Why do people hate twd game season 2
why do people hate twd game season 2 i like it more that season 1 sorry if there is a discussion already i am new to the forum
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
why do people hate twd game season 2 i like it more that season 1 sorry if there is a discussion already i am new to the forum
Comments
Basically,for a lot of things,like:cheap deaths,wasted potentials,lack of hubs,shortened episodes,and a lot of other things.
Well, personally, I don't hate season 2. I believe most people don't like it because of the story (the story has some flaws), little interaction (S1 you were able to explore the environment), 90 minutes episodes (unlike S1, when the episodes were around 120 minutes long), people dying just for shock value (in S1 people died for a reason actually), characters coming back to life, Carver being a wasted potential, and your choices didn't matter at all in S2. At least in S1 you had choices with an impact, for example the Kenny/Lilly and Carley/Doug choices. Carley and Doug were determinant characters, but they still had some impact in the story, especially Carley. In s2 EP 2 if Nick is not killed, he has THREE lines, and then he's killed offscreen in EP4. I believe most people don't like it for these reasons.
What TheCatWolf said. But for me personally as well, it was that Season 2 was inconsistent and didn't really have a clear narrative or goal throughout, nor was there a set focus on the characters Clementine interacted with, with none having as a believable or strong enough bond as we got with her and Lee in Season 1.
That said, I really like the first two episodes of Season 2 T_T even if they make weep to think of them now.
Yess, I don't remember who said that, but If I had to use ONE word to describe S1, it would be redemption. If I had to use one word to describe S2, this word would be... uh... none. Cause I still don't know what S2 is about.
Stuff, Season 2 is about, stuff.
Things...
I personally love Season 2, but I can try and explain a few of the complaints:
In Harms Way: As stated before, people generally didn't like this episode and what they did to Carver. Other than him dying too early, some people feel that they made his character into a typical evil psychopath that ruined all of his potential.
Departure of Sean Vanaman: Sean Vanaman was the head writer of Season 1 of The Walking Dead and wrote Episode 1, 3, and 5. Shortly before the release of Season 2, he left and formed his own company called Campo Santo. Vanaman recommended his friend and now current Telltale writer Nick Breckon to take over the job. Breckon wrote Episodes 1, 2, and 5 of Season 2.
Its personal opinion every fan i love both seasons
oh god xD
Not sure if you're talking about me when I said this about a month ago in the "Not Excited about Season 3" thread, but I agree regardless. A tighter narrative structure, especially the set up in the first episode, would have really helped the Season 2. It seemed that they tried to use the theme "sometimes you have to do bad things to look after people you care about" (with Carver, the baby, and the Russian group as plot events around the theme), but it wasn't set up well and the story wasn't as tightly wound around it.
Actually I was talking about someone who said that S1 is about Redemption, there was a thread a while ago. :P But yeah, I agree with you, for me the first episodes were pretty good, but everything got so messed up when Amid the Ruins was released
I still prefer season 1 over season 2, but season 2 was still fantastic, and a great sequel
I can't tell you why everyone hates it. But, for me the final episode killed everything I loved about where the season could've potentially headed. The intrigue, the tense narrative, the choices... Clementine as a character. And that last one destroyed me the most, I loved her character in season two more than season one UNTIL No Going Back. NGB just cast her aside as a completely passive side-character for Kenny's non-character. And then there's the bullshit with Jane and Kenny being spiteful and mean toward each other for no reason, the town literally disappearing. I mean, there's only so much stupidity a person can handle before it overloads the senses.
So, NGB pushed season two to shit.
You put In Harm's Way but not Amid The Ruins -_-
I think there's so much hate for season 2 b/c there's been so much time to dwell on problems and issues people had with that season. Even though our choices don't really change the overall story of S1, S1 did a better job of at least give the illusion that our choices mattered...and b/c the story was more captivating and S1 was a breath of fresh air for RPGs...
It seems like there wasn't a clear consensus as to where Clementine was gonna go. The only thing that really matters is who you choose at the end...but nothing Clementine does prior to that moment has any affect on the events that transpire...
EDIT: like, the writers have said that they already knew how they were going to end S1 before any dialogue had been written....S2 felt like the opposite...like they were kinda just wingin' it....they were letting the story lead them rather than them leading story, so to speak;
it's like they didn't figure out how they wanted to end it until Ep.5 and just threw in the choice b/c they had to make something about S2 matter
But like I said, it's been almost 2 years since S2 was released so there's been a lot of time to replay every scenario and nit-pick at every inconsistency..because S1 was so raw and the story was so enthralling, it was much easier to brush aside moments that were unrealistic.
