TWD Season 2 from the perspective of an 0311 Marine
Reading these forums is mostly turning me off, so I want to speak up.
Sarah died after she got 2 people killed and showed no ounce of survivability. Sarah was a completely consistent character, including what her father tells Clem about her, from beginning to end. Equating her gruesome death with Crawford-level-evil is just lazy thinking. If you want to offer a critique, suggest ways in that she could have been a net positive to any group that could protect her.
For example, ever watch Cube? There is an autistic guy that cannot control his outbursts and gets someone seriously injured, but he had a remarkable ability that, in the context of what the movies was telling us, was instrumental to their survival. Something like that could be extremely interesting.
And more generally, any character that is useful to the group in a way that does not involve killing, would be interesting. Doctors to heal and plan hygiene policies, engineers to construct better defenses, creature comforts, and communications, artists to remind/reawaken everyone of the gentle sides to themselves, leaders that could handle interpersonal relations with extreme care, agriculturists that can teach the intricacies of living off the soil...all of these are much more interesting than killing.
However, trying to lambaste the developers (who are ALWAYS in a state of sink-or-swim, from the moment they started work in the corporate world) to make sure that your pet character survives doesn't seem that productive to me.
In summary, thanks to the devs more making something memorable. It made me laugh, cry, and everything in between. Try to make the story a little more believable and give us more meaningful choices to protect who each of us chooses to protect. However, please don't make the story so "sanitary" that it becomes just another game. Make more characters that are like Carver, but without the obviously-evil level of behavior. More moral ambiguity, please.
Comments
What your asking for sounds too perfect if that makes sense, engineers, doctors and trained leaders all in one group? It's too convenient.
Welcome to the forums!
(I'm like 4 posts late damnit)
Right, I'm not saying all at once. I just want a group that builds its own settlement and makes its own rules, even if it's a tiny one (like, less than 10). If it gets torn down yet again, fine, but make that part believable and make it last just long enough to flesh out some good long-term survival that doesn't involve obviously-evil folks.
I can't agree on Sarah being responsible for two people's death, since her actions never gets anyone killed.
Reggie's death was entirely Carver's fault, and Sarah (or Clementine) had nothing to do with it. So what if Sarah couldn't do her job right? It was also Carver's fault for emotionally crippling her in the first place by manipulating her dad into assaulting her for a small slight that he could have just told her off for. As for Reggie's death, it was made clear by his henchmen during Clementine's stealth sections that Reggie was never going to be forgiven for his actions in the past and was planned to be executed from the start, he just wanted to find the right moment and the berries incident was that moment.
It was all fixed from the beginning, Sarah was just a tool in Carver's plan to get rid of Reggie, but perhaps I'm giving Carver too much credit since Sarah and Clementine just happened to be there when Carver decided to make an excuse to kill Reggie.
As for the other death, I'm assuming you mean her own father, which is ridiculous. The 'blend into the walker heard' was a very risky if highly stupid plan, since the group wanted to get out of the place as fast as they could, and not wait another night where the walker heard would have moved on by then. Everyone took the risk to get out and endanger everyone's live by walking through the heard, and whoever didn't want to go had no say in the matter.
Besides, Sarah for all of her problems was very admirable during the event where she walked by the heard. Sure she whimpered and was frightened, but she was nowhere near loud enough to attract any attention whatsoever. She didn't alert any walkers by screaming at the top of her lungs until her dad died brutally in front of her when he was unlucky enough to be shot by Carver's men from the rooftop. And the shooting was also not Sarah's fault either, how on earth would she have helped attract the shooter's attention and give away her father's position? Was she holding up a sign that said 'Here's my dad! Shoot him!' when I wasn't looking?
And once again, Carlos was shot and killed because the entire group took the risk to get out of the place fast and risk everyone's lives by walking through the heard, just because they didn't want to wait another night when a safer opportunity to escape would arrive. Sarah likely had no say in whether the group should leave or not, even if she was mentally sound and was older. Even Clementine's advice, if the player wanted to wait, would be ignored.
That's interesting that Reggie was going to be offed, anyway. I didn't know that.
However, this is note is exactly what I took away from her actions during the walk through the herd (source: http://walkingdead.wikia.com/wiki/Sarita):
"After Carlos gets shot and devoured, Sarah alerts the rest of the group and the nearby walkers with her screaming. Sarita separates herself from Kenny when she tries to protect Sarah and Clementine from an oncoming walker"
But even if we cannot ascribe Sarita's death to Sarah, she wasn't willing to do the minimum required to keep herself alive.
