did Telltale want people to Pick Jane?
Because in episode 4 there were like 2 Dialogue options in the episode to be mean to Jane while Kenny had several of them in episode 4 and 5 when bonnie suspects Jane in episode 4 you cant even agree with her showing a bit of a bias towards Jane which is a bit weird ((in episode 5 you have more options because of Clem s anger because Jane left but as soon as The luke camp pre death Birthday whiskey party starts the dialogue boxes that are mean to Jane dissapear again and they only come back when you talk to her in Arvo s house and then after that i dont remember alot of the dialogue in the car with Kenny and Jane but you can only outright hate Jane and completely antagonize her something you can do to Kenny in episodes 4 to 5 im just sayng.
Comments
...what?
Telltale doesn't care what you pick. Your choice is your choice.
You have known Kenny longer so there was more negative choices aimed towards him depending on if you liked him or not in the previous season. Of course the developers didnt want you to pick Jane because of Jane. The choice is yours. You haven't known Jane as long so the dialogue options are limited. I still think the game gave you enough options as to whether you liked her or not.
Kenny sucks.
I got not jokes, no witticisms or clever comparisons, no nothing. Kenny sucks, point blank.
POINT. BLANK.
There weren't exactly a myriad of options for Clementine to outright express any dislike towards Kenny either. I think Season 2 had too many forced relationships - Sarah's determinant friendship is probably the best relationship in the game.
I recall a few moments where you can talk smack about him but other than that, I'm not exactly an expert.
Truth.
Going into this season off the heels of Season 1 (and 400 Days!), I was thinking about how Lee had all these great relationships to experience: friendly ones like Carley and Doug, encouraging ones like Kenny and Christa, and then very antagonistic ones like Andy St. John and the Stranger. Clementine got a couple of great ones like Luke and Sarah, Rebecca and Jane, and Carver and Arvo that definitely scratched that itch, but it turned out with mixed results.
Granted, part of what makes Season 1 stronger in my opinion is that Lee had a more defined character even with the determinate choices and his relationships were also more solid. I think the primary reason people are so obsessed with Kenny is because of the huge variation in your interactions with him based on your choices throughout the season. Meanwhile, Carley, Doug, and Mark are well liked because of their friendliness and loyalty towards him, while the likes of Larry, Lilly, and Christa were generally disliked due to their antagonism and disagreement. However, you could make efforts to change those sentiments with some examples(Kenny, Lilly) being more notable than others(Larry, Christa).
Contrast that with Season 2's interactions, where the story itself wasn't very solidified the whole way through and it felt like there was more effort put into pandering than telling a coherent story, which extended to the character focus. Aside from Kenny(who I have my issues with) and Jane, most of the other characters are pretty black and white in their portrayal and their dynamic with Clementine could be pretty superficial at times.
Uhhh...yeah, I'm inclined to agree.
And according to alternate playthroughs, there's still quite a bit I didn't see.
Clementine had little to no reason to dislike Jane up to that point! Calling her out on reproachable acts rarely was an option because this posibility didn't go through her mind. The opportunity to do so was present when it was understandable.
I actually think that Season Two writers favored Kenny consistently.
Telltale's main goal was to make the choice an extremely difficult one, that way the fan base would be split 50/50. They don't want all the choices o be plainly obvious by all the players. They did a great job at making everyone pick different sides.
And i can see why because bias aside, love him or hate him, he is the most interesting character created because no matter what, there is always drama, likeable and unlikeable moments with him and people always talk about him.
Yes. But that ain't my ending and it never will be.
Doesn't matter what Telltale want.
"...I've been waiting for this moment for all my life, oh Lord, oh Lord". (Phil Collins)
I think the main issue was that Kenny was shoved into the forefront, resulting in a lack of focus on other characters. In those regards, Jane is also guilty. The extra screen time kind of screams bias towards both characters.
Additionally, the other characters talking shit on Kenny can be interpreted as him overcoming his adversity as the hero on top or something of the like. If you try to get into the head of a player that happens to dislikes Kenny, then his constant drama could be found to be more grating than interesting. And even if you don't agree with this, you have to admit that some form of bias had to be involved to bring him back instead of other characters that had a more likely survival rate. Even in the end, after all of the bad, Kenny earns redemption and a determinant "happy" ending. Additionally, his death provides a more in-depth close than those of other characters. I love Kenny, but I can sniff out a little bias.
Because in the end our choice doesn't matter to them.
After the Kenny vs. Jane clash, an ending with either is fair and fine. I agree there.