I find Amid the Ruins is generally liked much better than In Harms Way by most of the people on the forums because, unlike In Harms Way, Amid the Ruins had a lot of exploration (Parker's Run, museum, the deck) and you could also talk to several people such as Rebecca, Luke, Jane, Mike, Bonnie, etc. I personally feel In Harms Way is way better than Amid the Ruins, but the overall feeling on the forums is that IHW is worse so I went with that.
I loved S2, but with S1 being sooo good and in this one going in a slightly different direction (plus some minor screw-ups people tend to blow out of proportion) it will get some hate. A game this popular will always have people that dislike it for whatever reason, it's just bound to happen.
You'll see the same arguments posted over and over again (err kinda like this topic), because new people play it everyday and the old players want something to talk about. Tis the way of the ye ol' Telltale forums.
I think you could use the word trust here
The first two episodes were heavily based around the idea of trust (Nick and Pete, who do you appeal to, this new group's disposition towards you, the introduction of Carver, reintroduction of Kenny, and the dilemma of what group to trust, etc etc)
Episode 3 sort of dealt with the idea of trust but not really (Bonnie and... that's about it)
Episode 4 pushed towards Kenny vs Luke and which one to trust but that's about it
Episode 5's climactic choice can essentially boil down to who you trust, and you have Mike and Bonnie's betrayal
The problem is, the season pretty much stopped treating trust as an overarching theme after episode 2
I don't hate it. Just disappointed. It could have been better, although the season finale was really well done.
No. it's
Get it right next time.
...Well, I can sum up s2 with this;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wikWQRmyIQo
Um...Anyway, on a more serious note, the biggest reason I didn't like it was because I felt they wasted plenty of character potential by either killing them off too quickly or turning them into mindless plot devices. There were a lot I wanted to see more of and I didn't get that. (At least it gives me lots of ideas for fanfiction. If the writers won't love these characters, then I will. Even though I am a shit writer.)
salute to you. this is what this forum is about, telltale need a feedback like this to make future seasons worth gamers while and not make a mistake twice, because those facts dont lie. it reflect the work of a game since its an episodic game and not a full one on release people have time to correct the errors with each episode and to put a score on the final product, thats what you get. they say they use this ''gap'' between episodes to correct things that the fan wants, and episode 5 of season 2 was a redemption for the whole season for me personally, if the ending episode wasnt really good then i would give season 2 a 5/10. but the finale really picked it up for me and made me excited for season 3 again! i hope next season will have stronger episodes and not just kill people for the shock, i'd rather have no characters killed but with a development is better then off-screen deaths just for the shock value. that way it has longer impact if we actually cared enough for the characters and not just BOFF. nick is dead. but yeah. its sad but will i cry like lee or kenny or even omid? NO. because there is not enough development for me to care. hope season 3 will be a much better than season 2.
I guess I'll first apologize, I never really hated Season 2. So any posts/comments I've made saying really bad stuff about it were a bit uncalled for so I apologize for that.
For me though, I just wasn't as personally invested in the story and characters in Season 2 as I was in Season 1. The story in Season 1 was really strong and clear for me and I loved the characters, whereas in Season 2 it fell apart for me after In Harm's Way and I found myself not particularly caring about the characters that much.
So yeah, I guess a lot of people "hate" on it because like me they weren't as personally invested in it. I still enjoyed it as a fun thing to play every couple months though.
'Hate' is a strong word. There were moments in Season 2 where they really had me hooked. For example, there are scenes in Episode 2, like the first meeting with Carver or the final showdown at the ski lodge, I'd put up against the best scenes in Season 1.
From Episode 3 onward, though, it all started going off the rails, and got steadily more meandering and pointless as it went. Shoddy characterization, ridiculous behavior that comes out of nowhere, laughably over-the-top breeches of suspension of disbelief like Clem being shot and shrugging it off like it never happened. And on and on.
I can't shake the feeling the writers actually did have a plan of some sort when it all started, but that it fell apart for reasons we're not privy to. Maybe Michael Madsen was too costly to bring back for Episode 4 or something, forcing them to kill Carver early? Maybe they were under strict instructions to keep each episode short, with minimal voice work, limiting the amount of character development they could engage in? Maybe they underestimated how expensive it would be to acknowledge all your 400 days outcomes properly?
I dunno. Given how complex games are, and how the studio as a whole appears to have bitten off a whole lot more than it seems able to chew lately, I'm very hesitant to just blame the writers for sucking at their jobs. I have a feeling Season 2 could have been just as great as the first season if Telltale had simply been willing to invest the time and money into it that it deserved.
