acceptable to end this character's story with a kid looking at me and saying "Nice hat." Really? That's how her character arc ends? That's as far from closure as you can get, and we've been through too much with her to have nothing but a closed ending.
I made an account just so I could get in on this conversation. I'm a 22 year old male (not sure if that matters) and I just finished season… more 2. Absolutely loved it. Like some have said, I'm more attached to Clementine as I ever have to any character in any form of media. With all due respect, I can't figure out why some are even suggesting TT should end Clementine's story. The way I see it, Clementine IS The Walking Dead, and ending her ends the series. It's the equivalent of killing off Rick in the comics (haven't read any) or in the TV show; there's just no point after that. She's just a kid and there's so many more possibilities. If they move on from Clementine I'll have a difficult time caring about the protagonist. In fact, I could see myself hating a new protagonist because I cared for Clementine that much and would hate so see anyone take her place. WE ARE Clementine. We've watched her grow up, and now it's time to put the le… [view original content]
Still ranting here. Last thought, I promise haha. Stories have a beginning, middle, and end, Act I, Act 2, and Act 3. We're still in Act 2, so if you want to go the trilogy route (something I disagree with; I think Clem should be the playable character in every episode from now on) then she still has at least one more season left. Act 3 is where the character takes everything s/he has learned and puts it to the test. I understand this might contradict a little bit with one of my earlier comments, but what has Clementine learned? She's been with fucked up groups left and right and I would argue that she's still pretty clueless as to how this apocalypse world works. Clem has so much more development to go. She's yet to become the true bad ass I envision her of becoming (she's getting there but not yet) and she's yet to be put in a kill or be killed situation in which SHE has to do the dirty work. I want to see how she reacts in situations like that! I want to see her humanity come into question. I want her to eventually find a love in her life. I want her to become the female version of Rick, one who will do anything for the group and is a genuine good person, but if you fuck with her once she will end you for the sake of the group. Clem is 11, her story is nowhere near done and she has so much potential. So far adults have dictated her life, it's time for her to take control of the story and put her in true survivalist mode. I think we should stay in Act 2 for a loooooooong time, for as long as TT wants to keep telling Clem's story.
Looking forward to see what others say. Hopefully I'm not too late to the party.
Hehe, yeah, the only thing I really like about it is this...
"We hope players feel like Clementine has grown significantly over the seaso… moren and she is now ready for the world, even if that world is harsh and has forced Clem to leave her childhood behind."
Makes me think she'll be returning in some form, but maybe that's wishful thinking.
I've sorta just been lurking the community occasionally rather than joining in, don't have much time to post now that I've found a job. :P Will probably always be around to some extent up until Season 3 when I'll be super active again.
I agree with pretty much everything you've said! You make some great points, though I hope Telltale don't go too far in terms of making Clem badass seeing as my suspension of disbelief could start faltering if she kicks in more doors and makes important decisions! :P If they somehow manage to ease around the time constraints placed by the comics however and she ends up much older then I'd definitely enjoy seeing her bash a few skulls together.
Still ranting here. Last thought, I promise haha. Stories have a beginning, middle, and end, Act I, Act 2, and Act 3. We're still in Act … more2, so if you want to go the trilogy route (something I disagree with; I think Clem should be the playable character in every episode from now on) then she still has at least one more season left. Act 3 is where the character takes everything s/he has learned and puts it to the test. I understand this might contradict a little bit with one of my earlier comments, but what has Clementine learned? She's been with fucked up groups left and right and I would argue that she's still pretty clueless as to how this apocalypse world works. Clem has so much more development to go. She's yet to become the true bad ass I envision her of becoming (she's getting there but not yet) and she's yet to be put in a kill or be killed situation in which SHE has to do the dirty work. I want to see how she reacts in situati… [view original content]
Glad to hear . I agree, perhaps not quite as ruthless as Rick, but you get the point. OR if you want her to be loving and giving like Walter, you should have that option as well. We still have no idea who Clementine will become. Part of me sees her as evolving into Walter while part of me sees her as becoming a Rick type; this uncertainty of her identity is proof that she is nowhere near fully developed. I want to trust TT but I'm seriously nervous that they're going to butcher this and end Clementine's story. I don't even know if I would play the game. I'm so invested in her story that I don't see myself giving two shits about a new protagonist. Like some others said, the fact that they call it "season 3" is a good sign, because if it doesn't include Clem, then it shouldn't be called season 3 at all.
This may be off base, but since the decision plays into Clem's morality and humanity, I think it's a valid point to bring up. When Kenny killed Carver, I stayed and watched to make sure he followed through on his killing of Carver. Kenny has great respect for Clementine, and he often goes where she goes. So I was afraid that if I didn't watch and I left with the group that Kenny could "possibly* feel that he's being left behind and would quick run to catch up with us (without killing Carver) or, feeling rushed, he would quickly beat Carver but not kill him.
Kind of the same deal with the cannibals. I killed them to ensure they wouldn't come after us and wouldn't prey on anyone else.