Just overall, I'm very iffy on both halves of the bias argument. Yeah, there was a lot of Kenny bias, but there also was some favouritism towards Jane. The bias towards Kenny may have been the most obvious, but it wasn't like every one of his moments was laced thickly with favouritism.
The Kenny endings mainly went along with the theme of "How far will you follow Kenny". For me personally, that was fine. I'd be lying if I said I didn't enjoy every moment of the Wellington scene or Kenny's Season 2 role. I guess it's just Kenny's entire arc that I view as biased. And in all honesty, bias doesn't equate to quality. In my opinion, something can be both good while having bias spewed on it. There are a few points I could bring up against the Kenny ending being biased, but I won't. The points that go towards that arguement (that I can think of) kind of tear the ending apart, so I'll refrain from bringing them up. While I don't mind acknowledging the flaws of something I enjoy, I feel as if these points are a tad too negative and they flat out go against my actual thoughts on those particular scenes.
Technically speaking, this entire comment was a waste of time and a prime example of why I am terrible at debates. The majority of times, I'm not on one side. I kind of just rest somewhere in the middle. Sorry for kind of wasting your time here, Daze.
People always talk about the Kardashian's too, but they're hardly an interesting family or a likable one.
What I'm saying is Kenny is the Kim Kardashian of The Walking Dead.
That's completely false and not what I meant.
You wanna know something I legitimately hate about Kenny? Whenever a series of comments debating about him happens, I either have no interest, simply don't know where to pitch in, or just don't wanna further derail the actual topic. So I'll just link previous deconstructions about him and move on.
Um...what do you mean by "bad"?
Well that and they'd rather spend time with other characters, usually those much nicer and less developed than those two.
Not quite completely false..
If you felt like the game didn't give you enough choices to "hate on" the character then luckily you (the player) can form your own opinion. Thus the final choice is always in your hands. I feel like TT gave plenty of choices to dislike a character, but you still have to talk to them to progress the story and get the main character involved as much as possible. Sometimes the choice to be angry at a character wouldn't flow well with the story, especially at times when we're trying to get to know them or accomplishig a task.
Oh, you mean using his established flaws to create conflict! Okay, I got ya. Honestly, I thought that aspect of his characterization was a good use for him, it's just that he spent a little too much time doing that and other things in the spotlight compared to everyone else.
From what I recall, while my patience with him didn't get really tested too often, there were moments where I just wanted to smack him and tell him to chill out. Notable examples include stashing the walkie talkie on Clementine with Troy barely six feet away from them, insisting that Arvo is "still" a threat -- while pointing a gun at him, Luke, and Mike, being a little too insistent about the plan despite the others simply tossing in their opinions, and ignoring Clementine during the final fight just as much as Jane did. Though that last one is a bit excusable considering he wasn't thinking straight at the moment and Jane constantly provoking him wasn't helping at all.
Yeah but you are one of the few who won't just admit that as much as you hate him, he IS an interesting character whether you like it or not. No matter what scene he is in, drama happens, good or bad, topics are discussed that involve him. You say he isn't interesting, yet you DO talk none stop about him in many of your posts so you obviously have some interest in him, and that interest is to love to hate him.
Season 2 would have been even worse if he hadn't appeared in my opinion and these forums wouldn't have had as many decent discussions either
Spot on! It's those people i wish would actually think more about it than just the obvious hating on him for the bad things he did. It's so one dimensional
I'd argue that not always a good thing, but I see what you're getting at. Even if I don't like how often even bringing him up causes arguments and/or derails things.
Not neccessarily.
Honestly, almost any concept can be interesting and investing as long as the writer executes it competently. Characters like Luke, Rebecca, Sarita, and Carver could've worked out a LOT better than they did if there was more of a concentrated effort into making them less black and white characters and more fleshed out ones. And as some people point out, other characters like Sarah, Nick, Jane, and Arvo are examples of potentially complex characters that didn't always get the proper focus they deserved-- Nick and Arvo especially.
Being controversial is different from being interesting, Dan.
Abortion and gay marriage are controversial topics along with gun control, terrorism, the refugee crisis, US elections and the Brexit, but none of those are interesting just because they produce multiple opinions to rise.
Yes, but it's more of an abided duty to inform people how miasmic and uninteresting Kenny is whilst simultaneously being an abhorrent character.
That's what truly makes him a toxic mix, he isn't just uninteresting, he's a slug in human skin as well.
Maybe you didn't mean that, but it's not false.
You know what, I actually think it's a little bit of both.
