Yup, I never found myself liking Sarah either, and I guess I should be thankful too , because it must have been horrible for people who liked her to save her in Ep 4 just for her to die moments later and not even saying anything between those times.
And like you said, every time she talked to me, I just wanted her to go away because I simply just didnt care
If you were expecting that TLOU story, look elsewhere.
What? You mean a competent plot that engages the players? Or are you talking … moreabout the fact Ellie was a child character done right and not some anemic bore of a character?
At that moment i felt the extremely protective of her. This is the moment i actually started to care.
I can kind of understand why you would. But, that scene was put there to bait people into feeling sorry for her. Needless to say I felt worse about Carlos being forced to doing that to the last thing in the world he loved. Having to break her down like that broke him down far worse than a bruise.
I didn't blame her for that. She didn't have any control over it.
Nor did I, but I didn't know her true intentions at the time. So, naturally, she's with them. She's against me, that's what I thought at first anyways. But, here's a prime example of her character being boring...
When we fir… [view original content]
I'll give you that. I suppose it has more to do with me not liking characters like Ashley Graham from Resident Evil 4 who only sit there and scream while not fighting. It's not like I'd reject these people in real life, but people like that become obstacles in games either through baby-sitting gameplay or baby-sitting dialogue. It becomes one dimensional, and I never feel any sympathy for those types of characters in stories.
In real life though? Yeah, I'd imagine most young children would be like Sarah. Clementine is interesting partly because she breaks the mold of a young child in this type of story and changes over the course of the story. It's a dynamic process that took time, and it's possible that Sarah could've been like that. She wasn't, though, and I have to judge her character based on the content that we got of her.
Right, and I don't just like a character that's bland, uninteresting, and make's me feel comfortable about liking them. I like characters that are either A: interesting and engage me, or B: I can personally relate to. Sarah was a child, that was her entire personality. No deep complexities or interesting merits for me to feel like I had any responsibility toward. I can't even remember what she looked like (apart from her glasses).
And, again, I don't hate her. Uninspired bores aren't really hate worthy, they're just are a space filled by a bland person.
Yup, I never found myself liking Sarah either, and I guess I should be thankful too , because it must have been horrible for people who like… mored her to save her in Ep 4 just for her to die moments later and not even saying anything between those times.
And like you said, every time she talked to me, I just wanted her to go away because I simply just didnt care
When i was a young dog running like a old dog, i would like to fight about everything too. I liked it, what else do you want from me. I'm not four years old, so i not going to censor myself. If the mods feel it needs to be removed, so be it.
Yeah, I dont hate her, I just really didnt care what she thought of me. I remember in ep 2 how the game wanted me to put the angle on top of the tree and I made sure I would do anything but find an angle to put on the tree lol
Right, and I don't just like a character that's bland, uninteresting, and make's me feel comfortable about liking them. I like characters th… moreat are either A: interesting and engage me, or B: I can personally relate to. Sarah was a child, that was her entire personality. No deep complexities or interesting merits for me to feel like I had any responsibility toward. I can't even remember what she looked like (apart from her glasses).
And, again, I don't hate her. Uninspired bores aren't really hate worthy, they're just are a space filled by a bland person.
Yeah, I dont hate her, I just really didnt care what she thought of me. I remember in ep 2 how the game wanted me to put the angle on top of the tree and I made sure I would do anything but find an angle to put on the tree lol
When i was a young dog running like a old dog, i would like to fight about everything too.
what else do you want from me. I'm not four years old,
Dude, what are you talking about? No one said you were four. Stop being so defensive, it's a weird picture to put up connecting your point to Clementine and Sarah's "love." And it's a little inappropriate, that's all. Nobody's "picking a 'young dog' fight with you."
If the mods feel it needs to be removed, so be it.
When i was a young dog running like a old dog, i would like to fight about everything too. I liked it, what else do you want from me. I'm not four years old, so i not going to censor myself. If the mods feel it needs to be removed, so be it.
I don't dislike Sarah she just didn't have any sort of impact on me. Upon first meeting her I was like 'sweet, she'll be a good friend for Clementine'. But as the season progressed, she gradually became useless; a character that was just there. When she dies in episode 4 I was like 'okay, that happened, let's move on. The only reason I'd ever have to dislike Sarah is if in the greenhouse Clementine doesn't help her with a very simple task she says they're not friends.
And my opinion has absolutely nothing to do with her mental health. Sarah and I share several mental issues and she still didn't have an impact on me, now if she weren't a fictional character it'd be different. Sarah started off as an interesting character but, after a short time, became someone I didn't too much care for. As the PC it felt like I had to coddle her, it became annoying after awhile.