I get it, you loved Sarah. I, too, did everything I could to keep her alive and happy, but it was only because I thought she would snap out of it.
Wiki isn't really a credible source, since anyone can edit it anytime for free and fill in whatever article they like.
Sarita's death was, sadly, caused by her own actions. She choose to rescue Sarah and Clementine, and for her heroics she ended up bit. As for Sarah breaking down over her father's death, the entire group is responsible for everyone else's wellbeing, and they still took that for granted when they decided to walk out in the middle of a heard storm. Had they chose to stay and wait for another day, no-one in the group would have died needlessly.
She actually did the minimum required by running away from the heard and hide in a spot where she would be safe after breaking down over her dad's death, she had that survival instinct. She only died because of Luke's clumsy rescue attempt which ended up attracting the walkers that would kill her in the first place, because she was too much in shock over her father's death, and her friends assumed she had given up and willingly abandoned her, which is made even more blatant in her second death.
It's not a matter of whether I 'love' Sarah, but I felt that her potential as a character was wasted by turning her into a victim and a scapegoat, thus justifying the act of leaving her to die a horrible death for reasons that weren't even her fault to begin with.
So, you don't think Wiki's converge to truth better than other formats that are closed? Not sure what you are saying, there.
Did we play the same game? Maybe it's not fresh in your head. Sarah put Luke at risk by screaming inside the trailer, over and over, despite his efforts to quiet her gently. Being able to STFU is an important survival skill, in any context, and should be part of the minimum requirements to survival in this world.
(EDIT: spelling)
Sure, the character would have been more interesting had she been able to snap out of it and save the day in some way.
Thanks for the welcome, Man, but I doubt I'll be sticking around. There is something very not...grounded going on here. Maybe this game doesn't appeal to folks that have actually been in a life-or-death situation, where morally ambiguous decisions are made to survive. Hard to say, really, but I don't like it.
I'll play the future games, though!
Wiki is free to edit by the public, hence why it's not generally the most reliable source online, especially if a wiki was created for a story about zombies. People are not going to have the same opinions on the characters, the deaths and who's fault it is, and whether they like each other romantically or not...hence why these opinions will always override another opinion via editing. The amount of edits are made are why Wiki is not a reliable source for facts, but for opinions.
Sarah screamed in the first place because Luke was yelling at her to shut up and calm down in the middle of her grieving process, and was agitating her when he arrived and tried to get her to move, especially when she was still in shock over her dad's death.
He was pretty noisy himself too, and he certainly wasn't being gentle about it since he was just as loud as her when Clementine and Jane was wandering around outside. And judging by how quiet Sarah was if Luke leaves her alone for a minute to meet up with Clementine and Jane when they enter, it's heavily implies if not outright states that Sarah was quietly mourning on her own until Luke came around to rescue her and ended up making her upset by pushing her to move without letting her grieve first.
Sure there's no time or place to grieve, but having Luke just leave her be for as long as it takes and stand guard watching for walker activity sounds like a better plan than just barging in, screaming at her to get moving, making her cry, and end up attract walkers that ends up killing her.
If you look at my quoting of the wiki, though, it was to state what I thought happened. I didn't edit that Wiki to reflect what I thought happened. I thought what I thought before reading that wiki and I quoted it because someone else thought the same thing I thought.
I do not believe that my take on the situation was a stretch, either. Common sense dictates that knowing when to remain silent is an important thing in this universe. Sarah was not, either in the herd, when Carver was talking, or in the trailer. I again question whether we played the same game or whether you played it a long time ago. Luke could be heard, too, but his words were to try to calm Sarah down. He wasn't threatening her. He was stating the obvious that they would die if she didn't calm down. The walkers were threatening them and the reason for all of the noise is both directly and indirectly caused by Sarah. The walkers were getting in that trailer, eventually (though why they are always able to overpower structures is a stretch, IMO).
Whether you agree with the decision to go into the herd without waiting a night or two is completely beside the point: they would likely be in a survival situation that required being silent.
Again, I get it: I'm in the extreme minority. I am also in the extreme minority in life experiences among those that play this game, it seems.
Funny how you present yourself as a "marine" in order to assume credibility. It's also funny how you, like so many others, shift the culpability of a murderer onto someone who ISN'T a murderer - how on earth does Carver pushing a man off a roof translate to it being someone else's fault? Only those with an illogical sense of logic think that makes sense.