Might just be my opinion but I thought the relationship with Kenny was just a bit forced due to certain issues it brought up from a logical narrative standpoint (in fact, I address some of them in one the links above). The main one I can think of is that if Kenny and Clementine had more time to interact with each other back in Season 1 beyond "Duck is sick." "Get in the train, Clementine.," I'd believe and invest in some of the interaction between them a little more. And even then, this is primarily because most of the connection, investment, and history between him and Clementine is mostly based on their mutual connection to Lee. It felt a little less like an organic development of both characters and more like an excuse to pander on nostalgia and "fanservice" for the players of Season 1. As I've stated before, I didn't have too much of a problem with this until I stepped back and realized that Kenny was taking precedence over most of the other characters regardless of your choices. And the Episode 3 example I gave is one the most blatant about this: Why is Clementine, age eleven, spending so much time working with Kenny and Mike, two grown men, when she should realistically swap places with Nick on the women's team a little more often?
Meanwhile, with Jane's case, it was almost intentionally divisive: is she just a sociopath who was introduced as a silver shilled gimmick or is she just an troubled individual who is trying to runaway from her problems by being cold? While I obviously didn't take kindly to her mind games by the end, was she really that bad objectively speaking? Honestly, her sob story wasn't as prominent as people make out (as far as I can remember, anyway) and it was actually one of the things that made think there was hope for her as a person. And while I definitely have my issues with her constantly trying to convince Clementine to just give up on her friends, I can sorta see what she was trying to get at. After all, one of the most memorable(if unintentionally self-depreciating) lines from the final episode in my opinion was "When's the last time anyone did what you wanted." At the end of the day, I find her much more unlikable than Kenny, but I won't act like she never got on my (admittedly huge) good side. Plus, say what you will about her as an individual, but there's no denying that Jane actually added to Clementine's story and character while still managing to stand up on her own. The whole "strong independent woman fights back against the pure evil oppressive man" undertones were a bit much, though.
I think Kenny is a really good character....should he have been brought back...debatable...I preferred his deaths in season one. My real question and one that would be awesome if TTGS would just admit what the hell happened in those writing sessions and rewriting sessions. To me it feels like TellTalegames went through some serious shit behind-the-scenes.
Agreed. For the most part.
> Imagine if someone tried to stop Lee from saving Clem?
I guess the Stranger wasn't a thing. Also, some might go as far as to mention Larry, Jolene, Lilly, Christa, Brie, Vernon, Ben, or Kenny, but that's obviously exaggerating for the sake of being against them.
> That's exactly how Kenny felt throughout the end of Season 2; everyone was against him.
To be fair, he did kinda bring it on himself a few times. Plus, I wouldn't say everyone.
Well i did say my opinion. I think a lot of the reason some people like myself felt Season 2 was better with Kenny's involvement is due to history they had (good or bad) with him from Season 1. Personally i still think had he not appeared in Season 2, the development of the characters from the 2nd season still wouldn't have been any better simply because the writers in my opinion just weren't as good as the ones from Season 1. I just felt everything was perfect on almost every character in that game.
Oh so you are actually telling me right that Kenny is not interesting in any way to you?? He is controversial AND interesting and i stand by what i said.
Controversial but those topics can actually also be interesting depending on the story and outcomes.
So what are you trying to say? That once again you disagree with what my opinion is? That my view is wrong?
And what you said is just an opinion so it really doesn't matter. However i still think you'd have to find something interesting about him to go on about him the way that you always do, even if what you say is vile and over the top most of the time.
Oh, my bad! That's what I get for not reading the fine print.
Yeah, I thought that was the case. Glad you guys enjoyed it!
Hence why I try to stress the writers putting their effort into every aspect of the story instead of using characters like Kenny and, to a lesser extent, Jane in an attempt to distract from the flaws by pandering to nostalgia and "fanservice" that might not even be there, when really it's just making them more obvious. I'm just harder on Kenny in particular about that point because it's a lot more obvious considering he had so much screentime in Episode 3, which is the weakest episode in my opinion.
I am saying that the quality of being controversial does not automatically come in a bundle with the quality of being interesting. The two are not mutually exclusive, either. They're independent from each other.
Lee was foolish if he thought that leaving Clementine by herself amidst a swarmed town was safer than leaving her under the care of a man who was shown to desire her wellbeing.
Well, my opinion does have the value of factual evidence to help support claims I may more elegantly make against him.
And what's wrong with "vile and over-the-top?" It comes standard to Ke... eh, too easy.
100% THIS
I guess the Kenny fans are...
Triggered.
How does your opinion have evidence? Your opinion is that he is uninteresting for the reasons you have stated billions of times but it doesn't mean that it's a fact he's uninteresting. Only what you think