Love season 2 but I hate the glitches for example i can't rewind my data every time i try it crashes and some of my choices are not save which is frustrating. make it simple love the game hate the glitches.
Senson 2 is my favorite season and I personally love it to play as Clem because its interessting how a kid is surviving the ZA.
Not really... the finale felt pretty mishandled, especially with how Telltale thought that Kenny vs Jane was somehow more of tearjerker than Kenny vs Luke, even though Luke was introduced from the very first episode of S2, and was one of the few members of the cabin group who wasn't a complete idiot. He was probably the most likable member of the group and so instead of being wasted in that drowning scene we should have had that ultimate build up to finally force Clem to choose between him or Kenny - but no, somehow its the recently introduced Jane whose a worthy alternate choice to Kenny.
It would have been much cooler to see two leaders like Kenny and Luke finally clash, that would have had far more impact than Kenny vs Jane.
Despite Season 2's major faults, playing as Clementine, a child survivor was actually very enjoyable for me, I just wish Telltale would remember she was an 11 year old girl and therefore kept her character more consistent, but they didn't (when an 11 year old girl is the only competent member of a group comprised of adult survivors you know something is seriously wrong).
I don't hate it... I mean Clem is still my favourite character (but considering how wooden the other S2 characters were she was really the only one I cared for), but seriously I still don't get why a potentially interesting character like Pete got wasted in favour of Nick.... we could have developed a better emotional connection with Pete since he was really the closest we got to another Lee (well Luke sort of came close), plus it would have been interesting to have an older more experienced survivor around but instead we were stuck with Nick/Ben 2.0.
I know its a singular issue I'm pointing out but seriously, how could anyone see someone as dumb as Nick as a more interesting character than Pete? We already had another incompetent member (Sarah) there was no need to push in another one - Pete would have been way better.
Just imagine if Nick died early in S2 and Pete lived...
Then in the finale instead of Kenny vs Jane, what if we had Kenny vs Pete? Kenny vs Luke would have still been a more logical progression, but Pete had so much potential, he would have likely been my favourite cabin survivor in place of Luke had Telltale not killed him off early.
This.
Well. Let me think...
1: They Killed off Characters way too much, and Often wasted their Potential. For example, As mentioned by @Harian96 On a different Thread, Pete had a fantastic Amount of Potential, He could have become a great character, But was Replaced by Nick, He was Underdeveloped, and More, But he had potential to be a great Character. I find this problem frequently with Many of the Characters, Especially Jane. The reason so many people hate on Jane is because she was Underdeveloped, Which means her actions were COMPLETELY Out of Line, Because no one knew her, She has no development. Sarah was Killed off too early, and was Far too underdeveloped, Leading to people not being to fond of her, Hell, Kenny was underdeveloped and he was a Season 1 character. The Only Character even CLOSE to Being Developed Correctly was Luke (Correct me if I'm wrong), But The fact that they killed Characters who were Barely developed, and Kept characters who Everyone hated alive, Makes that the first reason.
2: The Plot, They threw new characters, and Often Completely Changed the plot Into something else for no reason, the Villains (Not carver) Were Bland, The Walkers were either underused or used with Horrid timing, The locations were stupid, Hell, The entire season had a Span of 20 Days! and I did the math! It was far too much that they had fit into 20 days, and There were way too many Coincidences, Making the whole season Look sloppy.
3: and Finally, Since we covered the Characters and Plot, we Have Clementine. She was underdeveloped, She turned into a tank, was too Tough, and Not to mention, A Good ZA game with a Child protaginist Makes you feel helpless, just as the main character feels. (Such as when you play as ellie in TLOU) But Clem was so tough and Bland, and Emotionless, It felt like we were walking through a rose field. It doesn't feel right. Clem had to take care of everything. that's NOT how it works.
So I could go on and on about More reasons, But That is the Grade school sum up about why people hate season 2.
You sure about that
because I never really got that feeling playing Ellie
Season 2 gained more detractors due to how it failed to live up to the hype, especially when it continues from the first season, which was critically acclaimed. The second season pales in comparison to the first in terms of writing, quality, content, and entertainment.
It was clear that unlike Season 1, there was a lack of passion and effort in creating Season 2, and it shows in the later episodes. Nothing new and exciting was incorporated into the story, and instead we were either given one-dimensional characters and plot, or a retelling of past plots for the sake of nostalgia.
The only positive note it that the original writers were not responsible for the mess that Season 2 had become, otherwise I would have been appalled by the idea of a universally acclaimed work that would eventually suffer from the 'sequelitis' syndrome, because they assumed that we would unquestionably love Season 2 just because it's a sequel to the critically acclaimed Season 1.