Don't know if someone has already said this and cba to read Every comment, but regarding who gets who killed Sarah's behaviour also gets Nick killed if he's still alive by Amid The Ruins. If she doesn't run off screaming Luke and Nick (determinant) don't need to go chasing after her into the trailer, Nick doesn't go out looking for the others, and instead they go straight to Parker's Run and reunite with the others.
reggie, sarita and carlos to a point. There is also the fact sarah is annoying by her constant questions, doesnt do all that much to help and just causes problems however unintentionally
reggie, sarita and carlos to a point. There is also the fact sarah is annoying by her constant questions, doesnt do all that much to help and just causes problems however unintentionally
reggie, sarita and carlos to a point. There is also the fact sarah is annoying by her constant questions, doesnt do all that much to help and just causes problems however unintentionally
I just can't believe that Sarah haters still exist. Really thought they would at least come to their senses or just quit in general instead of using the same old "Sarah got ____ killed!" when she clearly didn't.
Suppose if there's a wheelchair bound character in Season 3, these writers would be drooling at the idea of a paralysed man/woman crawling away from bloodthirsty monsters while other characters mock him for not being able to walk properly, as if that person had any choice in the matter.
No, but what is the most likely outcome for someone in that position? Like, in the TV show when they come across the people in the nursing home....yes, it's admirable that those men were doing their best to protect those most vulnerable and can't protect themselves, but when it comes to survival, it's not very smart to do so. Look at non-human animals....if one of the group is injured...or if a baby is sick, the mother/pack leave the injured/baby behind. A few years ago, a stray cat had kittens in my garage and one of the babies had some kind of neurological problem( we found out after taking it the vet after a few days)...but the mother cat immediately new something was wrong with the kitten and kicked her out of the den.(the baby couldn't walk and stand up right properly, she kept falling over)....Humans seem to be the only species that actively tries to save those that otherwise wouldn't be alive if mother nature were allowed to run its course
Ben and Sarah served slightly different purposes. Sarah was to show the player that you can't save everyone, especially someone who can't even attempt to save themselves and to get the player to question whether they would try to save someone not just because of their cost/benefit ratio. Ben tried to contribute to the group and kept messing up...and they get the player to question do I save this guy?
Sarah: do i try to save someone who's a good person, but utterly helpless/useless
Ben: do i try to save someone who's a good person, but they are an utter f*ck up
both are liabilities, but in slightly different ways...that's why they were treated differently and Ben gets redemption....(I do wish they had given Sarah a chance at redemption)
I'm not a Ben or Sarah hater, I chose to save both of them. In a cost/benefit analysis, it's unwise to try and save them
I agree. But what I find unfortunate about this situation is how different the treatment Ben and Sarah had in their respective seasons.
B… moreen, in spite of his screw-up and arguably being indirectly responsible for many character deaths, is given the chance to redeem himself and is portrayed in a sympathetic light should you rescue him. In spite of the choice that you can drop him to his death, that choice is demonised due to the anti-Crawford mentality the episode had, and how it will negatively impact Clementine's relationship to Lee. Choosing to save him rewards you with more of Ben's characterisation, and a tragic end to his story that feels neither mean-spirited nor anti-climatic.
Sarah's treatment, however, is downright offensive considering how many people with similar issues as her identified with the character. In comparison to Ben, yet she's created purely to be hated by the players because apparently the writers hates her as wel… [view original content]
Although Sarah could be very irritating at times, she was exactly like Clementine in Season 1 episode 1 an innocent girl who hasn't been exposed to the horrors of the world they lived in and thought of it as sunshine and rainbows. Despite causing a few deaths indirectly she has shown to be a good friend such as when she defended Clementine if Carver slaps her and being one of three people who were nice to Clementine when she first got to the Cabin. Sarah was actually on the middle section of my favorites list until her unfortunate demise. I don't hate her but I find her irritating but a good person.
My problem is that Amid the Ruins implies that anyone with a disability, both physical and mental, are deservingly expendable...and we're supposed to agree with the mentality and not argue against it. This is a stark contrast to Season 1 which handled the subject in a mature way, while Season 2 was more tasteless to the point of childishness.
Being a disabled person, why do I need this implication from Amid the Ruins that my lack of survival in a perilous world is the most likely outcome? Would my survival be considered unrealistic, unneeded, and compromise every member in the group as if I was a doom magnet? Considering how the series has yet to portray a disabled or ill character in a positive light and a fair chance for survival, I'm inclined to believe that the creators themselves find it hard to believe that even disabled people can still get a chance, and should be given a chance, to survive.
Sarah and Nick dying only served to continue this unneeded train of thought. Their survival wouldn't have ruined the story Telltale had for Season 2, and their deaths only ended up delivering yet another 'disabled people are weak and helpless' message in the series. You don't need to be a hard-core survivor (Jane) to make it out alive, you don't need to be blessed with luck (Kenny), and you don't need to be healthy and well-abled (Luke) to survive. Anyone and everyone, disabled or no, had a varying degree of chance to survive in a post-apocalyptic world, no matter how low.
