To be honest, I was really surprised about her actions in ANF, she wasn't the same Clem that I raised her to be, stealing, reckless shooting at Eli, constant lying, it was super strange to see her actions. At the very first choice to lie or tell the truth to Tripp about Clem killing Eli, I chose to tell the truth, I didnt support her because my Clem wouldn't be so reckless as to point a gun at a scammers head and assume that all the bullets couldn't fire. Her character to me seems far more distant than its ever been to me. I hope Telltale brings her back into my Clem from season 2, and I hope they don't bring me to the point of killing her over her bad actions.
I admire how passionate you are towards her, but if you're playing as Javier, and she has a gun to Gabe's head, no matter the bond, family c… moreomes first. I just think it's wrong for people to choose her just because they're biased. i suppose if she shot Gabe, you'd still support her yeah?
To be honest, I was really surprised about her actions in ANF, she wasn't the same Clem that I raised her to be, stealing, reckless shooting… more at Eli, constant lying, it was super strange to see her actions. At the very first choice to lie or tell the truth to Tripp about Clem killing Eli, I chose to tell the truth, I didnt support her because my Clem wouldn't be so reckless as to point a gun at a scammers head and assume that all the bullets couldn't fire. Her character to me seems far more distant than its ever been to me. I hope Telltale brings her back into my Clem from season 2, and I hope they don't bring me to the point of killing her over her bad actions.
I don't understand what's the point of being surprised/disgusted/outraged of what other players choose to do in their game. They have their own reason and to some people some choices are easier than others, nothing more nothing less.
If that's the case, why is it deemed wrong or bad if you tell the truth and Clementine gets in trouble for killing Eli? Or agreeing with Conrad? Or if you call her a liar and a troublemaker? Seems that people are so guttered by it and that's it's wrong given how many people chose against those. Clementine was firing a gun at a mans face and weather she thought it was blanks or not, it proved she had no respect for another persons life and the fact that so many people covered for her proves that there is no justice in these games from the majority. Covering her ass when she's in the wrong because people are biased is disgusting.
I don't understand what's the point of being surprised/disgusted/outraged of what other players choose to do in their game. They have their own reason and to some people some choices are easier than others, nothing more nothing less.
Except I never said it was wrong or bad. I don't care what you decide to do in your game. I just find getting worked up over other people's choice to be pointless. Do you think keeping saying they're biased is going to change their mind or something?
If that's the case, why is it deemed wrong or bad if you tell the truth and Clementine gets in trouble for killing Eli? Or agreeing with Con… morerad? Or if you call her a liar and a troublemaker? Seems that people are so guttered by it and that's it's wrong given how many people chose against those. Clementine was firing a gun at a mans face and weather she thought it was blanks or not, it proved she had no respect for another persons life and the fact that so many people covered for her proves that there is no justice in these games from the majority. Covering her ass when she's in the wrong because people are biased is disgusting.
Im not trying to change peoples mind/opinions, im just stating what is the obvious. We all know Clementine fans are going to be biased because they haven't got the right mindset when playing these games. They make decisions based on helping her or trying to get close to her, even if they're wrong, they still choose it. Like, Her shooting Eli in cold blood and then her wanting you to lie for her, how is that a good choice?
Except I never said it was wrong or bad. I don't care what you decide to do in your game. I just find getting worked up over other people's choice to be pointless. Do you think keeping saying they're biased is going to change their mind or something?
"Stating what is the obvious". "Right mindset". Again, why do you care? We're talking about games here, not reality. No zombie apocalypse, just people playing for fun.
As far as her accidentally shooting Eli, the guy gave her bullets that won't fire which nearly got her killed and when she confronted him he tried to attack her with a knife. He is far from innocent. I have save files for both options, not everything is about Clementine fans you know?
Im not trying to change peoples mind/opinions, im just stating what is the obvious. We all know Clementine fans are going to be biased becau… morese they haven't got the right mindset when playing these games. They make decisions based on helping her or trying to get close to her, even if they're wrong, they still choose it. Like, Her shooting Eli in cold blood and then her wanting you to lie for her, how is that a good choice?
You'll notice in the statistics that when it comes to deciding on whether to side with Clem or not, an overwhelming amount of players will choose Clem. We miss being able to play as her, and even though most people didn't want to have to kill Conrad, when you ask us to choose, it'll always be Clem.
Dude, what they did matter just as much as when they did it. That's what you are ignoring in order to try to support your argument.
Do you honestly think that the moment when the threat happened, if it was immediate or a past threat, doesn't matter when deciding to shoot? Really?
Hitting Andy, while I still don't think was necessary, is at least understandable after everything he did. Shooting him is also somehow understandable, but it is even less necessary given the situation. Unless people wanted to make sure he wouldn't hurt anyone again, which is a different reason to shoot Conrad.
You are simplifying the two situations down to "shooting a guy for something he did at any point of time". You are not weighting the situations correctly and you are ignoring what are actual facts in order to try to support what you think other people think.
You have one "confession" (and you are still going with the false equivalency when it comes to killing someone in front of Gabe or S1 Clem). I have all the posters who are saying the exact same thing as me, and agreeing with my posts on the matter, because everything in this discussion, the big hole on your biased and baseless argument, comes down to "Andy was not an immediate threat, while Conrad was". That's it. That's all that matters.
Why so aggro?
