Choice of leaving in the RV or staying feels too random.

edited July 2013 in The Walking Dead
I don't feel like that choice was designed well enough. I feel like I closed my eyes and picked a choice, instead of actually putting myself in that situation and deciding.

I don't know enough about any of the characters in that chapter. I don't know how trustworthy the leader is nor stephanie or anyone else.

I am only able to hear 1 side of the story (She stole it and ran.)... If she was there for so long, why would she randomly do that? It makes no sense.

The parts before that don't tell me anything relevant enough for me to base my decision on, so essentially when it came down to it...

I have no idea on:
What her motivation might be to steal supplies and run.
If she had any issues with other people in the group before or recently.
What kind of people i'm dealing with. Not enough time to learn about anyone whatsoever.
Can not try and hear more than just the one side of the story.

Which all led to essentially:

"Do I trust these people, and just take them for their word and kill her without knowing what EXACTLY happened or getting to talk to her (Like any sane group should do, even if you are going to kill her anyway)"
Or
"Do I abandon the people I've spend months surviving with and risk me and my childs safety for a person who might have tried to just screw us all."

Absolutely nothing was made clear and after staring at the pause menu, thinking about it for 5 minutes, I just said 'Fuck it, I don't know enough" and chose to stay with the group and shoot her.

Based on nothing.

Comments

  • edited July 2013
    If you agonized for five minutes, it doesnt sound like it was based on nothing.
  • edited July 2013
    KCohere wrote: »
    If you agonized for five minutes, it doesnt sound like it was based on nothing.

    It was, at most.. Based on the fact we would need:
    Food.. Water..Ammo... Basic things to survive in that world.

    If I was to leave all that, I wouldn't do it when I don't know anything.

    I chose to stay because of safety, nothing to do with the story.
  • edited July 2013
    Advanced wrote: »
    I don't feel like that choice was designed well enough. I feel like I closed my eyes and picked a choice, instead of actually putting myself in that situation and deciding.

    I don't know enough about any of the characters in that chapter. I don't know how trustworthy the leader is nor stephanie or anyone else.

    I am only able to hear 1 side of the story (She stole it and ran.)... If she was there for so long, why would she randomly do that? It makes no sense.

    The parts before that don't tell me anything relevant enough for me to base my decision on, so essentially when it came down to it...

    I have no idea on:
    What her motivation might be to steal supplies and run.
    If she had any issues with other people in the group before or recently.
    What kind of people i'm dealing with. Not enough time to learn about anyone whatsoever.
    Can not try and hear more than just the one side of the story.

    Which all led to essentially:

    "Do I trust these people, and just take them for their word and kill her without knowing what EXACTLY happened or getting to talk to her (Like any sane group should do, even if you are going to kill her anyway)"
    Or
    "Do I abandon the people I've spend months surviving with and risk me and my childs safety for a person who might have tried to just screw us all."

    Absolutely nothing was made clear and after staring at the pause menu, thinking about it for 5 minutes, I just said 'Fuck it, I don't know enough" and chose to stay with the group and shoot her.

    Based on nothing.

    From my understanding, ever since Roberto came back and killed Bloyd, Roman went bananas to the point of being paranoid; his men can't leave the camp. If so, they face execution. If a stranger comes, he or she dies. Becca can no longer play the guitar and possibly, can't leave the RV at night. Because the camp became so harsh, Stephanie stoled the supplies and tried to leave.
  • edited July 2013
    Romans choice of killing the hot girl was random, Ok yes she stole, but you dont need to KILL Her, jesus, she would not have told anyone where they were, she would not wanna endager the kid, so wtf, just let her go, maybe tell her how dissapointed you are but dont kill hur
  • edited July 2013
    doom saber wrote: »
    From my understanding, ever since Roberto came back and killed Bloyd, Roman went bananas to the point of being paranoid; his men can't leave the camp. If so, they face execution. If a stranger comes, he or she dies. Becca can no longer play the guitar and possibly, can't leave the RV at night. Because the camp became so harsh, Stephanie stoled the supplies and tried to leave.

    That actually sounds like a reasonable assumption....

    But I still don't think that's enough to base that kind of "big" decision off of.
    End of day, that's still just an assumption about what and why it happened, and there just wasn't enough time for the story to develop to warrant it.

    In my opinion at least.
  • edited July 2013
    Advanced wrote: »
    That actually sounds like a reasonable assumption....

    But I still don't think that's enough to base that kind of "big" decision off of.
    End of day, that's still just an assumption about what and why it happened, and there just wasn't enough time for the story to develop to warrant it.

    In my opinion at least.

    I think i have gotten that notion from the game since after the Roberto incident, the colors chained. While the next day task place at night, it gives the feeling of bleakness. Having Becca and Shel playing Fish further adds that bleakness - it is a game that is played when ppl are bored. Having them in the RV as oppose to the more lively dinner gave me the notion that the campsite transformed into a shitty place to live in.

    As Shel, I wanted to leave since I saw how much Roman's leadership have twisted Becca. I didn't want Becca to end up crazy and cold blooded like Roman, so I chose the keys.

    The way Becca wanted to kill Stephanie despite the two being friends and willing to kill her herself is not how I want a sibling be raised to be.
  • edited July 2013
    I liked Shel, but I think her story is the one that would probably have benefited the most from being longer.