Realism in this season gets challenged numerous times due to the writers not thinking things through. The whole horde scenario falls apart because the characters do whatever the hell they want. Bonnie unloads her rifle in the middle of the horde and nobody notices, 5 people start running through the horde without any consequences, Kenny starts shrieking and yelling when he loses his girlfriend in the middle of the horde. It's hard to blame Sarah for reacting like a fucking human being would - unless you're an orphan, I suggest you be less presumptuous about how someone should behave when they see their parents get killed.
It doesn't take being a soldier to understand that CIVILIANS AREN'T ROBOTS.
But I'm not just a Marine. I am an 0311 Marine who has at least some life experience that I think is relevant.
Yes, people that don't murder people can be responsible for murder through inaction or incompetence.
Yes, realism is hurting on many fronts, in this game.
Again, Sarah's lack of discretion lead to a chain-of-events that got people killed, IMO.
Marines aren't robots, either.
I don't want to sound like a broken record, but you aren't saying anything to change my mind. No amount of likes will, frankly. Discussion could, though.
I never said you made the edit, I only said Wiki as a whole isn't generally a reliable source when looking for truth and facts. The quote you used is true in terms of how the incident was presented, but as to whether Sarah is to blame for Sarita's death is purely speculative.
We have played the same game, yes. I just don't happen to believe that Sarah is responsible for attracting the walkers in the trailer, and I believe Luke is more to blame for failing to console a child the proper way. It may not be his fault for not knowing how to handle a girl suffering from PTSD, but as an adult he should have known better than to yell at her and trying to push her into moving when she was in no condition to do so, especially when his attempt to rescue Sarah ends up attracting walkers.
I can't really agree on that. Sarah is capable of being quiet when the time arrives. Remember when Carver went inside the cabin house with Clementine and Sarah inside? She stayed quiet and hid away from him, even if she did accidentally step on a creaky floorboard and almost got caught. She's quiet enough to not attract the walkers during the crew's escape from the community, and only started screaming when a stray bullet hits her dad, and he ends up stumbling into walkers that would eat him. If she can be quiet during those situation, then she's clearly capable of being quiet on her own in the trailer.
That's how forums work, I'm afraid. You are going to have opinions that are in the minority, as everyone does, including me.
Luke was presented as a reasonable guy that cared a lot for Clem. I assumed that he cared about Sarah's welfare, too, and was doing his clumsy best to keep them both alive. I have a hard time blaming him for stating the obvious to Sarah and not understanding and getting frustrated when he couldn't get through to her. This seems consistent with how Jane, Clem, and Luke are working together to fend off the walkers in the trailer while Sarah sits there in a trance.
(EDIT: grammar)
Pointing out that Sarah was quiet in an earlier moment is interesting, but she was not able to do so when the group had made a decision to save itself by fleeing the compound. Being able to adapt to what the group decides is best is an important survival...mindset, more than skill. It might even be the most important thing to be able to do, at all, since survival for most is contingent upon working together and following joint decisions.
Separate comment for wiki's, in general.
Why wikis are important are because we, collectively, care about objective truth and that each of us adding/editing content based on our own, personal understanding will converge on what is true much more quickly than any closed-source reference. Using language, we can clarify a matter, indefinitely, with confidence that it will evolve into a constantly better understanding of the matter.
It is clear that you feel very differently about the content of the wiki I sourced. You have every right, and maybe even an obligation, to edit it to reflect what you believe is more accurate. However, if you do not do so because you are less certain than the last editor, then you are morally obligated to leave it be. It is the basis for what used to be called web 2.0.
Reasonable, but he's shown to be incompetent at times. His return to the community when his group is caught by Carver is foiled when he gets caught when trying to get food to eat, and his radio smuggling plan ends up with Kenny nearly beaten to death. He also has intercourse with a random women when he should have been keeping an eye out for approaching walkers, which ends up getting Sarah killed in her alternate death, thus undoing the hard work to save her from the cabin the first time.
Sarah isn't an adult, she's a child with mental issues who have been coddled by her dad (which she disapproves of to begin with) for a long time in a zombie apocalypse. She shouldn't be expected to cope under the stress of walking through a horde of walkers, watch her father be shot and have his flesh torn apart in quick succession, and not scream.
And as repeatedly stated, the group is responsible for their own downfall by walking out at the wrong time in the first place, risking the lives of their friends just because they wanted to escape sooner, and expecting everyone to go through with the plan without any problems whatsoever. They were even selfish enough to risk the lives of the children.