And what's wrong with that? I mentioned the 2 reasons why Conrad was killed, and it is also a fact that Gabe isn't as harde… morened as her which is clearly evident by him panicking at like watching his steps mom surgery, making stupid decisions like run into open gunfire the way he reacted with Conrad etc.
Because they both did the same thing, what aren't you getting? Everyone who shot Conrad is saying because he either grabbed Gabe or what he did to Clementine, meaning that if his gonna do that, then he deserves to die. Andy did the same thing to 2 kids who were younger then Gabe and Clementine beiung younger as well. The reason why he wasn't killed was because people didn't want to do it infront of Clementine. And you wanna go on about not being a threat, is it justified then to punch the living shit out of a guy when his defenceless?
If Clementine wasn't there, how many of those people that spared Andy and Danny would've … [view original content]
The way the OP frames the question is misleading. Conrad wasn't "Suggesting" anything, he was demanding at gun point, so not 1 single person killed Conrad for "Suggesting a plan."
Lot's of different people had lots of different reasons for killing Conrad, it's not as simple as "They killed him because, 'MUH CLEM!!!' (I'm paraphrasing)."
I didn't want to kill a group member either, but I also didn't want to betray a group member because it 'might help Kate a little bit maybe.' And at that point, Conrad was the one putting the group in danger, not Clem, so it was an easy decision. Bang.
Well now you are baiting. Wonderful. I understand you, really, it is hard to hold up a civil argument when you ignore the most basic thing about the situations you are trying to compare.
"As long as a person is alive, they're still a threat". That's a way to see it, but even when you put it that way, it isn't the same situation because:
1 - You can incapacitate Andy by beating him up, but you can't do that to Conrad.
2 - Andy stays behind. Conrad stays in the group.
That makes the probability of Conrad being a threat to the group again much higher than Andy. Besides, you say Conrad shows no hostility towards Gabe if he doesn't die. He showed no hostility towards Gabe before that scene either. And, again, this is if you agree with him. If you don't make a decision, therefore not agreeing with him, he kills Gabe and Javi. The chance of him getting hostile again if you disagree is very real.
I am saying the reasons why I did what I did and repeating the reasons other people said why they did it, so I am not assuming anything about what is going on other people's heads, I am believing them when they say their reasons. You are the one claiming that people are not being honest about the reasons, and now you are baiting and flaming. Very grown up, love, very grown up.
Because then people like me who actually play the game from a mutual perspective, get slandered because we aren't apart of the clem army. What's the current percentage of The Eli situation? 90/10% in favour of lying for her? Clementine wants you to lie for her after she did a fucked up thing and 90% of the players or maybe more did so yet if we are talking properly, you'd tell the truth more so after an unarmed man was killed in cold blood. You have save files to see what the alternate choices are, right?
He was unarmed when she shot him, she was firing the gun in his face which showed no regard for someon'es life. she could've fired it on the ground but she chose to fire it at his face. The fact that so many players chose to lie for her is pretty scary.
"Stating what is the obvious". "Right mindset". Again, why do you care? We're talking about games here, not reality. No zombie apocalypse, j… moreust people playing for fun.
As far as her accidentally shooting Eli, the guy gave her bullets that won't fire which nearly got her killed and when she confronted him he tried to attack her with a knife. He is far from innocent. I have save files for both options, not everything is about Clementine fans you know?
Dude, what they did matter just as much as when they did it. That's what you are ignoring in order to try to support your argument.
Do yo… moreu honestly think that the moment when the threat happened, if it was immediate or a past threat, doesn't matter when deciding to shoot? Really?
Hitting Andy, while I still don't think was necessary, is at least understandable after everything he did. Shooting him is also somehow understandable, but it is even less necessary given the situation. Unless people wanted to make sure he wouldn't hurt anyone again, which is a different reason to shoot Conrad.
You are simplifying the two situations down to "shooting a guy for something he did at any point of time". You are not weighting the situations correctly and you are ignoring what are actual facts in order to try to support what you think other people think.
You have one "confession" (and you are still going with the false equivalency when it comes… [view original content]
I have a clearly different experience because it seems to me that 90% of the complaints are mostly the flashbacks, determinant characters, length of the game and Clem reacting the same way irregardless of what you taught her in previous games or where she ends up.
Because then people like me who actually play the game from a mutual perspective, get slandered because we aren't apart of the clem army. Wh… moreat's the current percentage of The Eli situation? 90/10% in favour of lying for her? Clementine wants you to lie for her after she did a fucked up thing and 90% of the players or maybe more did so yet if we are talking properly, you'd tell the truth more so after an unarmed man was killed in cold blood. You have save files to see what the alternate choices are, right?
He was unarmed when she shot him, she was firing the gun in his face which showed no regard for someon'es life. she could've fired it on the ground but she chose to fire it at his face. The fact that so many players chose to lie for her is pretty scary.
The baiter is calling someone else a baiter? That's ironic lol.
I think you should edit that ignore part to "i fail to see what he said because im not actually paying attention" fixed for you.
1: Andy still wants to fight, he never gives up, he just gets to his kness and still screams at Lee, it's up to the player to "walk away" or "kill Andy" and the majority walked away because of Clementine.
2: Andy not part of the group and Conrad only shows hostility towards Clementine if you agree with his plan which is a fair assessment given how she lied to the group.