I try to remove any emotions from my decisions. Killing the cannibals had nothing to do with revenge and watching Kenny beat the shit out of Carver had nothing to do with Clementine being bloodthirsty; I was just seeing everything through.
Am I over-thinking this or do you think it's good that I look at everything from every angle like that? I'm curious to see if others see things the same as I do. If you made the decision I made, Kenny eventually makes a smart ass comment, and I thought it was unfair because the game was trying to paint Clem as unforgiving after watching Kenny kill Carver while I only saw it as a way to 100% ensure that Carver is killed off. I definitely think the game's intent is to make it into a "revenge" or "hate-fueled" scenario but I don't see it that way. Am I over-thinking all of this or is that a valid point?
I agree with pretty much everything you've said! You make some great points, though I hope Telltale don't go too far in terms of making Clem… more badass seeing as my suspension of disbelief could start faltering if she kicks in more doors and makes important decisions! :P If they somehow manage to ease around the time constraints placed by the comics however and she ends up much older then I'd definitely enjoy seeing her bash a few skulls together.
Well this thread has pretty much run its course by now, but I'll play the Devil's advocate. Just because you like clementine doesn't mean the franchise cannot move on from her. They don't need to kill her as you seem to be suggesting. "It's the equivalent of killing off Rick in the comics." It would be like them diverting from telling Rick's story to telling Clementine's story, as they did, only without a media jump and without the continuation of both. I'm sure many people would be sad to see one of their favorite protagonists, or even characters, of all time go, but it wouldn't mean the new story is bad.
Still ranting here. Last thought, I promise haha. Stories have a beginning, middle, and end, Act I, Act 2, and Act 3. We're still in Act … more2, so if you want to go the trilogy route (something I disagree with; I think Clem should be the playable character in every episode from now on) then she still has at least one more season left. Act 3 is where the character takes everything s/he has learned and puts it to the test. I understand this might contradict a little bit with one of my earlier comments, but what has Clementine learned? She's been with fucked up groups left and right and I would argue that she's still pretty clueless as to how this apocalypse world works. Clem has so much more development to go. She's yet to become the true bad ass I envision her of becoming (she's getting there but not yet) and she's yet to be put in a kill or be killed situation in which SHE has to do the dirty work. I want to see how she reacts in situati… [view original content]
I completely agree with you. Clementine needs to be the protagonist in season 3. What's the point of building up this character from the start when she'll just vanish like that? I extremely love this character and I love to play as her. I want to see her grow up and what she's going to do next. Some people are saying they don't want her as the protagonist because since she's a kid, choices are "limited". Ya know, kids grow up to teenagers and then to adults so I'm sure we'll have more important choices to make as Clementine grows up. I'm not saying that they were limited in season 2 at all though. Just because the main character from season 1(Lee) changed to Clementine in Season 2, that doesn't mean that they have to do that every season! I would love to see how much her character grows based upon my choices in season 3. #MyClementine
using the birds or any other kind of animal doesn't really worked because we're all the same species. Of course everyone's not that exact same...i think you're taking things a little too literally. I mean that, as long as someone is a member of the group and can and does contribute to the continuance of said group-then age doesn't matter. Yes you're not going to send a four year old out on a supply run, but Clementine is mature enough to take care of herself. Which she had to really do once Omid died and her and Christa's relationship was strained. You might have been able to say that Clem was just a kid in season 1 and into the beginning of season 2, but by the time it's just her and Christa she's matured far beyond her 11 yrs...and other kids could and would do the same if the adults around them treated them more as equals rather than something that needs protecting. Clementine hasn't been asked to do anything that's way out of line for asking a someone her age to do. Having her deal with Kenny tantrums made the most sense since Clem was the only one he really trusted. Having her sneak around at Carver's made the most sense b/c she would be less noticeable, being smaller. That's why Carver wanted to make Clementine his apprentice....because he saw the potential in her,as did Jane, and didn't see her as just a kid
Whew... wall of text.
I don't agree with you on that.That's exactly why it changes.
So Carver, the baby, Kenny, Lee, Christa, … moreBrenda St. John, and Clementine are all the same (at their respective "alive" times)? I don't think so. To that extent all the frogs and horses and deer still alive are no different than Clementine because they are still living. That is simply not true.
Because those that stay alive can contribute to a group in some way and know how to protect themselves.
In different ways, and not even always.
A child isn't always inferior.
Not always. When it's a single child surrounded by 5 or 6 completely capable adults then, yes, they are.
Depending on what the subject is, maybe usually, but Clementine has shown herself to be even more useful than any adult.
Right, but only because the writing team could not put you into the shoes of an child effectively. Every time she is al… [view original content]
using the birds or any other kind of animal doesn't really worked because we're all the same species
Okay then, all house cats.
i think you're taking things a little too literally.
No, people just apply it to everything in the walking dead universe because it's an easy scape goat for the inexplicable accomplishments of someone who wouldn't actually be able to accomplish said accomplishments.