And speaking of liabilities from a narrative point of view, the actual liabilities of Amid the Ruins were Jane and Luke, not Sarah. Both of their actions almost gets the entire group killed twice (the failed perimeter search, and Arvo's group ambushing the heroes), and yet these issues are never brought to light. If the writing were as sensible as Season 1 was, Luke and Jane would have been the ones to be perceived as liabilities and would be left behind to die, not Sarah.
Suppose if there's a wheelchair bound character in Season 3, these writers would be drooling at the idea of a paralysed man/woman crawling a… moreway from bloodthirsty monsters while other characters mock him for not being able to walk properly, as if that person had any choice in the matter.
No, but what is the most likely outcome for someone in that position? Like, in the TV show when they come across the people in the nursing home....yes, it's admirable that those men were doing their best to protect those most vulnerable and can't protect themselves, but when it comes to survival, it's not very smart to do so. Look at non-human animals....if one of the group is injured...or if a baby is sick, the mother/pack leave the injured/baby behind. A few years ago, a stray cat had kittens in my garage and one of the babies had some kind of neurological problem( we found out after taking it the vet after a few days)...but the mother cat immediately new… [view original content]
that anyone with a disability, both physical and mental, are deservingly expendable...and we're supposed to agree with the mentality and not argue against it. This is a stark contrast to Season 1
while i agree with you 100% on that, I would say that this is because in S1, everyone's still adjusting to people cannibalistic corpses and trying to hold on to the old moral code. By S2, that compassion is no longer there are most of the caring, selfless people are dying out...likely due to those traits in particular. The people that are surviving are the heartless and selfish ones. I also agree with you on that the writers are probably a little biased in how disabled people would fare in TWD. But maybe they think that 2 years into the future more people would agree with Social Darwinism and to drive home Survival of the Fittest (both mentally and physically)
Nick's death was very unsatisfying because you find him that way...there's nothing you can do; it's like the writers were like, 'we don't have enough time/resources to develop his death so we're just gonna say he died while trying to look for Sarah'....
Sarah's death, though, is foreshadowed from the beginning....When Carlos says that Sarah wouldn't be able to handle it if she knew how the world really was, I think that was TT's way of foreshadowing that Sarah is a lost cause.
Anyone and everyone, disabled or no, had a varying degree of chance to survive in a post-apocalyptic world, no matter how low.
I agree....anyone has the possibility of surviving, but when there's only or seconds to escape, you can't really spend time trying to talk someone down from a panic attack
And speaking of liabilities from a narrative point of view, the actual liabilities of Amid the Ruins were Jane and Luke, not Sarah. Both of their actions almost gets the entire group killed twice (the failed perimeter search, and Arvo's group ambushing the heroes), and yet these issues are never brought to light
You are right about that....Luke is the reason they got ambushed and Sarah gets killed
My problem is that Amid the Ruins implies that anyone with a disability, both physical and mental, are deservingly expendable...and we're su… morepposed to agree with the mentality and not argue against it. This is a stark contrast to Season 1 which handled the subject in a mature way, while Season 2 was more tasteless to the point of childishness.
Being a disabled person, why do I need this implication from Amid the Ruins that my lack of survival in a perilous world is the most likely outcome? Would my survival be considered unrealistic, unneeded, and compromise every member in the group as if I was a doom magnet? Considering how the series has yet to portray a disabled or ill character in a positive light and a fair chance for survival, I'm inclined to believe that the creators themselves find it hard to believe that even disabled people can still get a chance, and should be given a chance, to survive.
Sarah and Nick dying only served to co… [view original content]
that anyone with a disability, both physical and mental, are deservingly expendable...and we're supposed to agree with the mentality and not… more argue against it. This is a stark contrast to Season 1
while i agree with you 100% on that, I would say that this is because in S1, everyone's still adjusting to people cannibalistic corpses and trying to hold on to the old moral code. By S2, that compassion is no longer there are most of the caring, selfless people are dying out...likely due to those traits in particular. The people that are surviving are the heartless and selfish ones. I also agree with you on that the writers are probably a little biased in how disabled people would fare in TWD. But maybe they think that 2 years into the future more people would agree with Social Darwinism and to drive home Survival of the Fittest (both mentally and physically)
Nick's death was very unsatisfying because you find him that way...there's nothi… [view original content]
Luke is the reason they got ambushed by walkers at Parker's Run, not the Russian ambush...if Luke was on look out, which he should've been, instead of trying to get his d*ck wet....Sarah dies before the Russians....so Luke IS the reason why they get ambushed
Luke is the reason they got ambushed by walkers at Parker's Run, not the Russian ambush...if Luke was on look out, which he should've been, … moreinstead of trying to get his d*ck wet....Sarah dies before the Russians....so Luke IS the reason why they get ambushed
If the theme of survival and pragmatism was supposed to be the main focus, then it was handled pretty poorly. It had only emerged and put to use by the fourth episode, and in a very clumsy fashion via Jane's development. Before, the group were shown to care and support each other from Episode 1 and 3, and yet suddenly the group no longer cares about each other, and are very quick to give up and forget about Sarah and Nick, who had been with them for much longer than Jane has.