LOL another one with the canon death? Okay, the canon death is a respawn, it's because you didn't make a decision quick enough, it's not part of the storyline, just like Clementine getting eaten by the walker in the train station, it doesn't add to the story because it's a respawn, you either shoot him dead, or agree with him thats it. And what does the previous experience have to do with it? Don't forget, Gabe pulled a gun on Conrad, was that acceptable?
You're reading into a few people on here compared to how many people play these games? And also, almost eveyrone on here has said the shot him because of Clementine and Gabe, weather it be because Clementine is their boo, or Gabe is family, that's the main reason why. and like i said with Andy, you're a hypocrite if you shoot Conrad, but don't shoot Andy. Both choices circle around Clementine.
Well now you are baiting. Wonderful. I understand you, really, it is hard to hold up a civil argument when you ignore the most basic thing a… morebout the situations you are trying to compare.
"As long as a person is alive, they're still a threat". That's a way to see it, but even when you put it that way, it isn't the same situation because:
1 - You can incapacitate Andy by beating him up, but you can't do that to Conrad.
2 - Andy stays behind. Conrad stays in the group.
That makes the probability of Conrad being a threat to the group again much higher than Andy. Besides, you say Conrad shows no hostility towards Gabe if he doesn't die. He showed no hostility towards Gabe before that scene either. And, again, this is if you agree with him. If you don't make a decision, therefore not agreeing with him, he kills Gabe and Javi. The chance of him getting hostile again if you disagree is very real.
I am saying the reasons why I did what I di… [view original content]
The complaints i've seen are basically, Kenny and Jane's deaths, Clementine only being a player character in flashbacks, short episodes and the fact that she has changed into a more colder reckless character.
I do think had she got half the episodes as a player character, it wouldn't of got that much hate because, well Clementine is the essence of 99% of the fans.
I have a clearly different experience because it seems to me that 90% of the complaints are mostly the flashbacks, determinant characters, … morelength of the game and Clem reacting the same way irregardless of what you taught her in previous games or where she ends up.
It's the Walking Dead. Who are you to say what's right or wrong in that world? I felt her killing the guy was justified because he almost got Clem killed with the bullets he sold her, then tried to stab her and Javi. There is no "right and wrong", for the most part, in that world.
If that's the case, why is it deemed wrong or bad if you tell the truth and Clementine gets in trouble for killing Eli? Or agreeing with Con… morerad? Or if you call her a liar and a troublemaker? Seems that people are so guttered by it and that's it's wrong given how many people chose against those. Clementine was firing a gun at a mans face and weather she thought it was blanks or not, it proved she had no respect for another persons life and the fact that so many people covered for her proves that there is no justice in these games from the majority. Covering her ass when she's in the wrong because people are biased is disgusting.
No, I think the complain would remain basically the same which are mostly the handling of the season 2 ending that we all saw coming and the clearly confusing comment about splitting the episode for being "too long".
The complaints i've seen are basically, Kenny and Jane's deaths, Clementine only being a player character in flashbacks, short episodes and … morethe fact that she has changed into a more colder reckless character.
I do think had she got half the episodes as a player character, it wouldn't of got that much hate because, well Clementine is the essence of 99% of the fans.
It's the Walking Dead. Who are you to say what's right or wrong in that world? I felt her killing the guy was justified because he almost go… moret Clem killed with the bullets he sold her, then tried to stab her and Javi. There is no "right and wrong", for the most part, in that world.
Clementine picture : Check.
Sticking up for Clementine for shooting a unarmed man in cold blood : Check.
Justifying her actions : Check.
Yep, we have one guys.
It's the Walking Dead. Who are you to say what's right or wrong in that world? I felt her killing the guy was justified because he almost go… moret Clem killed with the bullets he sold her, then tried to stab her and Javi. There is no "right and wrong", for the most part, in that world.
We all know it's mostly because Clementine has been pushed away from being a player character. The short episode things being happening since no time left.
No, I think the complain would remain basically the same which are mostly the handling of the season 2 ending that we all saw coming and the clearly confusing comment about splitting the episode for being "too long".
The thing is, literally nobody is saying that the reason why they shoot was that "at some point of the time they both were a threat" but you. You are the only one using this as an argument for your false equivalency, you alone.
The argument people are using is: Andy was not an immediate threat, while Conrad was.
You are saying: No you are all lying, that's not why you shoot Conrad.
Also the only reason why he wasn't a threat anymore was because he was beaten up, let's not put that aside because this is important, this is cause and consequence. We didn't get an option to just incapacitate Conrad to make him stop being a threat, so you can't - again - make this comparison, it doesn't add up.
You are saying people are not being honest on their motives because you think you know what is going on in other people's heads better than they do. This is just what you think. You don't know why people do what they do, you can only know what they told you. Do you realize how arrogant that is? To pretend you know everybody and that they are lying because your idea of them doesn't line up with what they are telling you?
My "agrees" are all in posts that are pro-Gabe, not pro-Clem, which means other people did it for the same reason I did: To protect Gabe. But of course, you will just say everybody is lying. Nobody is being truthful about why they shoot. You know what goes in people's head, you know how everybody thinks.
And you wanna know something? I don't even care for Clem. I never did, not even in Season 1. Small kids like that are a liability in a zombie apocalypse and I wanted Lee to survive. But all of my decisions in Season 3 were favorable to Clem. Not for her, but for other reasons (I wanted to shoot the people who killed Mariana, I wanted to protect Gabe from Conrad, etc).
