Following Arvo
He led his group to take everything and kill them yet they still trusted him enough to follow him to the house. What happened to the town they were going to? That was a better chance of finding supplies then following a guy who you were just in a firefight with to his shelter. Who's to say there weren't more people there just in case things went wrong. This could have prevented Luke's death, (determinant) Bonnie's death, Clem getting shot, and the betrayal.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Comments
I honestly don't know why anyone would trust after the shootout. Would have I killed him? No, but after he shot Clem, he's a dead man walking. I feel they should've told him to fuck off after the shootout and continue on our ever lasting journey.
If not that, they should have at least mentioned the town, but as far as I know it was never brought up again, ever. It was like they forgot that was where they were headed to in the first place.
Most of episode 4's plot points were kind of abandoned, perhaps due to the change in writers.
Looking at it another way, Arvo's mentioning of food and a safe place to stay sounded more reassuring to the group than a potentially dangerous city I guess.
But on the other hand how can you trust someone who just attacked you, what if there were more of them and he was leading the group into an ambush.
I guess it was desperation at that point. The group was arguing if they should trust Arvo and their main excuse for him was he wasn't the one shooting at them and he does not wish for more people to get hurt (which was obviously a lie: Clem getting shot by him). Plus the fact that he is a cripple and we outnumbered him/had guns on him, it felt like a pretty safe bet...I guess.
"1) I believe they said the town was on the other side of a river? (Don't quote that, but I think that's what I remember) 2) He said it was close 3) There would most definitely be food, warmth, shelter, etc. because the Russian group had been surviving there. Something the town didn't promise."
From a different thread.
OMG yes! The decision to follow Arvo was the worse decision in the game...it was completely out of character, espeically for Jane...the loner who doesn't trust anyone and threatened to kill Arvo is she saw him again....even if they felt it wasn't safe to leave Arvo behind...why on earth would they believe he's got a shelter and food somewhere?
I think Luke or someone says that the next rive crossing wasn't for a few miles...but considering Arvo took them on a 5+ hr journey for two cans of beans....they could've waited til they found a crossing.
all the deaths that occured at Arvo's could've happened if they went with the original plan and could've been better executed in doing so
I would have left him. All things considered the group was too nice. He was just dead weight given easy life also Mike being inconsistent is ehhh... I'd like to alter Hershel's quote from S1 " Old Breckon's writing has gone lame but that ain't nothing new"
That was my in-game choice...i was against believing and going with Arvo. I couldn't believe how willingly everyone was (aside Kenny and I) on believing Arvo. "
when Jane says, "believe him or don't believe him, but it's still worth checking out"...i was like, "i don't know who you are anymore"...Bonnie was right...just when you think you've got her figured out she up and surprises...
Bonnie is never right she's part of the problem and usually is her and Arvo are weak links
don't get me wrong i don't like Bonnie, but she was right about Jane in that respect. just b/c someone's an asshole doesn't mean they can't be right about something