Talking Sarah (and slapping her) out of her episode not only saves her, but gets no one killed, and though she's still in shock she proceeds on step one into recovery. Plus her state had only held the group back in the trailer because Luke had thought that shouting, manhandling her, and making her cry and scream was an excellent idea to snap her out of her shocked state, which ended up attracting the walkers in the first place, seeing how quiet Sarah becomes when left alone.
If Telltale intended to portray Sarah as a lost cause, they did a poor job of it. To me, Sarah was a victim of being surrounded by uncaring people who wanted nothing more to do with her, and not because she held the group down. That wouldn't be a problem by itself had the narrative focused less on portraying Sarah as an annoying liability and more on how selfish the group is to left an innocent girl die for no real reason other than because they couldn't be bothered with her, where we as the player would actually show disgust over their actions.
Remember how the group treated Clementine back in Episode 1, and Sarah was the only one who actually helped her at the time? Seems that the writers forgot that...
that anyone with a disability, both physical and mental, are deservingly expendable...and we're supposed to agree with the mentality and not… more argue against it. This is a stark contrast to Season 1
while i agree with you 100% on that, I would say that this is because in S1, everyone's still adjusting to people cannibalistic corpses and trying to hold on to the old moral code. By S2, that compassion is no longer there are most of the caring, selfless people are dying out...likely due to those traits in particular. The people that are surviving are the heartless and selfish ones. I also agree with you on that the writers are probably a little biased in how disabled people would fare in TWD. But maybe they think that 2 years into the future more people would agree with Social Darwinism and to drive home Survival of the Fittest (both mentally and physically)
Nick's death was very unsatisfying because you find him that way...there's nothi… [view original content]
they could've done a better job as portraying her as a lost cause, but I think they wanted the moral ambiguity of saving someone who may just be mentally ill or maybe it's just in her nature. I don't think the adult didn't not care for Sarah. For the most part, most of the adults aren't really seen interacting with Sarah, but that doesn't mean that they didn't care about her well being. Carlos probably made sure to keep them at a distance so he could keep Sarah's rose colored glasses on. I think Sarah is supposed to help symbolize that the people who don't or CAN'T adapt to the new world WILL perish.
Back in episode 1, Alvin can help you too if you got to the window
If the theme of survival and pragmatism was supposed to be the main focus, then it was handled pretty poorly. It had only emerged and put to… more use by the fourth episode, and in a very clumsy fashion via Jane's development. Before, the group were shown to care and support each other from Episode 1 and 3, and yet suddenly the group no longer cares about each other, and are very quick to give up and forget about Sarah and Nick, who had been with them for much longer than Jane has.
Talking Sarah (and slapping her) out of her episode not only saves her, but gets no one killed, and though she's still in shock she proceeds on step one into recovery. Plus her state had only held the group back in the trailer because Luke had thought that shouting, manhandling her, and making her cry and scream was an excellent idea to snap her out of her shocked state, which ended up attracting the walkers in the first place, seeing how quiet Sarah becomes when lef… [view original content]
Sarah did want to adapt to the world by learning how to use a gun and wanting to be out of her father's protective cage...right until her father died, and she became too traumatised to learn anything at the time. Saving her from the trailer had given her another chance to adapt seeing how she still had the will to live, even if she was in denial over her dad's death (much like how Kenny was over Duck's death back in Season 1) and fell under the observation deck due to sheer bad luck (and a convenient way for Telltale to get rid of her). Too bad that the writers kept hammering our head with the 'she doesn't want nor deserve to live' mallet over and over.
True, Alvin does help Clementine, but only if he's persuaded by her since he's too passive and under Rebecca's control at the time. Sarah helps Clementine regardless of whether you accept her offer to be friends or not.
they could've done a better job as portraying her as a lost cause, but I think they wanted the moral ambiguity of saving someone who may jus… moret be mentally ill or maybe it's just in her nature. I don't think the adult didn't not care for Sarah. For the most part, most of the adults aren't really seen interacting with Sarah, but that doesn't mean that they didn't care about her well being. Carlos probably made sure to keep them at a distance so he could keep Sarah's rose colored glasses on. I think Sarah is supposed to help symbolize that the people who don't or CAN'T adapt to the new world WILL perish.
Back in episode 1, Alvin can help you too if you got to the window
Sarah did want to adapt to the world by learning how to use a gun and wanting to be out of her father's protective cage...right until her fa… morether died, and she became too traumatised to learn anything at the time. Saving her from the trailer had given her another chance to adapt seeing how she still had the will to live, even if she was in denial over her dad's death (much like how Kenny was over Duck's death back in Season 1) and fell under the observation deck due to sheer bad luck (and a convenient way for Telltale to get rid of her). Too bad that the writers kept hammering our head with the 'she doesn't want nor deserve to live' mallet over and over.