Who is "we"? That's funny because when I read a thread, the first thing they usually mention is the flashbacks, not Clementine and you seem to have some kind of fixation about Clementine's fans. What did they do to you?
We all know it's mostly because Clementine has been pushed away from being a player character. The short episode things being happening since no time left.
You are the one calling me names, acting arrogant, rude and aggressive.
1 - Andy still stays back. He doesn't run towards Lee, he doesn't try to tackle him or to walk after the group, he just stays back. His part in the story ended there, him dying or not. *Exactly because he is not part of the group, while Conrad is". You decided to have a person who would put a gun to your nephew's head if you don't agree with them in your group. I find that to be dangerous and would never do that.
2 - You see, Conrad only leaves you one option. He is not interested in what you think. He is forcing you, through a threat to the life of your nephew, to do his biding. The death scene means that that's his personality, that's what he would do if you didn't do his biding.
The death scene is like... Did you play The Walking Dead? The scene inside the Whitehills castle. Would you say that, because it is a respawn, if you killed the lord inside his castle his soldiers wouldn't kill you and all of your group? Just because it is a respawn?
Clementine getting eaten by the walker in the train station, if means Clementine would be eaten by a walker in the train station. The death scene with Conrad means that that's what Conrad would do if you didn't do his biding, he would kill Gabe and Javi. It says everything I need to know about who he is, about what he is capable of.
Gabe pulled a gun on Conrad, and then lowered it when I told him to. When I told Conrad to stop, he didn't. Big difference here.
And again, no, not shooting Andy but shooting Conrad doesn't make anyone a hypocrite. It boils down to why they shoot them, and again, if they shoot Conrad just to protect Gabe (like I did and like a bunch of people here did), to prevent him from shooting Gabe because he literally was about to do just that, then it makes sense not to shoot Andy, because Andy wasn't a threat to anyone at that point anymore. Now, if Andy had a gun to someone's head when the option to kill him came up? That someone didn't even have to be a kid, it could be Kenny for all that I care, you bet I was going to shoot him. But that wasn't the case, and that makes all of the difference.
The baiter is calling someone else a baiter? That's ironic lol.
I think you should edit that ignore part to "i fail to see what he said bec… moreause im not actually paying attention" fixed for you.
1: Andy still wants to fight, he never gives up, he just gets to his kness and still screams at Lee, it's up to the player to "walk away" or "kill Andy" and the majority walked away because of Clementine.
2: Andy not part of the group and Conrad only shows hostility towards Clementine if you agree with his plan which is a fair assessment given how she lied to the group.
LOL another one with the canon death? Okay, the canon death is a respawn, it's because you didn't make a decision quick enough, it's not part of the storyline, just like Clementine getting eaten by the walker in the train station, it doesn't add to the story because it's a respawn, you either shoot him dead, or agree with him thats it. And what does the previous experience have to … [view original content]
The thing is, literally nobody is saying that the reason why they shoot was that "at some point of the time they both were a threat" but you… more. You are the only one using this as an argument for your false equivalency, you alone.
The argument people are using is: Andy was not an immediate threat, while Conrad was.
You are saying: No you are all lying, that's not why you shoot Conrad.
Also the only reason why he wasn't a threat anymore was because he was beaten up, let's not put that aside because this is important, this is cause and consequence. We didn't get an option to just incapacitate Conrad to make him stop being a threat, so you can't - again - make this comparison, it doesn't add up.
You are saying people are not being honest on their motives because you think you know what is going on in other people's heads better than they do. This is just what you think. You don't know why people do what they do, you can only know what t… [view original content]
You mentioning yourself in that first line? Because that's exactly how you're coming across pal.
Not the point, the point is he still wants to fight, you're saying his not a threat, yet his showing hostility still towards Lee. I find it more dangerous to have Clementine who shoots a man in cold blood lying to us then a man who lost his partner and did what he did because he couldn't trust Clementine.
Lol, the death scene is a respawn, its the game telling you that if you don't make a choice, you die and have to restart, like if you don't choose to save doug or carely, you get eaten by walkers etc, only difference was there was no walkers around because they couldn't get in the train, so they chose to have a guy with a gun shoot Javier and Gabe. Tell me sir, if you play on after a decision i.e if you shot Conrad or Agreed with him, does the canon death of him shooting Gabe and Javier exist? Does it have meaning if you make a decision?
What it means is that you have to restart the game, it's not part of the story, because Clementine never got eaten and Conrad never shot them, it's just the games way of telling you to make a decision, dude, let it go, you're embarrassing yourself by trying to make a reason when there is none.
Big difference between the circumstances as well, Conrad didn't lower it down because he didn't trust Clementine and Gabe didn't have it in him to shoot Conrad, but it doesn't make it better that Gabe pulled a gun on Conrad. But because his 13, he gets the benefit of the doubt right
It sounds like you're trying to justify what you're claiming by stating "Well, im gonna be the bigger man and walk away after ive bashed an unarmed man to a pulp" because you said it's okay to do that but not so much to shoot him (lol) Yet you coul've did that with Conrad, but you chose not to because of Gabe and Clementine, because answer me this, you say you only cared foR Clementine this season right? Well if he didn't hold Gabe hostage, that must mean that you would've accepted Conrads plan no? Because if you still would've shot him then it was about Clementine.