I mean that, as long as someone is a member of the group and can and does contribute to the continuance of said group-then age doesn't matter.
First off the point is that the contributions made are not realistic nor believable. Secondly people will be judged by their age among other things. Age does matter in many regards.
Yes you're not going to send a four year old out on a supply run, but Clementine is mature enough to take care of herself.
That's why she almost died the very first time we saw her by herself? She is not competent enough to care for herself (and them trying to portray her as this is annoying), and even if she was then it's ridiculous to think that this should equate to her being competent for the whole groups since they're all lacking it.
You might have been able to say that Clem was just a kid in season 1 and into the beginning of season 2, but by the time it's just her and Christa she's matured far beyond her 11 yrs...
She should rightly be more mature than her fellow, normal world 11 year olds, but that doesn't excuse the actions she does and the things the group expects her to be able to do. I can still say she is a kid in season two because she is still a kid in season two. Inarguably.
and other kids could and would do the same if the adults around them treated them more as equals rather than something that needs protecting.
They are not equal. They do need protecting. Not as much as an infant, new born, or toddler, but a pre-teen is not fully developed in any sense and that merits protection from those who can give it. Instead she is elevated to the status of an overly-adept thing capable of things not even adults can do and not only is she capable of doing things a child could not do but more infuriatingly is expected to do these things by fully grown people who sit idly by waiting for a fucking child to do their work.
Clementine hasn't been asked to do anything that's way out of line for asking a someone her age to do.
Not always asked, but often expected. Turning off the wind turbine (the fuck?), checking the building for food (the fuck?), climbing up the ladder (meh), taking care of the newborn (the fuck?), caring for a deranged man (the fuck?), and the list goes on. Plus the things she does that are not necessarily asked of her but are still superhuman feats such as, but not limited to, being shot and waking up fine, and being the target of a madman for no reason outside of "because it makes her more interesting to play as."
Having her deal with Kenny tantrums made the most sense since Clem was the only one he really trusted.
So it makes sense to put her in a dangerous position? They don't know Kenny, for all they could reason they were sending her to tame a fucking troglodyte with weapons.
Having her sneak around at Carver's made the most sense b/c she would be less noticeable, being smaller.
2 feet shorter makes you that much less conspicuous? No.
That's why Carver wanted to make Clementine his apprentice....because he saw the potential in her,as did Jane, and didn't see her as just a kid
For what reason? Jane liked her, sure. Carver wanted to make her an apprentice? On what grounds? Because she looked like a prime candidate for the next dictator of Howe's? Please.
using the birds or any other kind of animal doesn't really worked because we're all the same species. Of course everyone's not that exact sa… moreme...i think you're taking things a little too literally. I mean that, as long as someone is a member of the group and can and does contribute to the continuance of said group-then age doesn't matter. Yes you're not going to send a four year old out on a supply run, but Clementine is mature enough to take care of herself. Which she had to really do once Omid died and her and Christa's relationship was strained. You might have been able to say that Clem was just a kid in season 1 and into the beginning of season 2, but by the time it's just her and Christa she's matured far beyond her 11 yrs...and other kids could and would do the same if the adults around them treated them more as equals rather than something that needs protecting. Clementine hasn't been asked to do anything that's way out of line for ask… [view original content]
Yes, Carver wanted to make her the next dictator of Howe's. At least, that's what I think. I think that's why he was asking her to help him when she's being questioned in his office in regards to Reggie's murder.
My opinion still hasn't changed. I think in a zombie apocalypse age isn't going to matter as much. Why is having her turn off the wind turbine so out of line? I she did was use the key to turn a switch. It was actually safer for her to do that than to stand watch for zombies. As volatile as Kenny is, I don't think Kenny would've ever hurt Clementine, unless maybe he felt like she was ever a danger to him. And if you end up with Kenny at Wellington, you get to see just how selfless Kenny can be. Clementine held the baby here and there, but she wasn't the primary person until the numbers started dwindling. Bonnie and Kenny took care of him mostly, if I remember correctly. It wasn't Clem's responsibility until Bonnie's gone. Kenny is the main protector and the baby pukes on Jane, if you let her hold him...Clementine has to become the defacto caretaker. It's not ideal, but again, that's safer than having her try and fight zombies. Clementine's old enough to help take care of a baby.
What I'm saying is in the Deadverse I don't think age would matter as much if someone proves to be capable. Everyone has to be able to protect themselves and would have the same expectations. In season 2 episode one when Clem first gets to the cabin no one gave a damn that she was kid. Christa shoots Omid's assailant without hesitation-didn't give a f*ck that the girl was a young teenager or that it was technically an accident. Capability is what is going to mandate what's expected of someone not their age. Sarah was completely incapable so no one expected anything from her.
Her being short - It's not that it makes her less suspicious, but it makes it easier for her to hide and avoid detection
I didn't say that Clementine didn't need protecting, but in her given circumstances, I still don't think that there was anything that was too out of line for Clementine to be expected to do.