True, Alvin does help Clementine, but only if he's persuaded by her since he's too passive and under Rebecca's control at the time. Sarah helps Clementine regardless of whether you accept her offer to be friends or not.
Perhaps you're right, but I still believe that she only died not necessarily because she doesn't adapt in time, but because of bad luck and being in a group of people who doesn't want to help her.
We'll just have to agree that the writing was too clumsy to give us a clear cut answer about how Sarah and Nick's roles was meant to be, and how it end up being poor delivered.
yeah...the writers just wanted to get rid of her, b/c when they're on the deck at PR, there's absolutely NO reason why Sarah should be outside just staring...she should've been inside with Rebecca and Kenny...but no, they wanted her dead or didn't have time/resources to explore her death....but 2 years into ZA, people are going to be less compassionate towards people like Sarah and Ben...all the nice, good hearted people are dying because they're too kind and good hearted
Perhaps you're right, but I still believe that she only died not necessarily because she doesn't adapt in time, but because of bad luck and … morebeing in a group of people who doesn't want to help her.
We'll just have to agree that the writing was too clumsy to give us a clear cut answer about how Sarah and Nick's roles was meant to be, and how it end up being poor delivered.
I tried so hard to like Sarah. But it was that, hard. I couldn't understand her (and don't come at me with PTSD or anxiety because I knew that, even though it wasn't shown well in the game). But in the end, she was a detriment to the group. I would never have intentionally killed Sarah, but when given the option to leave her. I did, and with no regrets. I think the reason many people tried to save her (and admit it), is because you knew Clementine was canon to the story and couldn't be killed, so stuff it...might as well try. But on my play through I do think as if anything could happen at any time, Clem had a huge chance of being killed at that moment to save a girl who is useless anyway (not in a bad way, I did really like her. But she had no hope of survival in this world)...so yes. She died at my hands.
I don't understand why people insist comparing Sarah to Clem from S1. Clementine was 8/9 yrs. old in S1 and S1 happens 2 yrs prior to us meeting Sarah. Sarah is TWICE S1 Clem's age. It's kinda unacceptable that 2 yrs into ZA that Sarah is still so helpless. That's why people hate her---because she's useless and can't contribute a damn thing...she f*cks up the easiest job, harvesting berries...all she had to do was pick the berries and cut the dead leaves off...how pathetic can a person be? Carver should've pushed her off the damn roof.
I just want to add, I attempted to save Sarah both times...I don't hate or dislike her, but it's very easy to understand why Sarah doesn't get any sympathy.
Although Sarah could be very irritating at times, she was exactly like Clementine in Season 1 episode 1 an innocent girl who hasn't been exp… moreosed to the horrors of the world they lived in and thought of it as sunshine and rainbows. Despite causing a few deaths indirectly she has shown to be a good friend such as when she defended Clementine if Carver slaps her and being one of three people who were nice to Clementine when she first got to the Cabin. Sarah was actually on the middle section of my favorites list until her unfortunate demise. I don't hate her but I find her irritating but a good person.
Are we seriously assuming that Sarah's too stupid to do something as simple as pick berries? Really?
She didn't pick the berries because she's apparently an idiot. She couldn't do it because she's too stressed out over being recaptured by her worst nightmare who kidnaps her and her father and friends back to his community, experiences the first time that a loved one smacks her to the ground (albeit forced to do so by said worst nightmare) for a small forgivable slight she made, and is forced to do labour work while traumatised over what had been done to her and her friends. Of course she's not going to be happy and able to pick berries for a tyrannical man who kills a man simply because he didn't get his berries.
And on top of that she suffers from anxiety issues, possibly has autism/Asperger's Syndrome, and also has PTSD. Calling her pathetic over all of this is ignorant.
I don't understand why people insist comparing Sarah to Clem from S1. Clementine was 8/9 yrs. old in S1 and S1 happens 2 yrs prior to us mee… moreting Sarah. Sarah is TWICE S1 Clem's age. It's kinda unacceptable that 2 yrs into ZA that Sarah is still so helpless. That's why people hate her---because she's useless and can't contribute a damn thing...she f*cks up the easiest job, harvesting berries...all she had to do was pick the berries and cut the dead leaves off...how pathetic can a person be? Carver should've pushed her off the damn roof.
I just want to add, I attempted to save Sarah both times...I don't hate or dislike her, but it's very easy to understand why Sarah doesn't get any sympathy.
Comments
Yup, I never found myself liking Sarah either, and I guess I should be thankful too , because it must have been horrible for people who liked her to save her in Ep 4 just for her to die moments later and not even saying anything between those times.
And like you said, every time she talked to me, I just wanted her to go away because I simply just didnt care
I'll give you that. I suppose it has more to do with me not liking characters like Ashley Graham from Resident Evil 4 who only sit there and scream while not fighting. It's not like I'd reject these people in real life, but people like that become obstacles in games either through baby-sitting gameplay or baby-sitting dialogue. It becomes one dimensional, and I never feel any sympathy for those types of characters in stories.