Suppose if I crossed a busy road because I couldn't be bothered to use a zebra crossing, and I got killed by a car because I looked behind me to check if my little niece is right behind me, is my niece responsible for my death because she was too slow to catch up and give us enough time to cross safely?
I'll admit it's not the best analogy, but the situation is similar enough to show that Sarah (or my niece) isn't responsible for the deaths of the group.
That pretty much goes without saying about Wikipedia, or rather the concept of knowledge, in general.
And why would I want to tamper with the article/quote you posted and change it to my liking just to prove a point? I'm not the kind of guy to physically change someone's opinion just because I don't agree with it. I express my opinion, no matter how popular or unpopular, and stick by them.
Luke had lots of issues, but his heart was in the right place. I cannot fault him for not knowing how to get through to Sarah in a life-or-death situation under heavy stress.
As regards Sarah not being an adult, Chuck said it best in Season 1 (source: http://walkingdead.wikia.com/wiki/Charles_(Video_Game)):
"I don't know much 'bout you folks, but y'all keep goin' like this and that girl ain't gon' make it. You gotta consider her a living person, that's it! You're either living or you're not. You ain't little, you ain't a girl, you ain't a boy, you ain't strong or smart, you're alive."
The situation in the story is providing constraints to Sarah that are at least symbolic of those that would be faced in a truly apocalyptic situation. That is, the group made a decision as a group, and each member is responsible for following that decision for the good of the group. Individuals are expected to make mistakes, but certain mistakes are worse than others. Remaining quiet, on command, is one of those basic requirements. There are exceptions, of course, for babies. Babies can be easily carried, concealed from walkers, and shushed.
I really thought it did go without saying, but I wanted to make it clear that this is what I believe in reference to wikis.
And I am not suggesting you "tamper" with it. I am suggesting you update it if you believe that it does not describe what you believe to be true, adequately. This means editing what is there, adding to it, or removing it. You could merely clarify a point, for example. Being proactive about this is what makes wikis successful. If only a few people are doing all of the work, it suffers.
I can't fault him either, but he still chose the responsibility to rescue Sarah, which had ended up being out of his expertise at the time.
So because the majority of the group decided to venture inside a walker horde, even if the minority are against it have no say in the matter and are force to go through with it, he or she has to take full responsibility for something that's beyond their control and accept fault in spite of being placed in that position against their wishes? That makes no sense I'm afraid.
I'd rather not, because that Wiki is a business that I'm not a part of and I don't have any desire to be one.
If not following the group's decision was a known safe decision, I would agree that it would make no sense. After watching Carver get beaten so badly, Reggie being killed on a whim, the executions at the lodge, and the retribution that Carver faced, I think it is reasonable to want to avoid the group that supported him, throughout. That, and the knowledge that covering one's body in walker-guts makes them not notice you if you can remain quiet and walk slowly, of course.
Sarah's own father supported the decision to bring her along rather than risk leaving her at the compound.
I don't understand. You do not wish to be a part of it because it describes a product from telltalegames or because it is hosted by TUCOWS DOMAINS INC?
People get bored when characters get too settled. They like them to be on the move and in constant peril. Makes it more exciting.
Kenny was beaten to near death because of a smuggling plan that went wrong, which was Luke's idea. Reggie was not a part of our group and was doomed to die no matter what in spite of his loyalty to Carver and his community. The death of Walter was indirectly Kenny's fault, as he chose to shoot one of Carver's men, prompting Carver to shoot Walter as an act of vengeance. Not to mention that Alvin is tortured by Carver due to George's murder by Alvin during the first escape plan.
Other than that, the rest of the group wasn't necessarily in imminent danger so as long as they worked for Carver and stirred up trouble. He looked up to Clementine favourably, he didn't push Sarah off the roof just as he did to Reggie, Carlos is used for his doctorate skill and killing him would be bad for business, Sarita and Nick were ignored, and Rebecca was cared for due to her pregnancy. There's a good chance that biding their time and wait until a better opportunity to escape was present, since not everyone was in immediate danger, otherwise why would Carver bring them back home just to kill them all?
And what about Sarah's own opinions? Sure she may not have spoken up due to her age and her dad making decisions for her, but her own opinion would still have been valid.