I personally love viewing the apocalypse from the viewpoint of a kid and we're obviously not going to agree on the adult-child relationship in the apocalypse so lets just agree to disagree
using the birds or any other kind of animal doesn't really worked because we're all the same species
Okay then, all house cats.
… more i think you're taking things a little too literally.
No, people just apply it to everything in the walking dead universe because it's an easy scape goat for the inexplicable accomplishments of someone who wouldn't actually be able to accomplish said accomplishments.
I mean that, as long as someone is a member of the group and can and does contribute to the continuance of said group-then age doesn't matter.
First off the point is that the contributions made are not realistic nor believable. Secondly people will be judged by their age among other things. Age does matter in many regards.
Yes you're not going to send a four year old out on a supply run, but Clementine is mature enough to take care of herself.
That's why she almost died the very first time we saw her by he… [view original content]
Agreed. Kids in poor families or in third-world countries are often asked to do adult work all the time. There are plenty of real-world examples of shitty situations forcing kids to grow up fast and become an adult, and those that don't adjust (i.e. Sarah and Walter) are killed off. Also keep in mind that Bonnie and Mike lived in Carver's camp and had everything handed to them whereas Clem grew up surrounded by danger, so it makes sense for them to be looking to a "kid" for help.
It was also clear that Carver's camp didn't see Clem as just a kid, otherwise they wouldn't have struck her to the ground when she tried to help Kenny. It's free game in the apocalypse. Just like the old guy said, "the world doesn't care." So if the enemy sees Clem as an adult why wouldn't her allies?
Yes, Carver wanted to make her the next dictator of Howe's. At least, that's what I think. I think that's why he was asking her to help him … morewhen she's being questioned in his office in regards to Reggie's murder.
My opinion still hasn't changed. I think in a zombie apocalypse age isn't going to matter as much. Why is having her turn off the wind turbine so out of line? I she did was use the key to turn a switch. It was actually safer for her to do that than to stand watch for zombies. As volatile as Kenny is, I don't think Kenny would've ever hurt Clementine, unless maybe he felt like she was ever a danger to him. And if you end up with Kenny at Wellington, you get to see just how selfless Kenny can be. Clementine held the baby here and there, but she wasn't the primary person until the numbers started dwindling. Bonnie and Kenny took care of him mostly, if I remember correctly. It wasn't Clem's responsibility until Bonnie's gone. Kenny is t… [view original content]
Agreed. Kids in poor families or in third-world countries are often asked to do adult work all the time. There are plenty of real-world ex… moreamples of shitty situations forcing kids to grow up fast and become an adult, and those that don't adjust (i.e. Sarah and Walter) are killed off. Also keep in mind that Bonnie and Mike lived in Carver's camp and had everything handed to them whereas Clem grew up surrounded by danger, so it makes sense for them to be looking to a "kid" for help.
It was also clear that Carver's camp didn't see Clem as just a kid, otherwise they wouldn't have struck her to the ground when she tried to help Kenny. It's free game in the apocalypse. Just like the old guy said, "the world doesn't care." So if the enemy sees Clem as an adult why wouldn't her allies?
Comments
I'm going to say I don't care whether or not she makes an appearance or is even a part of the story. In season 2 I enjoyed the other characters more than I liked Clem, they were all much more interesting in my opinion. I wouldn't mind seeing some new characters that could run into older characters, because to me this series doesn't rely on Clem or any other character, it's about everyone.
I wouldn't mind seeing her but I just don't care who our characters are, so long as the story is good, I'm satisfied.
I agree with the OP that Clem should be the the primary character for Season 3, and beyond... the fact she is still so young means the window is there for many more stories. I think Clem, like other gaming greats such as Lara Croft and Shepard (Mass Effect), are characters people/fans get easily attached to, and I, personally, think writing her out, or not using her, would be a mistake because fans of her story could lose interest in TWD. Just imo.
So, anyway, when do you think we can expect Season 3?
I'd be cool with the idea of a teenage Clementine. I still can't understand why this is such a big deal for some people.
So would I... If they continue the 2-3 year jumps, for example, per-season we could follow Clem through her teens and in to adulthood, like I said, the windows is there for potentially lots more stories following Clem. The one character I would do away with is the baby, I think having that in the next game will hinder what you (or they) will be able to do... I think it would also be cool to have a more identifiable choice for where you take Clem... does she become more of a good character thinking of others and helping out like Lee, or does she go down a darker road, for example, like Carver. (Personally, I tried to take her down a darker road in one playthru to see what would happen, but the choices in the game didn't make it all that easy)
Wait so you saying that you expect a story, which is based off an unrealistic event, to be realistic? Not only that but you also believe the characters of this unrealistic story based of an unrealistic event should behave realistically?
Well the story she exist in is unscientific so it only makes sense that an 11 yr old would be able to do something unrealistic.