In real life though? Yeah, I'd imagine most young children would be like Sarah. Clementine is interesting partly because she breaks the mold of a young child in this type of story and changes over the course of the story. It's a dynamic process that took time, and it's possible that Sarah could've been like that. She wasn't, though, and I have to judge her character based on the content that we got of her.
Right, and I don't just like a character that's bland, uninteresting, and make's me feel comfortable about liking them. I like characters that are either A: interesting and engage me, or B: I can personally relate to. Sarah was a child, that was her entire personality. No deep complexities or interesting merits for me to feel like I had any responsibility toward. I can't even remember what she looked like (apart from her glasses).
And, again, I don't hate her. Uninspired bores aren't really hate worthy, they're just are a space filled by a bland person.
You mean Clementron?
When i was a young dog running like a old dog, i would like to fight about everything too. I liked it, what else do you want from me. I'm not four years old, so i not going to censor myself. If the mods feel it needs to be removed, so be it.
Yeah, I dont hate her, I just really didnt care what she thought of me. I remember in ep 2 how the game wanted me to put the angle on top of the tree and I made sure I would do anything but find an angle to put on the tree lol
It doesn't matter, don't get attached to anyone in this game, we all know how it ends, unless your name starts with Clem and ends with time.
Dude, what are you talking about? No one said you were four. Stop being so defensive, it's a weird picture to put up connecting your point to Clementine and Sarah's "love." And it's a little inappropriate, that's all. Nobody's "picking a 'young dog' fight with you."
Again, I never said they should. Calm down.
So did Clementine(Indirectly)- Lee, Ben, Omid
I don't dislike Sarah she just didn't have any sort of impact on me. Upon first meeting her I was like 'sweet, she'll be a good friend for Clementine'. But as the season progressed, she gradually became useless; a character that was just there. When she dies in episode 4 I was like 'okay, that happened, let's move on. The only reason I'd ever have to dislike Sarah is if in the greenhouse Clementine doesn't help her with a very simple task she says they're not friends.
And my opinion has absolutely nothing to do with her mental health. Sarah and I share several mental issues and she still didn't have an impact on me, now if she weren't a fictional character it'd be different. Sarah started off as an interesting character but, after a short time, became someone I didn't too much care for. As the PC it felt like I had to coddle her, it became annoying after awhile.
Don't know if someone has already said this and cba to read Every comment, but regarding who gets who killed Sarah's behaviour also gets Nick killed if he's still alive by Amid The Ruins. If she doesn't run off screaming Luke and Nick (determinant) don't need to go chasing after her into the trailer, Nick doesn't go out looking for the others, and instead they go straight to Parker's Run and reunite with the others.
Reggie was a victim of Carver, who looked like he was looking for an excuse to kill someone to spook the kids.
Carlos...wild shot killed him, and he chose to baby her instead of having her do what the others were doing.
Sarita was a victim of the ensuing chaos from Carlos getting shit by...random Carver trooper guy.
it's more everyone else laves her in enough peril for 4 episodes that eventually they just sit around like a-holes while she gets eaten.
I just feel the character wasn't written as well as it could have been
I'm one of those people who's indifferent to Sarah. I don't love her, but I don't hate her either.
what if lee wouldn't found clementine, do you still think it will be the same?
probably she will end up dying from starvation at the tree house
Sarah is mental.
carlos? nope, he got shot by carver's group before sarah cease to function
Carver was damn well looking for a reason just to kill Reggie.
Sarita's a humane person. She would have done that for anyone in the group.
lmao what
That's because Lee taught Clementine the basic necessities of surviving.
Carlos didn't even want to teach her that, claiming "I can protect her myself".
I just can't believe that Sarah haters still exist. Really thought they would at least come to their senses or just quit in general instead of using the same old "Sarah got ____ killed!" when she clearly didn't.
Suppose if there's a wheelchair bound character in Season 3, these writers would be drooling at the idea of a paralysed man/woman crawling away from bloodthirsty monsters while other characters mock him for not being able to walk properly, as if that person had any choice in the matter.
No, but what is the most likely outcome for someone in that position? Like, in the TV show when they come across the people in the nursing home....yes, it's admirable that those men were doing their best to protect those most vulnerable and can't protect themselves, but when it comes to survival, it's not very smart to do so. Look at non-human animals....if one of the group is injured...or if a baby is sick, the mother/pack leave the injured/baby behind. A few years ago, a stray cat had kittens in my garage and one of the babies had some kind of neurological problem( we found out after taking it the vet after a few days)...but the mother cat immediately new something was wrong with the kitten and kicked her out of the den.(the baby couldn't walk and stand up right properly, she kept falling over)....Humans seem to be the only species that actively tries to save those that otherwise wouldn't be alive if mother nature were allowed to run its course
Ben and Sarah served slightly different purposes. Sarah was to show the player that you can't save everyone, especially someone who can't even attempt to save themselves and to get the player to question whether they would try to save someone not just because of their cost/benefit ratio. Ben tried to contribute to the group and kept messing up...and they get the player to question do I save this guy?