You are the one calling me names, acting arrogant, rude and aggressive.
1 - Andy still stays back. He doesn't run towards Lee, he doesn't… more try to tackle him or to walk after the group, he just stays back. His part in the story ended there, him dying or not. *Exactly because he is not part of the group, while Conrad is". You decided to have a person who would put a gun to your nephew's head if you don't agree with them in your group. I find that to be dangerous and would never do that.
2 - You see, Conrad only leaves you one option. He is not interested in what you think. He is forcing you, through a threat to the life of your nephew, to do his biding. The death scene means that that's his personality, that's what he would do if you didn't do his biding.
The death scene is like... Did you play The Walking Dead? The scene inside the Whitehills castle. Would you say that, because it is a respawn, if you killed the lord inside his castle … [view original content]
Most of the community. When it got released, im agreeing the deaths of Kenny and Jane was a big factor, but ALOT of people bitched because they all thought it was going to be a borderlands type of playthrough, and now people are like "Javier is boring" "Clemy, i want Clemy".
I don't hate Clementine just putting it out there, it's the fans.
They're biased and think she's a golden child that deserves to be the main character in every game and will disregard characters who do something wrong by her.
Kenny gets hated on when he yells at her
Conrad gets killed because he wanted to take her hostage
Eli is given no justification even though Clementine shot him unarmed in cold blood
If anyone has a opinion that is against her, they're abused, insulted and wrong according to the fans.
They're the most biased fans i've seen who play these games to suit her and playing it from a mutual stand point
This quote from one sums it up "Because telltale has neglected her in season 3 and made Javier the player character for the main story, we're gonna keep favouring Clementine"
That's bitter and pathetic, that's saying "We don't like the fact you made him the player character, so instead of playing it from a mutual standpoint, we are going to just favour Clementine, because we're whinging that she isn't in the spotlight".
Who is "we"? That's funny because when I read a thread, the first thing they usually mention is the flashbacks, not Clementine and you seem to have some kind of fixation about Clementine's fans. What did they do to you?
I didn't know that you speak for "most of the community", that's news to me.
but ALOT of people bitched because they all thought it was going to be a borderlands type of playthrough, and now people are like "Javier is boring" "Clemy, i want Clemy". I don't hate Clementine just putting it out there, it's the fans.
And how is that different from when people "bitched" when she was the main character in season 2? How is that different from you complaining about the fans instead of arguing about the game? How do you call that?
They're biased and think she's a golden child that deserves to be the main character in every game and will disregard characters who do something wrong by her.
How is that different from anyone favoring their favorite characters? Don't act like Clementine is the only one suffering from this.
Kenny gets hated on when he yells at her
That's what you mostly got from season 2 criticisms? No Kenny coming out of nowhere with his "explanation"? Nor the handling of Nick or Sarah's deaths? Kenny vs Jane? Luke's death? AJ?
Conrad gets killed because he wanted to take her hostage
Because maybe to some people, taking people hostage to force someone to make a decision/to benefit YOUR loved ones is immoral.
Eli is given no justification even though Clementine shot him unarmed in cold blood
Attacking her with a knife is called being unarmed now? Right.
Most of the community. When it got released, im agreeing the deaths of Kenny and Jane was a big factor, but ALOT of people bitched because t… morehey all thought it was going to be a borderlands type of playthrough, and now people are like "Javier is boring" "Clemy, i want Clemy".
I don't hate Clementine just putting it out there, it's the fans.
They're biased and think she's a golden child that deserves to be the main character in every game and will disregard characters who do something wrong by her.
* Kenny gets hated on when he yells at her
* Conrad gets killed because he wanted to take her hostage
* Eli is given no justification even though Clementine shot him unarmed in cold blood
* If anyone has a opinion that is against her, they're abused, insulted and wrong according to the fans.
They're the most biased fans i've seen who play these games to suit her and playing it from a mutual stand point
This quote from one sums it up "Bec… [view original content]
Clementine picture : Check.
Sticking up for Clementine for shooting a unarmed man in cold blood : Check.
Justifying her actions : Check.
Yep, we have one guys.
Eli attacked first, was a smartass and a dick, and the gun fired accidently (Clem thought the bullets don't work or got mixed up with Javi's gun). It's a legitimate mistake on Clem's side, but she doesn't wanna take the full fall for a alleged murder on such a bastard. So I understand she asks Javi to back her up. It was, afterall, self-defense.
Clementine picture : Check.
Sticking up for Clementine for shooting a unarmed man in cold blood : Check.
Justifying her actions : Check.
Yep, we have one guys.
It wasn't self defense, since he had already stopped attacking them and gave up, however it wasn't intentional homicide either. I guess that would make it manslaughter? IDK, but what she did was reckless and unnecessary and on every playthrough, whether or not I back her up, I still give her flak for it.
But the topic of this thread is about choosing to kill Conrad or not. For me, what happened with Eli is a separate issue with very little bearing on this one.
Eli attacked first, was a smartass and a dick, and the gun fired accidently (Clem thought the bullets don't work or got mixed up with Javi's… more gun). It's a legitimate mistake on Clem's side, but she doesn't wanna take the full fall for a alleged murder on such a bastard. So I understand she asks Javi to back her up. It was, afterall, self-defense.