Yes, that has been the case so far, but wouldn't it be interesting to learn something about survival in this universe by exploring it a bit more deeply than "kill walkers, keep moving"? I still think the Dairy Farm was one of the more interesting episodes because you actually had a feeling that somewhat normal life was possible, before the big reveal. I don't mean to knock what transpired as it definitely worked in terms of invoking an emotional reaction, but I would have at least wanted them to try and stay at the farm, even if that meant doing deals with the bandits for a few days. Or at least, I would have hoped that they could have gathered seed from the farm and started thinking about trying to find a plot of land in the middle of nowhere that could be used to start a discreet crop, with hunting/scavenging along the way to stay alive long enough for it to grow. After all, there are months-long gaps in the game, throughout.
Because I don't want to. I'm perfectly fine here on this forum.
I am confused because you say that it was only Carver's fault for being crazy that Reggie died, but Carver is not responsible for beating Kenny? It was all Luke and Kenny's fault, then?
I agree with you that Kenny seriously blew it at the lodge. He got innocents killed, recklessly.
Carlos knows Carver better than anyone, and he thought his daughter would be safer walking through hundreds of walkers than staying with Carver. Are you now saying that you thought Sarah, whom you have described as disabled, had the capacity to make decisions for the group? It seemed clear that she was relying on her father at all times, and he sided with the decision of the group to leave.
OK, fine, but this game is popular enough that there is a wealth of material outside this forum that will continue to be referenced in this forum. If you have a problem with that material and you have the power to make changes to it, you really should do it if you care about it, deeply.
Carver is indeed the one at fault for EP3 as a whole, but Luke and Kenny are responsible for their own mess due to the radio plan and taking the blame for the theft, which provokes Carver into torturing them. The radio plan didn't accomplish anything in the end, and all they got out of it were bruises and broken bones.
Even a disabled person's opinions should be taken into consideration into the group. Sarah may have anxiety issues and PTSD, but she's not stupid. She doesn't agree to the idea of being kept in the dark and being coddled, as shown with her interaction with Clementine in EP2. Then again, she likely doesn't speak up due to the stigma of children not being taken seriously in group discussions, or she was too stressed out over being kidnapped to make a decision and relied on her dad's advice instead at the expense of her own.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say "even a disabled person's opinions should be taken into consideration into the group." Of course they should, in general, if that person has the capacity to articulate them. She had her father speak for her, instead, which is apparently what he had been doing long before the outbreak.
Clementine was a strong example in the group of a child that could be taken seriously in the group. Are you saying that Sarah did not notice this?
In defense of the herd scene, the walkers are most likely going through some low-functioning version of sensory overload, since they have the PA music radiating all around them, people on the roof shooting guns at them, and people shouting and running within the herd itself. They probably can't even figure what to go towards since it's a hodgepodge of sights and sounds in every direction. They could go after that cloaked survivor running past them, or go after the loud noises and people on the roof shooting. It'd also explain their erratic movement, as they're all stumbling around in various different directions during the whole sequence
Getting away with running has actually worked in the other mediums. The idea is that covering yourself in guts just cloaks you, so a survivor basically looks semi-transparent, or something akin to the displacement effect you see from heat. Under normal circumstances, running would be enough to draw attention to you, but since they have sporadic gunfire and music playing all around them, they follow the more 'concrete' and continuous sources of interest, instead of the barely-visible survivors dashing past
The only real instance that is really pushing it is Bonnie shooting her gun, but the rest can be justified to some level, and can even be argued to be in accordance to what's been seen in the source material (as far as the 'mentality' of herds go, at least)
Good point. I didn't think about that.
Sarah also saved the entire groups life during Episode 4. Who was it that spotted the Walkers? Not Luke.
Sarah is not responsible for her dad's death, or Sarita being bitten. If it wasn't for the plan to walk through the herd then Carver's group would not have shot Carlos. Sarah would not have then screamed in horror as most of us would. Bonnie would not have opened fire, and Sarita wouldn't have gotten bitten, but that's difficult to see as she didn't get bit saving Sarah.
But her writing was not, which is usually the point of contention a lot of us have. She was only "consistent" in the sense that, "ZOMG, what Carlos said came to pass!" Yeah, that's like saying that Nick and everybody else in the cabin group were "consistent" because he predicted he and everyone would die, and then he and everyone did. Such deepness. Much complexity. Wow.