Sarah: do i try to save someone who's a good person, but utterly helpless/useless
Ben: do i try to save someone who's a good person, but they are an utter f*ck up
both are liabilities, but in slightly different ways...that's why they were treated differently and Ben gets redemption....(I do wish they had given Sarah a chance at redemption)
I'm not a Ben or Sarah hater, I chose to save both of them. In a cost/benefit analysis, it's unwise to try and save them
Although Sarah could be very irritating at times, she was exactly like Clementine in Season 1 episode 1 an innocent girl who hasn't been exposed to the horrors of the world they lived in and thought of it as sunshine and rainbows. Despite causing a few deaths indirectly she has shown to be a good friend such as when she defended Clementine if Carver slaps her and being one of three people who were nice to Clementine when she first got to the Cabin. Sarah was actually on the middle section of my favorites list until her unfortunate demise. I don't hate her but I find her irritating but a good person.
My problem is that Amid the Ruins implies that anyone with a disability, both physical and mental, are deservingly expendable...and we're supposed to agree with the mentality and not argue against it. This is a stark contrast to Season 1 which handled the subject in a mature way, while Season 2 was more tasteless to the point of childishness.
Being a disabled person, why do I need this implication from Amid the Ruins that my lack of survival in a perilous world is the most likely outcome? Would my survival be considered unrealistic, unneeded, and compromise every member in the group as if I was a doom magnet? Considering how the series has yet to portray a disabled or ill character in a positive light and a fair chance for survival, I'm inclined to believe that the creators themselves find it hard to believe that even disabled people can still get a chance, and should be given a chance, to survive.
Sarah and Nick dying only served to continue this unneeded train of thought. Their survival wouldn't have ruined the story Telltale had for Season 2, and their deaths only ended up delivering yet another 'disabled people are weak and helpless' message in the series. You don't need to be a hard-core survivor (Jane) to make it out alive, you don't need to be blessed with luck (Kenny), and you don't need to be healthy and well-abled (Luke) to survive. Anyone and everyone, disabled or no, had a varying degree of chance to survive in a post-apocalyptic world, no matter how low.
And speaking of liabilities from a narrative point of view, the actual liabilities of Amid the Ruins were Jane and Luke, not Sarah. Both of their actions almost gets the entire group killed twice (the failed perimeter search, and Arvo's group ambushing the heroes), and yet these issues are never brought to light. If the writing were as sensible as Season 1 was, Luke and Jane would have been the ones to be perceived as liabilities and would be left behind to die, not Sarah.
while i agree with you 100% on that, I would say that this is because in S1, everyone's still adjusting to people cannibalistic corpses and trying to hold on to the old moral code. By S2, that compassion is no longer there are most of the caring, selfless people are dying out...likely due to those traits in particular. The people that are surviving are the heartless and selfish ones. I also agree with you on that the writers are probably a little biased in how disabled people would fare in TWD. But maybe they think that 2 years into the future more people would agree with Social Darwinism and to drive home Survival of the Fittest (both mentally and physically)
Nick's death was very unsatisfying because you find him that way...there's nothing you can do; it's like the writers were like, 'we don't have enough time/resources to develop his death so we're just gonna say he died while trying to look for Sarah'....
Sarah's death, though, is foreshadowed from the beginning....When Carlos says that Sarah wouldn't be able to handle it if she knew how the world really was, I think that was TT's way of foreshadowing that Sarah is a lost cause.
I agree....anyone has the possibility of surviving, but when there's only or seconds to escape, you can't really spend time trying to talk someone down from a panic attack
You are right about that....Luke is the reason they got ambushed and Sarah gets killed
That´s was Jane and determinaly Clem
Luke is the reason they got ambushed by walkers at Parker's Run, not the Russian ambush...if Luke was on look out, which he should've been, instead of trying to get his d*ck wet....Sarah dies before the Russians....so Luke IS the reason why they get ambushed
Oh xd. I thought you meant Arvo´s group one
If the theme of survival and pragmatism was supposed to be the main focus, then it was handled pretty poorly. It had only emerged and put to use by the fourth episode, and in a very clumsy fashion via Jane's development. Before, the group were shown to care and support each other from Episode 1 and 3, and yet suddenly the group no longer cares about each other, and are very quick to give up and forget about Sarah and Nick, who had been with them for much longer than Jane has.
Talking Sarah (and slapping her) out of her episode not only saves her, but gets no one killed, and though she's still in shock she proceeds on step one into recovery. Plus her state had only held the group back in the trailer because Luke had thought that shouting, manhandling her, and making her cry and scream was an excellent idea to snap her out of her shocked state, which ended up attracting the walkers in the first place, seeing how quiet Sarah becomes when left alone.