    I know that neither outcome was supposed to feel particularly satisfying, but it would have helped establish the choice if we could have been able to talk to Stephanie more, or actually experience the conditions and consequences of Roman setting the place on lock-down. Or maybe have the ability to question the rationality of decisions like chaining up walkers in the backyard. (Trying to justify that one's still bothering me)
  • edited July 2013
    Mikejames wrote: »
    I liked Shel, but I think her story is the one that would probably have benefited the most from being longer.

    I know that neither outcome was supposed to feel particularly satisfying, but it would have helped establish the choice if we could have been able to talk to Stephanie more, or actually experience the conditions and consequences of Roman setting the place on lock-down. Or maybe have the ability to question the rationality of decisions like chaining up walkers in the backyard. (Trying to justify that one's still bothering me)

    i agree it could have been longer (although it did seem like the slowest/longest part of the game) i wanted to talk to stephanie and try and help her escape, but it was clear that wouldn't have been possible so it was just a choice about whether you should kill someone for betraying the group and agreeing with roman's ideas of how things should be handled or running away because you didn't want to live by those rules
  • edited July 2013
    If he's still alive, Boyd gives you more info on the situation. He practically begs Shel to take the RV and get out of there while they still have the chance.
  • edited July 2013
    Yertos wrote: »
    If he's still alive, Boyd gives you more info on the situation. He practically begs Shel to take the RV and get out of there while they still have the chance.

    Ah that's interesting. Shame you're only given more legitimate reason to get out of there if you've already taken the choice leaning towards Roman's standards.
  • edited July 2013
    So does that mean Boyd forgives you for killing Roberto, and says that is the right thing, if that's the case them damn it am going to play that right now, I can not have Boyd just be dead like that.
  • edited July 2013
    Mikejames wrote: »
    Ah that's interesting. Shame you're only given more legitimate reason to get out of there if you've already taken the choice leaning towards Roman's standards.

    Actually, Roman chooses to let the guy go if you do nothing, so he's actually more of a good guy at the start of Shel's story. It's just after that that he goes off the deep end.
  • edited July 2013
    Mikejames wrote: »
    Ah that's interesting. Shame you're only given more legitimate reason to get out of there if you've already taken the choice leaning towards Roman's standards.
    In my second playthrough I didn't agree or disagree for Roman to shoot the intruder. I let the time run out and he decided to kill the guy. When he asked me to kill Stephanie I took the keys and escaped after talking to Boyd. I escaped in both playthroughs cause I didn't want them to live like that but in my first game save I voted for the intruder to be released.
  • edited July 2013
    Rock114 wrote: »
    Actually, Roman chooses to let the guy go if you do nothing, so he's actually more of a good guy at the start of Shel's story. It's just after that that he goes off the deep end.
    That's interesting. When I played it Roman chose to shoot the guy when I didn't vote and then he told me that if it happened again I would have to kill the intruder. He wouldn't let me talk to Stephanie so I took the camper and left him to rot.
  • edited July 2013
    First play through, took the camper. Second, stay. I kinda feel like if you leave, you are putting everyone else in jeopardy - especially with that big ass hole in the fence you leave through! Maybe Roman went nuts, but the others might still be okay. That bothered me. No good situation there, but maybe that's the point.

    Also, was disappointed that we didn't get to see the scene with Stephanie play out. Would have like to have had some options to go through that. Shoot her or not? Shoot Roman and save her? Etc. Would have been nice.
  • edited July 2013
    Rock114 wrote: »
    Actually, Roman chooses to let the guy go if you do nothing, so he's actually more of a good guy at the start of Shel's story. It's just after that that he goes off the deep end.

    I thought Roman seemed pragmatic, but still a decent enough guy until hearing about the whole hunting deserters down shtick. Though I still want to know who was mental enough to think that walkers made good guards.
    crash665 wrote: »
    Also, was disappointed that we didn't get to see the scene with Stephanie play out. Would have like to have had some options to go through that. Shoot her or not? Shoot Roman and save her? Etc. Would have been nice.
    Yeah. In retrospect the option being "Kill Stephanie," was plenty blunt, but I took the gun wanting to talk to her and see if there was some different way for things to play out instead of running away blindly. So, one of the few times I'm debating about redoing a choice for my main run.
  • edited July 2013
    That's interesting. I thought it was a natural situation that could arise. Did you kill the bandit the first time around? If you do Boyd if the one who tells you to get the hell out of there and don't look back. Perhaps that is why it seemed natural to me.

    Most of the time things are going to come out of no where and your going to have to make a choice.
  • edited July 2013
    Mikejames wrote: »
    I thought Roman seemed pragmatic, but still a decent enough guy until hearing about the whole hunting deserters down shtick. Though I still want to know who was mental enough to think that walkers made good guards.

    I think it's just the idea that you can't have dogs around anymore. The walkers make similar such guards but you don't have to worry about them drawing attention from other walkers the way a howling and barking dog would. In theory atleast. I still think you have to be a little touched to try it though. :p

    Especially considering "herds" develop simply because walkers start following each other around. Meaning that if you have one chained up in the back it could bring other walkers around to wonder what the group in the backyard behind the fence is doing.
  • edited July 2013
    Mikejames wrote: »
    I thought Roman seemed pragmatic, but still a decent enough guy until hearing about the whole hunting deserters down shtick. Though I still want to know who was mental enough to think that walkers made good guards.

    Seeing how that first walker roared at Shel when she went outside, they're probably more of an alarm system. If they see(or smell) any humans they're going to make a lot of noise.
  • edited July 2013
    I always wanted to leave a group and venture out of a camp with stolen supplies as soon as I seriously thought about a walker Apocalypse.
This discussion has been closed.