Yes. Why wouldn't I? Realism after an unrealistic event. You make is sound like it's weird or impossible or shouldn't be expected, I find that peculiar.
Again expecting something realistic in an unrealistic storyline is kinda strange don't you think? They're giving Clem a behavior and personality that's keeping her alive. Realistically speaking, if Clem's behavior mimicked the average 11 yr old it would be unrealistic for her to still be alive.
No not impossible but just not common. And when realism is introduced into an unrealistic scenario it's never to the extent where you can imagine something like that actually being possible. Do you see what I'm saying? I honestly have no idea how else to word it lol. I'm sorry if it doesn't makes sense. I guess it's just me but when I'm playing something unrealistic I never expect realism.
You do realize the fallacy in your argument, right? This experience takes place in our world. When the unrealistic event takes place in the world we know then why wouldn't it be held to the same principles of our world? The entire zombie, and normally the entire post apocalyptic genre, are actually so largely popular because it doesn't alter the people and the scientific laws that we know. So we get to see how we as individuals and groups and whatnot would react to the situation realistically. So yes, I expect realism.
No it doesn't make sense.
Why do you have this conversation going on in like 5 different spots? 1 is fine.
It wouldn't be unrealistic for an 11 year old to be alive. The things she does are not realistic.
"why wouldn't it be held to the same principles of our world?"
Well maybe because we don't have dead bodies walking around and attacking people?
"it doesn't alter the people and the scientific laws that we know."
Yeah uh I'm pretty sure, scientifically speaking, the human brain stops functioning after death. So yeah you're completely wrong when you say stories within this genre don't alter scientific law. It's the very opposite. This genre and other sci fi genres are popular because they DO alter people and scientific laws.
Simply because you responded to me in like 5 different spots. And yes it would be unrealistic for an 11 yr old to behave like a child and survive in this scenario. That might explain why there's aren't too many children in general in the walking dead storyline.
Exactly. Most would die, few would survive. Surviving with help is one thing, surviving providing all the help is another.
You're daft. Good bye.
I'm saying right now that the baby will have some role for Christa when we find her and it will be a character which will eventually die to add in some drama. There is no way they will jump 15+ years in the future just to play with the baby.
I would like to think they would do a follow up episode like the one they did with season 1 and curtail all the choices made and continue with season 3, that's a great way to continue I personally think.
We've had father figures... mother figures (somewhat)... what about a friend? Clementine is one tough cookie, and extremely unique. But what if the new protagonist is a kid in the same situation? I understand that we've already played from the kid angle, but maybe if there is a short time-jump so Clem is a little older and the new child protagonist is older as well, it might interesting to see how preteens, who don't know what it's like to fall in love and just be hormonal and young, handle the apocalypse. Maybe Clem herself could fall in love? Or that crappy 'love' you experience when you're thirteen.
The first few episodes might be just about the new boy (or girl?) and how life has been for them in this hell of a world, and then they meet up? I don't know about you guys, but I think watching two clever thirteen/fourteen year-old best friends, slicing and hacking their way through life, would be super cool.
i completely agree, The end of Season 1 opened a door for season 2 to continue as clem.
season 2 was great, and agree with you 100%, it would be only fair for us to continue playing as clem, now that the gamers feel so attached to the character.
i want to take part of the decision clem makes as a teenager, and how these will continue to mold her to the adult she will become.
I love the walking dead series Telltale has given us, and i cant wait for the 3rd season, Clem has to be the main character no matter what.
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2014/11/05/extended-afterwords-the-walking-dead-season-two.aspx?PostPageIndex=3
This pleases me.
× 1. In reference to the article "LOL."
× 2. Where you been hiding, Hazzer?
Hehe, yeah, the only thing I really like about it is this...
"We hope players feel like Clementine has grown significantly over the season and she is now ready for the world, even if that world is harsh and has forced Clem to leave her childhood behind."
Makes me think she'll be returning in some form, but maybe that's wishful thinking.
I've sorta just been lurking the community occasionally rather than joining in, don't have much time to post now that I've found a job. :P Will probably always be around to some extent up until Season 3 when I'll be super active again.
Says the person who expect realism from a sci fi.
Exactly! Are you confused or something?
No you just don't make any sense to me. Good bye.