She was treated with much importance in the first three episodes, and our teaching her to use a gun was an obvious mirror to who Clementine once was. It was only once episode 4 came around that they decided, "Meh, fuck all that" and just wanted to get her out of the way. Her second death proves this, where she only dies through an increasingly retarded series of events that make no sense because they literally had no idea what else to do with her, almost like they expected you to sympathize with Jane's view and leave Sarah for dead or something. Nick's treatment is pretty much proof that they were just trying to cut away the fat of the large group because they had clearly bitten off more than they could chew with how many people they included with absolutely no fucking plan on what to do with any of them.
Anyone else remember the days when Telltale so obviously left AMC's writers in the dust as far as character treatment went? Yeah, me too, and I laugh at how the situations have reversed. Scott Gimple ain't perfect, but he knows how to balance characters a hell of a lot better than the current team from Telltale.
Ben was also doomed to die no matter what, but they showed actual effort in differentiating the two deaths and what they meant for the characters. A lot of us, including me, have said many times that we don't have a problem with Sarah dying, per se. If saving her the first time resulted in an alternate death that had an actual effect on the characters, a very different scene, some kind of character affirmation than none at all, and most of all, respect for the damn character they spent the time building up to begin with, you wouldn't see nearly as much complaining as you do today. Hell, Alvin was another character they just completely squandered, and they still tried to give him something resembling a respectable end in his second death if you managed to save him the first time.
TL;DR: Telltale killing Sarah off isn't what pisses us off, and Sarah not being a heroically strong character isn't what pisses us off. It's the lazy, wasteful, and mean-spirited treatment of many of season 2's characters that pisses us off. There were plenty of unfair, brutal, and shocking deaths in season 1. Not a single one of them felt like the writers just didn't give a rat's ass about the character to begin with.
Bullshit. There is absolutely no difference. Let people fall and die when they cannot contribute in some way. That's what Crawford suggested, and it's apparently what you are suggesting with your challenge to suggest what positive things she could have brought to the group. Thinking of people in terms of what they bring to the group and measuring their worth in such a way is precisely what Crawford did. End of story.
Besides, it's quite painfully obvious that Telltale wanted us to remember Crawford and equate it to our actions in "Amid the Ruins", as there are multiple allusions to the main theme of "Around Every Corner", only now they wanted to make it "Darker and Edgier" and implicitly sympathize with the cold, survivalist outlook this time, as opposed to the first season, which judged the hell out of you if you let Ben fall, and was unflinching in its condemnation of Crawford.
Yeah then they dog piled on Carlos after he barely made a sound after getting a bullet to the back of the neck.lol I guess it is kind of undeniable that season 2 was rather quite ridiculous in a bunch of circumstances.
They didn't really pile up on him though, only 2 walkers out of god knows how many actually attacked him (although a few more probably joined in once he was a screaming bloody mess on the ground). Two of which were already very close to him. In fact, one of the walkers that takes him down was already directly behind him, so it would have seen him stumble around and smelled the blood from the gunshot, since it happened right in front of it's face.
Damn, this thread is making me pitiful. You know if I was in a zombie apocalypse I would have probably turned into a raging machine putting a bullet into Sarah's head inside that trailer (if it was me). But I think for fragile zombies I could let them break into the trailer and I'd chop their heads 1 by 1. I mean we're talking about dead people with fragile bones that if they get kicked would be dead in no time.
And what if Sarah was dead at this point? Assuming you're talking about the walkers at the Civil War site.
I agree. In season one there many deaths that meant something. Even Doug or Carley in A New Day. And do you know why that was. Interaction. And the deaths in season one were actually remembered in later episodes. Lee still feels guilty about Carley or Doug come Episode 5. Larry is still a bone of contention between Kenny and Lee choice depending. Kenny still feels sad about family in season 2.
In season 2 the whole attitude to people's death's was. "So what? Did I see where Nick went? Nope. I've never met him before in my life." No one reacted to Nick dying. No one reacted to Sarah dying. Actually, Rebecca did react to their deaths but not by much.
I feel that the writers decided that they needed these people for the story but refused to think of a backstory for them.
Season 1: Lee: History professor. Kenny. Fisherman. Larry (?) Carley: Reporter. Doug. Technician. Lilly. Air force. Stranger: coached little league and liked hunting. Omid. Likes trains. Christa. Like Omid and her family likes old movies. Ben: student.
Season 2: Clem: Natural born leader and more experienced than the survivors she meets. Luke: Art Student. Nick: (?) Rebecca (?) Alvin (?) Carlos: Doctor. Sarah child of doctor. Pete: (?) Carver. (bad man) Kenny: Fisherman. Jane: Likes to pretend her sister isn't her sister.