Comments
To be honest, I was really surprised about her actions in ANF, she wasn't the same Clem that I raised her to be, stealing, reckless shooting at Eli, constant lying, it was super strange to see her actions. At the very first choice to lie or tell the truth to Tripp about Clem killing Eli, I chose to tell the truth, I didnt support her because my Clem wouldn't be so reckless as to point a gun at a scammers head and assume that all the bullets couldn't fire. Her character to me seems far more distant than its ever been to me. I hope Telltale brings her back into my Clem from season 2, and I hope they don't bring me to the point of killing her over her bad actions.
Agreed. I'm hoping Episode 3 addresses that problem.
I don't understand what's the point of being surprised/disgusted/outraged of what other players choose to do in their game. They have their own reason and to some people some choices are easier than others, nothing more nothing less.
It's not like the game is going to punish you now at this point for it.
Heck even they resolved Conrad's death pretty quickly by lying...
So gun blaze it and whatever, nothing matters.
If that's the case, why is it deemed wrong or bad if you tell the truth and Clementine gets in trouble for killing Eli? Or agreeing with Conrad? Or if you call her a liar and a troublemaker? Seems that people are so guttered by it and that's it's wrong given how many people chose against those. Clementine was firing a gun at a mans face and weather she thought it was blanks or not, it proved she had no respect for another persons life and the fact that so many people covered for her proves that there is no justice in these games from the majority. Covering her ass when she's in the wrong because people are biased is disgusting.
Except I never said it was wrong or bad. I don't care what you decide to do in your game. I just find getting worked up over other people's choice to be pointless. Do you think keeping saying they're biased is going to change their mind or something?
I wont use my clem as a bait
Anyway, the rest 10% must be new to twd
First he wanted me to turn on someone who helped me rescue my family, and when I refused he threatened my nephew.
You're goddamn right I shot him.
I have one save where I don't even try to play "in character" because... I JUST CAN'T THE FIRST TIME OKAY???
I have another save that's going to be my "real" save.
In my "real" save Javi didn't lie for Clem, didn't open fire from the wall... but you damn well bet he shot that fucker holding his nephew hostage.
Im not trying to change peoples mind/opinions, im just stating what is the obvious. We all know Clementine fans are going to be biased because they haven't got the right mindset when playing these games. They make decisions based on helping her or trying to get close to her, even if they're wrong, they still choose it. Like, Her shooting Eli in cold blood and then her wanting you to lie for her, how is that a good choice?
How do you come up with that if someone doesn't side with her they're new? Not everyone is a clementine fanatic you know.
"Stating what is the obvious". "Right mindset". Again, why do you care? We're talking about games here, not reality. No zombie apocalypse, just people playing for fun.
As far as her accidentally shooting Eli, the guy gave her bullets that won't fire which nearly got her killed and when she confronted him he tried to attack her with a knife. He is far from innocent. I have save files for both options, not everything is about Clementine fans you know?
You'll notice in the statistics that when it comes to deciding on whether to side with Clem or not, an overwhelming amount of players will choose Clem. We miss being able to play as her, and even though most people didn't want to have to kill Conrad, when you ask us to choose, it'll always be Clem.
Dude, what they did matter just as much as when they did it. That's what you are ignoring in order to try to support your argument.
Do you honestly think that the moment when the threat happened, if it was immediate or a past threat, doesn't matter when deciding to shoot? Really?
Hitting Andy, while I still don't think was necessary, is at least understandable after everything he did. Shooting him is also somehow understandable, but it is even less necessary given the situation. Unless people wanted to make sure he wouldn't hurt anyone again, which is a different reason to shoot Conrad.
You are simplifying the two situations down to "shooting a guy for something he did at any point of time". You are not weighting the situations correctly and you are ignoring what are actual facts in order to try to support what you think other people think.
You have one "confession" (and you are still going with the false equivalency when it comes to killing someone in front of Gabe or S1 Clem). I have all the posters who are saying the exact same thing as me, and agreeing with my posts on the matter, because everything in this discussion, the big hole on your biased and baseless argument, comes down to "Andy was not an immediate threat, while Conrad was". That's it. That's all that matters.
The way the OP frames the question is misleading. Conrad wasn't "Suggesting" anything, he was demanding at gun point, so not 1 single person killed Conrad for "Suggesting a plan."
Lot's of different people had lots of different reasons for killing Conrad, it's not as simple as "They killed him because, 'MUH CLEM!!!' (I'm paraphrasing)."
I didn't want to kill a group member either, but I also didn't want to betray a group member because it 'might help Kate a little bit maybe.' And at that point, Conrad was the one putting the group in danger, not Clem, so it was an easy decision. Bang.
Well now you are baiting. Wonderful. I understand you, really, it is hard to hold up a civil argument when you ignore the most basic thing about the situations you are trying to compare.
"As long as a person is alive, they're still a threat". That's a way to see it, but even when you put it that way, it isn't the same situation because:
1 - You can incapacitate Andy by beating him up, but you can't do that to Conrad.
2 - Andy stays behind. Conrad stays in the group.
That makes the probability of Conrad being a threat to the group again much higher than Andy. Besides, you say Conrad shows no hostility towards Gabe if he doesn't die. He showed no hostility towards Gabe before that scene either. And, again, this is if you agree with him. If you don't make a decision, therefore not agreeing with him, he kills Gabe and Javi. The chance of him getting hostile again if you disagree is very real.