I don't agree with you on that.That's exactly why it changes. Because those that stay alive can contribute to a group in some way and know how to protect themselves. A child isn't always inferior. Depending on what the subject is, maybe usually, but Clementine has shown herself to be even more useful than any adult. You can't think of the traditional adult/child roles of the world before it went to shit. Two years later...all that matters is how much someone can contribute. Clementine is alive still because the people around her don't treat her only as some helpless child that they have to protect. They want to protect her, but they rely on her as well. The people that stay alive are those that utilize every resource they can and that includes human resources--of course you wouldn't want to count on 8 yr old Clementine save your life, but 11 yr old Clem would be great to have around. Clem can tell Walter that everyone underestimates her because of her size, to which he candidly says she probably uses that to her advantage...which we've seen demonstrated a few times. Not every child would be completely helpless or useless...the ones that are, as we've seen, don't last very long....Clem couldn't rely on bruts protect herself, but being smart is a big part of staying alive...and Clem isn't like other kids in the Walking Dead...she was orphaned at a young age and while she's had adult role models and caretakers (Lee, Christa and Omid), she essentially had to raise herself. Anyone in that position wouldn't behave like a normal child-for better or worse...in Clementine's case it was for better. She's emotionally resilient...and like Luke said about Jane, "she's tempered by hardship"...where other people crack under the pressure and get either themselves and/or others killed b/c of their post traumatic negligence. She's always been the youngest person surrounded by adults, which is going to mature one faster...there are many things that make people different from one another, but ultimately we're all human beings, right? Same concept in the walking dead except all that really matter is how useful someone is. Obviously you wouldn't want to rely on someone like Clem from season one, but because she's looked at as just a short person, that's allowed her to stay alive. Plenty of children around the world learn martial arts or are smarter than their parents, and shouldn't be classified as inferior. Inferiority depends on the context at hand. And you may want to use a child as a last resort, but not with that rag-tag group of crippled fucks.
Whew... wall of text.
So Carver, the baby, Kenny, Lee, Christa, Brenda St. John, and Clementine are all the same (at their respective "alive" times)? I don't think so. To that extent all the frogs and horses and deer still alive are no different than Clementine because they are still living. That is simply not true.
In different ways, and not even always.
Not always. When it's a single child surrounded by 5 or 6 completely capable adults then, yes, they are.
Right, but only because the writing team could not put you into the shoes of an child effectively. Every time she is alone she nearly dies or screws up in a major way, yet as soon as she is in a group she is the most effective member at virtually everything? How 'bout, no.
Yes and no. If they can contribute then that's awesome, but to think a child can contribute more than a variety of adults is asinine.
I agree with this. There is a huge difference between sheltering someone and having them do most everything that needs doing, though.
I wouldn't want my life in the hands of an 8 year old or an 11 year old. Utilizing them when it is prudent or worthwhile is one thing, but another to utilize them for everything (for the sake of a more interesting PC mind you).
Yes, more empty words to make her heroic venture seem more tame and realistic.
I'm not suggesting she is helpless or useless. And she hasn't essentially raised herself. As you pointed out she has always had someone to care for her. Look at the start of S2, she couldn't make a fucking fire! She has had direct assistance from an adult since she stepped out of her tree house.
Okay? I'm getting the feeling you're missing the point being made.
And all birds are birds. Despite all of their differing attributes, right?
And to reiterate an above point: Having her capable of all her heroics is one thing (wrong, but whatever), but to have a random group of adults be okay with it, and more so expect these things of her, is an idiotic other.
I made an account just so I could get in on this conversation. I'm a 22 year old male (not sure if that matters) and I just finished season 2. Absolutely loved it. Like some have said, I'm more attached to Clementine as I ever have to any character in any form of media. With all due respect, I can't figure out why some are even suggesting TT should end Clementine's story. The way I see it, Clementine IS The Walking Dead, and ending her ends the series. It's the equivalent of killing off Rick in the comics (haven't read any) or in the TV show; there's just no point after that. She's just a kid and there's so many more possibilities. If they move on from Clementine I'll have a difficult time caring about the protagonist. In fact, I could see myself hating a new protagonist because I cared for Clementine that much and would hate so see anyone take her place. WE ARE Clementine. We've watched her grow up, and now it's time to put the lessons she's learned to the test.
Lee's absence in season 2 was painful but it was painful in the writers' intent; I missed him and wished he was still in the game to sort all of this stuff out, not painful in the way of "wow, this game is missing something without Lee." Clementine's absence would be just the opposite, it would take everything away from the game.
It's a major cop-out to say TT can't continue Clem's story because the multiple endings. These are creative people, it's their job to figure this stuff out. That is wayyyyyy to easy of an excuse. As some have mentioned, a DLC episode can be introduced that will get Clem to the same point for everyone so we can neatly start season 3. I think that would be the best option.
I apologize if this comment isn't structured or worded the best, I had a lot of thoughts and just wanted to let them out there haha.
I also strongly disagree with anyone who says that Clementine's story came to a satisfying conclusion at the end of season 2. Really? I've followed Clementine for hours upon hours through season 1 and 2, I've protected her and cared for her and cried for her (not gonna lie) through it all and people think it's acceptable to end this character's story with a kid looking at me and saying "Nice hat." Really? That's how her character arc ends? That's as far from closure as you can get, and we've been through too much with her to have nothing but a closed ending.