To be fair Season 2 did show promise early on, the first two episodes were handled well in spite of the lack of hub options and it's short play time, but they were still generally well received by the audience. But as soon as Episode 3 came around it all started to fall apart, and due to the poor writing direction and mishandling of characters, Season 2 was never going to redeem itself.
In the end Season 2 became an absolute mess, the Cabin Group's presence and impact in their own story were abruptly cut off in favour for a returning character and a new character introduced halfway in the story. A villain character that could have had the chance to become the likes of The Governor or Negan was quickly killed off, and instead replaced by The Russians that appeared out of nowhere and were basically walking stereotypes (pardon the pun). Likable characters that needed a backstory, character development, or a scene to make them stand out in their moment of glory are instead used as walker fodder to fill up the deaths-per-episode quota, and eventually we were left with characters that we couldn't care about or root for. And let's not get into the hyper competence of the child player character who's miraculous survivability and show of strength ends up breaking our immersion into the story.
Season 2 was obviously never going to be just as successful as Season 1, but it didn't mean it couldn't be memorable in its own right. It could have been a well written sequel that introduces new themes and characterisations for us to be invested in. Instead we ended up with a disappointing sequel with a lot of wasted potential, because the writers couldn't or didn't want to challenge themselves into matching the quality of the game's predecessor while introducing new and more diverse characters and exploring more opportunities for a more exciting story direction.
Dude. Playing the fight against Bill (Or whatever the cannibal dudes name is) made me feel pretty helpless.
I personally think S2 was better than S1, so I've never understood a huge amount of hate. But then again, you don't argue about taste.
Personally I really loved Nick, he was quite a dimensional character and was very interesting, he was just wasted in the end which is sad.
You liked the final choice?
MetallicaRules, you pretty much covered my complaints of Season 2 ;.; thank you.
One thing that did get on my nerves too was the pine trees. I know I've joked about it before, but we spent a lot of episodes surrounded by the same generated trees with just slightly different colors or snow on them. While the only episode we have away from the trees is spent trapped inside a warehouse store that's felt slightly claustrophobic and wasn't really interesting in terms of design when you compare it to places like the Ski-Lodge or the Cabin or other places from Season 1. Maybe it's because cast are prisoners, but we're still mostly confined to small areas with few hubs like you mentioned that doesn't help. You thought even with Clem's character it might've given us a chance see how these other survivors there are living instead of seeing everybody being on patrol all the time and seeming like the place was mostly 'empty'.
Season 2 felt like strays of a few buildings between trees, and I can't help feeling it was to cut corners rather than have us in other built up locations like towns or streets. I remember really liking the forest business with the first episode thinking 'wow we've got nice trees now! This looks so cool and different!' but by the end after having watched characters so many times just walk and chat while the same trees went on by like they're walking on a treadmill, I got really fed up, if felt claustrophobic there too in seeing them in woods nearly all the time.
If it was going for a more out in the country business than Season 1, couldn't we have seen more of the country other than pine trees blocking everything? There are so many beautiful things out there away from cities and towns that Telltale could've really explored even in terms of wildlife; like bears, friggin hell can you imagine the group having to deal with a hungry bear!? Or a snake bite, what if somebody had gotten bitten by a snake and now you gotta hurry and risk your life to get them an antidote? Even building shelters to hunting could've been interesting other than people sitting around complaining they can't find food.
I think it's true what a reviewer said once that Season 2 didn't feel like it got as much love put into it, and with the shorter episodes compared to last Season, even before the quality started dropping after A House Divided, I gotta wonder if it really was just time constraints, or if Telltale just didn't trust Clem in her own game
I do believe that it was time constraints, and I said this for several of the reasons I listed above, much of the problems can be fixed with longer episodes, like hubs, character development, choices, etc. When you look at Telltale's newest series, TFTBL and GOT, both of which have been about 2 hours every episode, we're seeing a lot more of what was missing in Season 2.
I said this a long time ago, imagine if an episode like Starved for Help was forced to comply to that hour and a half rule they were doing with Season 2, all of the things that would have been cut from the episode. I can guarantee you that the "Who to feed" choice would be removed, we wouldn't have been able to explore the dairy as much, we would be forced to go from place to place without looking around, and the St. Johns's wouldn't have been as interesting villains. Now an episode like In Harms Way should have been over 2 hours long, it wouldn't feel as rushed, we could explore more, characters could have developed, Nick could've played a bigger role, maybe even more choices could have been added, etc. Shorter episodes constrict the writer's freedom to make the episode how he or she wants it to be and leads to a drop in quality.
Don't say that ;_; I'm sure you're awesome.