I am saying the reasons why I did what I did and repeating the reasons other people said why they did it, so I am not assuming anything about what is going on other people's heads, I am believing them when they say their reasons. You are the one claiming that people are not being honest about the reasons, and now you are baiting and flaming. Very grown up, love, very grown up.
Because then people like me who actually play the game from a mutual perspective, get slandered because we aren't apart of the clem army. What's the current percentage of The Eli situation? 90/10% in favour of lying for her? Clementine wants you to lie for her after she did a fucked up thing and 90% of the players or maybe more did so yet if we are talking properly, you'd tell the truth more so after an unarmed man was killed in cold blood. You have save files to see what the alternate choices are, right?
He was unarmed when she shot him, she was firing the gun in his face which showed no regard for someon'es life. she could've fired it on the ground but she chose to fire it at his face. The fact that so many players chose to lie for her is pretty scary.
[removed]
I have a clearly different experience because it seems to me that 90% of the complaints are mostly the flashbacks, determinant characters, length of the game and Clem reacting the same way irregardless of what you taught her in previous games or where she ends up.
The baiter is calling someone else a baiter? That's ironic lol.
I think you should edit that ignore part to "i fail to see what he said because im not actually paying attention" fixed for you.
1: Andy still wants to fight, he never gives up, he just gets to his kness and still screams at Lee, it's up to the player to "walk away" or "kill Andy" and the majority walked away because of Clementine.
2: Andy not part of the group and Conrad only shows hostility towards Clementine if you agree with his plan which is a fair assessment given how she lied to the group.
LOL another one with the canon death? Okay, the canon death is a respawn, it's because you didn't make a decision quick enough, it's not part of the storyline, just like Clementine getting eaten by the walker in the train station, it doesn't add to the story because it's a respawn, you either shoot him dead, or agree with him thats it. And what does the previous experience have to do with it? Don't forget, Gabe pulled a gun on Conrad, was that acceptable?
You're reading into a few people on here compared to how many people play these games? And also, almost eveyrone on here has said the shot him because of Clementine and Gabe, weather it be because Clementine is their boo, or Gabe is family, that's the main reason why. and like i said with Andy, you're a hypocrite if you shoot Conrad, but don't shoot Andy. Both choices circle around Clementine.
The complaints i've seen are basically, Kenny and Jane's deaths, Clementine only being a player character in flashbacks, short episodes and the fact that she has changed into a more colder reckless character.
I do think had she got half the episodes as a player character, it wouldn't of got that much hate because, well Clementine is the essence of 99% of the fans.
It's the Walking Dead. Who are you to say what's right or wrong in that world? I felt her killing the guy was justified because he almost got Clem killed with the bullets he sold her, then tried to stab her and Javi. There is no "right and wrong", for the most part, in that world.
No, I think the complain would remain basically the same which are mostly the handling of the season 2 ending that we all saw coming and the clearly confusing comment about splitting the episode for being "too long".
Just because they're making a different choice than you, dosen't mean they're new. Knock it off.
My man Chuck said it best.
Clementine picture : Check.
Sticking up for Clementine for shooting a unarmed man in cold blood : Check.
Justifying her actions : Check.
Yep, we have one guys.
We all know it's mostly because Clementine has been pushed away from being a player character. The short episode things being happening since no time left.
The thing is, literally nobody is saying that the reason why they shoot was that "at some point of the time they both were a threat" but you. You are the only one using this as an argument for your false equivalency, you alone.
The argument people are using is: Andy was not an immediate threat, while Conrad was.
You are saying: No you are all lying, that's not why you shoot Conrad.
Also the only reason why he wasn't a threat anymore was because he was beaten up, let's not put that aside because this is important, this is cause and consequence. We didn't get an option to just incapacitate Conrad to make him stop being a threat, so you can't - again - make this comparison, it doesn't add up.
You are saying people are not being honest on their motives because you think you know what is going on in other people's heads better than they do. This is just what you think. You don't know why people do what they do, you can only know what they told you. Do you realize how arrogant that is? To pretend you know everybody and that they are lying because your idea of them doesn't line up with what they are telling you?
My "agrees" are all in posts that are pro-Gabe, not pro-Clem, which means other people did it for the same reason I did: To protect Gabe. But of course, you will just say everybody is lying. Nobody is being truthful about why they shoot. You know what goes in people's head, you know how everybody thinks.
And you wanna know something? I don't even care for Clem. I never did, not even in Season 1. Small kids like that are a liability in a zombie apocalypse and I wanted Lee to survive. But all of my decisions in Season 3 were favorable to Clem. Not for her, but for other reasons (I wanted to shoot the people who killed Mariana, I wanted to protect Gabe from Conrad, etc).
Who is "we"? That's funny because when I read a thread, the first thing they usually mention is the flashbacks, not Clementine and you seem to have some kind of fixation about Clementine's fans. What did they do to you?
You are the one calling me names, acting arrogant, rude and aggressive.
1 - Andy still stays back. He doesn't run towards Lee, he doesn't try to tackle him or to walk after the group, he just stays back. His part in the story ended there, him dying or not. *Exactly because he is not part of the group, while Conrad is". You decided to have a person who would put a gun to your nephew's head if you don't agree with them in your group. I find that to be dangerous and would never do that.
2 - You see, Conrad only leaves you one option. He is not interested in what you think. He is forcing you, through a threat to the life of your nephew, to do his biding. The death scene means that that's his personality, that's what he would do if you didn't do his biding.