Still ranting here. Last thought, I promise haha. Stories have a beginning, middle, and end, Act I, Act 2, and Act 3. We're still in Act 2, so if you want to go the trilogy route (something I disagree with; I think Clem should be the playable character in every episode from now on) then she still has at least one more season left. Act 3 is where the character takes everything s/he has learned and puts it to the test. I understand this might contradict a little bit with one of my earlier comments, but what has Clementine learned? She's been with fucked up groups left and right and I would argue that she's still pretty clueless as to how this apocalypse world works. Clem has so much more development to go. She's yet to become the true bad ass I envision her of becoming (she's getting there but not yet) and she's yet to be put in a kill or be killed situation in which SHE has to do the dirty work. I want to see how she reacts in situations like that! I want to see her humanity come into question. I want her to eventually find a love in her life. I want her to become the female version of Rick, one who will do anything for the group and is a genuine good person, but if you fuck with her once she will end you for the sake of the group. Clem is 11, her story is nowhere near done and she has so much potential. So far adults have dictated her life, it's time for her to take control of the story and put her in true survivalist mode. I think we should stay in Act 2 for a loooooooong time, for as long as TT wants to keep telling Clem's story.
Looking forward to see what others say. Hopefully I'm not too late to the party.
I agree with pretty much everything you've said! You make some great points, though I hope Telltale don't go too far in terms of making Clem badass seeing as my suspension of disbelief could start faltering if she kicks in more doors and makes important decisions! :P If they somehow manage to ease around the time constraints placed by the comics however and she ends up much older then I'd definitely enjoy seeing her bash a few skulls together.
Glad to hear
. I agree, perhaps not quite as ruthless as Rick, but you get the point. OR if you want her to be loving and giving like Walter, you should have that option as well. We still have no idea who Clementine will become. Part of me sees her as evolving into Walter while part of me sees her as becoming a Rick type; this uncertainty of her identity is proof that she is nowhere near fully developed. I want to trust TT but I'm seriously nervous that they're going to butcher this and end Clementine's story. I don't even know if I would play the game. I'm so invested in her story that I don't see myself giving two shits about a new protagonist. Like some others said, the fact that they call it "season 3" is a good sign, because if it doesn't include Clem, then it shouldn't be called season 3 at all.
This may be off base, but since the decision plays into Clem's morality and humanity, I think it's a valid point to bring up. When Kenny killed Carver, I stayed and watched to make sure he followed through on his killing of Carver. Kenny has great respect for Clementine, and he often goes where she goes. So I was afraid that if I didn't watch and I left with the group that Kenny could "possibly* feel that he's being left behind and would quick run to catch up with us (without killing Carver) or, feeling rushed, he would quickly beat Carver but not kill him.
Kind of the same deal with the cannibals. I killed them to ensure they wouldn't come after us and wouldn't prey on anyone else.
I try to remove any emotions from my decisions. Killing the cannibals had nothing to do with revenge and watching Kenny beat the shit out of Carver had nothing to do with Clementine being bloodthirsty; I was just seeing everything through.
Am I over-thinking this or do you think it's good that I look at everything from every angle like that? I'm curious to see if others see things the same as I do. If you made the decision I made, Kenny eventually makes a smart ass comment, and I thought it was unfair because the game was trying to paint Clem as unforgiving after watching Kenny kill Carver while I only saw it as a way to 100% ensure that Carver is killed off. I definitely think the game's intent is to make it into a "revenge" or "hate-fueled" scenario but I don't see it that way. Am I over-thinking all of this or is that a valid point?
Well this thread has pretty much run its course by now, but I'll play the Devil's advocate. Just because you like clementine doesn't mean the franchise cannot move on from her. They don't need to kill her as you seem to be suggesting. "It's the equivalent of killing off Rick in the comics." It would be like them diverting from telling Rick's story to telling Clementine's story, as they did, only without a media jump and without the continuation of both. I'm sure many people would be sad to see one of their favorite protagonists, or even characters, of all time go, but it wouldn't mean the new story is bad.
I completely agree with you. Clementine needs to be the protagonist in season 3. What's the point of building up this character from the start when she'll just vanish like that? I extremely love this character and I love to play as her. I want to see her grow up and what she's going to do next. Some people are saying they don't want her as the protagonist because since she's a kid, choices are "limited". Ya know, kids grow up to teenagers and then to adults so I'm sure we'll have more important choices to make as Clementine grows up. I'm not saying that they were limited in season 2 at all though. Just because the main character from season 1(Lee) changed to Clementine in Season 2, that doesn't mean that they have to do that every season! I would love to see how much her character grows based upon my choices in season 3. #MyClementine
Let's see what people vote: http://strawpoll.me/3401934/r
using the birds or any other kind of animal doesn't really worked because we're all the same species. Of course everyone's not that exact same...i think you're taking things a little too literally. I mean that, as long as someone is a member of the group and can and does contribute to the continuance of said group-then age doesn't matter. Yes you're not going to send a four year old out on a supply run, but Clementine is mature enough to take care of herself. Which she had to really do once Omid died and her and Christa's relationship was strained. You might have been able to say that Clem was just a kid in season 1 and into the beginning of season 2, but by the time it's just her and Christa she's matured far beyond her 11 yrs...and other kids could and would do the same if the adults around them treated them more as equals rather than something that needs protecting. Clementine hasn't been asked to do anything that's way out of line for asking a someone her age to do. Having her deal with Kenny tantrums made the most sense since Clem was the only one he really trusted. Having her sneak around at Carver's made the most sense b/c she would be less noticeable, being smaller. That's why Carver wanted to make Clementine his apprentice....because he saw the potential in her,as did Jane, and didn't see her as just a kid
Okay then, all house cats.