If Telltale intended to portray Sarah as a lost cause, they did a poor job of it. To me, Sarah was a victim of being surrounded by uncaring people who wanted nothing more to do with her, and not because she held the group down. That wouldn't be a problem by itself had the narrative focused less on portraying Sarah as an annoying liability and more on how selfish the group is to left an innocent girl die for no real reason other than because they couldn't be bothered with her, where we as the player would actually show disgust over their actions.
Remember how the group treated Clementine back in Episode 1, and Sarah was the only one who actually helped her at the time? Seems that the writers forgot that...
no worries.
i should've clarified, my mistake
they could've done a better job as portraying her as a lost cause, but I think they wanted the moral ambiguity of saving someone who may just be mentally ill or maybe it's just in her nature. I don't think the adult didn't not care for Sarah. For the most part, most of the adults aren't really seen interacting with Sarah, but that doesn't mean that they didn't care about her well being. Carlos probably made sure to keep them at a distance so he could keep Sarah's rose colored glasses on. I think Sarah is supposed to help symbolize that the people who don't or CAN'T adapt to the new world WILL perish.
Back in episode 1, Alvin can help you too if you got to the window
You've obviously never been on Tumblr.
Spare your innocence, sweetheart. Take my advice.
Mufasa voice You must never go there...
Sarah did want to adapt to the world by learning how to use a gun and wanting to be out of her father's protective cage...right until her father died, and she became too traumatised to learn anything at the time. Saving her from the trailer had given her another chance to adapt seeing how she still had the will to live, even if she was in denial over her dad's death (much like how Kenny was over Duck's death back in Season 1) and fell under the observation deck due to sheer bad luck (and a convenient way for Telltale to get rid of her). Too bad that the writers kept hammering our head with the 'she doesn't want nor deserve to live' mallet over and over.
True, Alvin does help Clementine, but only if he's persuaded by her since he's too passive and under Rebecca's control at the time. Sarah helps Clementine regardless of whether you accept her offer to be friends or not.
right, that's why I said people who DON'T or can't adapt....whether she was willing or not, she doesn't adapt in time to save herself
Perhaps you're right, but I still believe that she only died not necessarily because she doesn't adapt in time, but because of bad luck and being in a group of people who doesn't want to help her.
We'll just have to agree that the writing was too clumsy to give us a clear cut answer about how Sarah and Nick's roles was meant to be, and how it end up being poor delivered.
I've already seen it on tumblr
yeah...the writers just wanted to get rid of her, b/c when they're on the deck at PR, there's absolutely NO reason why Sarah should be outside just staring...she should've been inside with Rebecca and Kenny...but no, they wanted her dead or didn't have time/resources to explore her death....but 2 years into ZA, people are going to be less compassionate towards people like Sarah and Ben...all the nice, good hearted people are dying because they're too kind and good hearted
I'm so sorry.
I tried so hard to like Sarah. But it was that, hard. I couldn't understand her (and don't come at me with PTSD or anxiety because I knew that, even though it wasn't shown well in the game). But in the end, she was a detriment to the group. I would never have intentionally killed Sarah, but when given the option to leave her. I did, and with no regrets. I think the reason many people tried to save her (and admit it), is because you knew Clementine was canon to the story and couldn't be killed, so stuff it...might as well try. But on my play through I do think as if anything could happen at any time, Clem had a huge chance of being killed at that moment to save a girl who is useless anyway (not in a bad way, I did really like her. But she had no hope of survival in this world)...so yes. She died at my hands.
I don't understand why people insist comparing Sarah to Clem from S1. Clementine was 8/9 yrs. old in S1 and S1 happens 2 yrs prior to us meeting Sarah. Sarah is TWICE S1 Clem's age. It's kinda unacceptable that 2 yrs into ZA that Sarah is still so helpless. That's why people hate her---because she's useless and can't contribute a damn thing...she f*cks up the easiest job, harvesting berries...all she had to do was pick the berries and cut the dead leaves off...how pathetic can a person be? Carver should've pushed her off the damn roof.
I just want to add, I attempted to save Sarah both times...I don't hate or dislike her, but it's very easy to understand why Sarah doesn't get any sympathy.
Are we seriously assuming that Sarah's too stupid to do something as simple as pick berries? Really?
She didn't pick the berries because she's apparently an idiot. She couldn't do it because she's too stressed out over being recaptured by her worst nightmare who kidnaps her and her father and friends back to his community, experiences the first time that a loved one smacks her to the ground (albeit forced to do so by said worst nightmare) for a small forgivable slight she made, and is forced to do labour work while traumatised over what had been done to her and her friends. Of course she's not going to be happy and able to pick berries for a tyrannical man who kills a man simply because he didn't get his berries.
And on top of that she suffers from anxiety issues, possibly has autism/Asperger's Syndrome, and also has PTSD. Calling her pathetic over all of this is ignorant.