The death scene is like... Did you play The Walking Dead? The scene inside the Whitehills castle. Would you say that, because it is a respawn, if you killed the lord inside his castle his soldiers wouldn't kill you and all of your group? Just because it is a respawn?
Clementine getting eaten by the walker in the train station, if means Clementine would be eaten by a walker in the train station. The death scene with Conrad means that that's what Conrad would do if you didn't do his biding, he would kill Gabe and Javi. It says everything I need to know about who he is, about what he is capable of.
Gabe pulled a gun on Conrad, and then lowered it when I told him to. When I told Conrad to stop, he didn't. Big difference here.
And again, no, not shooting Andy but shooting Conrad doesn't make anyone a hypocrite. It boils down to why they shoot them, and again, if they shoot Conrad just to protect Gabe (like I did and like a bunch of people here did), to prevent him from shooting Gabe because he literally was about to do just that, then it makes sense not to shoot Andy, because Andy wasn't a threat to anyone at that point anymore. Now, if Andy had a gun to someone's head when the option to kill him came up? That someone didn't even have to be a kid, it could be Kenny for all that I care, you bet I was going to shoot him. But that wasn't the case, and that makes all of the difference.
[removed]
You mentioning yourself in that first line? Because that's exactly how you're coming across pal.
Not the point, the point is he still wants to fight, you're saying his not a threat, yet his showing hostility still towards Lee. I find it more dangerous to have Clementine who shoots a man in cold blood lying to us then a man who lost his partner and did what he did because he couldn't trust Clementine.
Lol, the death scene is a respawn, its the game telling you that if you don't make a choice, you die and have to restart, like if you don't choose to save doug or carely, you get eaten by walkers etc, only difference was there was no walkers around because they couldn't get in the train, so they chose to have a guy with a gun shoot Javier and Gabe. Tell me sir, if you play on after a decision i.e if you shot Conrad or Agreed with him, does the canon death of him shooting Gabe and Javier exist? Does it have meaning if you make a decision?
What it means is that you have to restart the game, it's not part of the story, because Clementine never got eaten and Conrad never shot them, it's just the games way of telling you to make a decision, dude, let it go, you're embarrassing yourself by trying to make a reason when there is none.
Big difference between the circumstances as well, Conrad didn't lower it down because he didn't trust Clementine and Gabe didn't have it in him to shoot Conrad, but it doesn't make it better that Gabe pulled a gun on Conrad. But because his 13, he gets the benefit of the doubt right
It sounds like you're trying to justify what you're claiming by stating "Well, im gonna be the bigger man and walk away after ive bashed an unarmed man to a pulp" because you said it's okay to do that but not so much to shoot him (lol) Yet you coul've did that with Conrad, but you chose not to because of Gabe and Clementine, because answer me this, you say you only cared foR Clementine this season right? Well if he didn't hold Gabe hostage, that must mean that you would've accepted Conrads plan no? Because if you still would've shot him then it was about Clementine.
Most of the community. When it got released, im agreeing the deaths of Kenny and Jane was a big factor, but ALOT of people bitched because they all thought it was going to be a borderlands type of playthrough, and now people are like "Javier is boring" "Clemy, i want Clemy".
I don't hate Clementine just putting it out there, it's the fans.
They're biased and think she's a golden child that deserves to be the main character in every game and will disregard characters who do something wrong by her.
They're the most biased fans i've seen who play these games to suit her and playing it from a mutual stand point
This quote from one sums it up "Because telltale has neglected her in season 3 and made Javier the player character for the main story, we're gonna keep favouring Clementine"
That's bitter and pathetic, that's saying "We don't like the fact you made him the player character, so instead of playing it from a mutual standpoint, we are going to just favour Clementine, because we're whinging that she isn't in the spotlight".
I didn't know that you speak for "most of the community", that's news to me.
And how is that different from when people "bitched" when she was the main character in season 2? How is that different from you complaining about the fans instead of arguing about the game? How do you call that?
How is that different from anyone favoring their favorite characters? Don't act like Clementine is the only one suffering from this.
That's what you mostly got from season 2 criticisms? No Kenny coming out of nowhere with his "explanation"? Nor the handling of Nick or Sarah's deaths? Kenny vs Jane? Luke's death? AJ?
Because maybe to some people, taking people hostage to force someone to make a decision/to benefit YOUR loved ones is immoral.
Attacking her with a knife is called being unarmed now? Right.
Way to attack the individual instead of the argument they presented.
Remember guys:
It was the choice between my nephew and the girl I met a day ago. I couldn't risk his life after all this shit.
Plus, I was assuming we have a chance to talk this shit through with the others when he cools off .
Eli attacked first, was a smartass and a dick, and the gun fired accidently (Clem thought the bullets don't work or got mixed up with Javi's gun). It's a legitimate mistake on Clem's side, but she doesn't wanna take the full fall for a alleged murder on such a bastard. So I understand she asks Javi to back her up. It was, afterall, self-defense.
It wasn't self defense, since he had already stopped attacking them and gave up, however it wasn't intentional homicide either. I guess that would make it manslaughter? IDK, but what she did was reckless and unnecessary and on every playthrough, whether or not I back her up, I still give her flak for it.
But the topic of this thread is about choosing to kill Conrad or not. For me, what happened with Eli is a separate issue with very little bearing on this one.
Amen