No, people just apply it to everything in the walking dead universe because it's an easy scape goat for the inexplicable accomplishments of someone who wouldn't actually be able to accomplish said accomplishments.
First off the point is that the contributions made are not realistic nor believable. Secondly people will be judged by their age among other things. Age does matter in many regards.
That's why she almost died the very first time we saw her by herself? She is not competent enough to care for herself (and them trying to portray her as this is annoying), and even if she was then it's ridiculous to think that this should equate to her being competent for the whole groups since they're all lacking it.
She should rightly be more mature than her fellow, normal world 11 year olds, but that doesn't excuse the actions she does and the things the group expects her to be able to do. I can still say she is a kid in season two because she is still a kid in season two. Inarguably.
They are not equal. They do need protecting. Not as much as an infant, new born, or toddler, but a pre-teen is not fully developed in any sense and that merits protection from those who can give it. Instead she is elevated to the status of an overly-adept thing capable of things not even adults can do and not only is she capable of doing things a child could not do but more infuriatingly is expected to do these things by fully grown people who sit idly by waiting for a fucking child to do their work.
Not always asked, but often expected. Turning off the wind turbine (the fuck?), checking the building for food (the fuck?), climbing up the ladder (meh), taking care of the newborn (the fuck?), caring for a deranged man (the fuck?), and the list goes on. Plus the things she does that are not necessarily asked of her but are still superhuman feats such as, but not limited to, being shot and waking up fine, and being the target of a madman for no reason outside of "because it makes her more interesting to play as."
So it makes sense to put her in a dangerous position? They don't know Kenny, for all they could reason they were sending her to tame a fucking troglodyte with weapons.
2 feet shorter makes you that much less conspicuous? No.
For what reason? Jane liked her, sure. Carver wanted to make her an apprentice? On what grounds? Because she looked like a prime candidate for the next dictator of Howe's? Please.
Yes, Carver wanted to make her the next dictator of Howe's. At least, that's what I think. I think that's why he was asking her to help him when she's being questioned in his office in regards to Reggie's murder.
My opinion still hasn't changed. I think in a zombie apocalypse age isn't going to matter as much. Why is having her turn off the wind turbine so out of line? I she did was use the key to turn a switch. It was actually safer for her to do that than to stand watch for zombies. As volatile as Kenny is, I don't think Kenny would've ever hurt Clementine, unless maybe he felt like she was ever a danger to him. And if you end up with Kenny at Wellington, you get to see just how selfless Kenny can be. Clementine held the baby here and there, but she wasn't the primary person until the numbers started dwindling. Bonnie and Kenny took care of him mostly, if I remember correctly. It wasn't Clem's responsibility until Bonnie's gone. Kenny is the main protector and the baby pukes on Jane, if you let her hold him...Clementine has to become the defacto caretaker. It's not ideal, but again, that's safer than having her try and fight zombies. Clementine's old enough to help take care of a baby.
What I'm saying is in the Deadverse I don't think age would matter as much if someone proves to be capable. Everyone has to be able to protect themselves and would have the same expectations. In season 2 episode one when Clem first gets to the cabin no one gave a damn that she was kid. Christa shoots Omid's assailant without hesitation-didn't give a f*ck that the girl was a young teenager or that it was technically an accident. Capability is what is going to mandate what's expected of someone not their age. Sarah was completely incapable so no one expected anything from her.
Her being short - It's not that it makes her less suspicious, but it makes it easier for her to hide and avoid detection
I didn't say that Clementine didn't need protecting, but in her given circumstances, I still don't think that there was anything that was too out of line for Clementine to be expected to do.
I personally love viewing the apocalypse from the viewpoint of a kid and we're obviously not going to agree on the adult-child relationship in the apocalypse so lets just agree to disagree
Agreed. Kids in poor families or in third-world countries are often asked to do adult work all the time. There are plenty of real-world examples of shitty situations forcing kids to grow up fast and become an adult, and those that don't adjust (i.e. Sarah and Walter) are killed off. Also keep in mind that Bonnie and Mike lived in Carver's camp and had everything handed to them whereas Clem grew up surrounded by danger, so it makes sense for them to be looking to a "kid" for help.
It was also clear that Carver's camp didn't see Clem as just a kid, otherwise they wouldn't have struck her to the ground when she tried to help Kenny. It's free game in the apocalypse. Just like the old guy said, "the world doesn't care." So if the enemy sees Clem as an adult why wouldn't her allies?
very nicely said