Hm, now that I think about it, subplots would not only make the game more dynamic and fun, like you said, but they can maybe be more rigorou… moresly used to exhibit character development as well. Think of each subplot's choice as small building block that develops Clementine's character. In the end, our general perception of her will be generally the same because the season would supposedly end in very similar ways. However, some of the details may be a bit different.
For example, we all ended Season 1 knowing that Lee is that leading, kind guardian for Clem. But little details about him may differ from player to player depending on how we played out some of the subplots' choices. My Lee is perhaps too kind and tends to try to be a peacemaker because when I played as him, Lee would try to diffuse the situation between Kenny and Larry instead of taking a side and he forgave Ben and tried to rescue him. However, someone's else's Lee may be a li… [view original content]
Clementine... she's trouble to write, and to write about :) I apologize if the following seems incoherent or vaguely connected; these are my general thoughts on what has been discussed here in broad terms.
I am of the mind that everything in the development of this game is connected. Gameplay, character interaction, development, the characters themselves... nothing stands on its own here. Clementine is no exception.
I like Domewing's interpretation, but I believe that is giving too much credit to Telltale. It is not that I think that they could not do that, but it does not *feel* like they are doing that. He nails the problem in the head: "the aspects of her personality that these conversations explore aren't really brought up again after the scene concludes."
Clementine is our protagonist and as so, we develop her according to what we think she would do, or we project ourselves into her. Whatever the case, we are the ones who dictate much of what she becomes. Is being the protagonist, a "blank slate" (although this one has baggage, and that is the reason why some still can't get into her), something that negates the chance of meaningful character development? No, I do not think so.
I think that the development a protagonist receives in a game that puts *you* into a role is a tad different one than that of an NPC. Clem has been both.
This is where I go back to my "everything is connected" argument. You were Lee Everett, a character with an arc that I would argue that outside of taking care of Clementine, did not have much to it. Many people call his arc an arc of redemption, I say that the player could make that theirs or ignore that angle completely as they advanced through the season. There was only one constant: Clementine.
You were projected into that world, and in a way, the character that developed was *you*. How? Well this was achieved in a large part thanks to the cast, and the interactions you had with them. "the aspects of her personality that these conversations explore aren't really brought up again after the scene concludes" this is a problem that plagues Season Two. People reacted to what you were doing, you as the lead, were confronted many times by the characters who either agreed, disagreed; liked you or hated you based on what you had molded your Lee Everett to be. You changed or stood by your attitude based on your convictions, but also on the emotional, "ethical" feedback you received from the others. Clementine's choice of words and actions are ignored, and as so, I believe that her development is hindered.
Many criticized Season One by saying that it did not vary enough; that the choices were meaningless. No, this is not the case (completely). The defenders have a point. Yes, the outcome was practically the same, but the journey changed and so did your relationships with the people who ventured with you. That is development, for me, too. Not only for the main character, but for the people around him/her that became like real people because of how they evolved *with* me and *thanks* to me. You did not need various outcomes to show that the journey had changed. (I'm not saying that they are bad, though)
> many of us have been on almost the same page all along on a number of things but have only now following the release of the 3rd episode begun dissecting these issues carefully and giving voice to those opinions
I believe that many people were giving it the benefit of the doubt. Plus, the usual "they will handle it in episode 2". Well, that turned into "they will handle it in episode 3". I think that many are not willing to let history repeat itself, with only two episodes left. I do wonder, what difference *can* this all make at this point? I grow somewhat disillusioned with each passing day and thread.
I'm as much dazed as happy to see the posts in this thread. Either some people have been reading some of the indigestible ruminations from … morethat infamous critique thread I started, or many of us have been on almost the same page all along on a number of things but have only now following the release of the 3rd episode begun dissecting these issues carefully and giving voice to those opinions, because I can almost swear these echo many specific points and particular details I was raising. I'm almost tempted to bump the old thread.
I was wishing that thread would have played the host to these kinds of discussions, but seeing that did not go very far, thanks very much Antzen for starting and contributing ideas to one devoted specifically to this topic, considering much critical analysis has been rightly devoted towards the secondary characters and plot, but not as much towards the protagonist herself and her character development, which on… [view original content]
i cant help but feel that telltale is focusing so much on kenny purely cos of how many fanboys kenny has. such a shame, i want so see more of the other characters & see them develop, and clementine too!
season 1 was about lee protecting clem and choosing how to do it(be harsh or kind), season 2 should be about clem choosing what kinda survivor shes developing into and who she can trust, not about showing every 5 minutes how ''badass'' kenny is
Haven't really seem much development from Clem in this season, maybe we'll see more in the remaining 2 episodes but i still think this is Kenny's season.
Thanks for your comment!
Granted, Kenny may take quite a bit of attention in episodes 2 and 3, but I think TTG tries to develop other characters extensively too (such as Luke, Sarah, etc.). As I said in this post, I don't think they're developing Clem enough, although I don't know if I can say that is because they spend too much time on Kenny. But I do agree, the focus should not be all on Kenny this season, even though he does play a big role, and I think TTG knows this. They seem to have brought back Kenny not to make it his season or anything, but to further develop the characters around him, like Luke and maybe even Clem. Hopefully we see this balance of characters play out in the next two episodes. :)
i cant help but feel that telltale is focusing so much on kenny purely cos of how many fanboys kenny has. such a shame, i want so see more o… moref the other characters & see them develop, and clementine too!
season 1 was about lee protecting clem and choosing how to do it(be harsh or kind), season 2 should be about clem choosing what kinda survivor shes developing into and who she can trust, not about showing every 5 minutes how ''badass'' kenny is
Thanks for you observation!
Yeah, I'm not sure if this post would even be read by TTG. They claim that they actually use feedback to mold the story as we go along (one of the reasons why they do episodic game adventures), but I don't know how much of that is true. Then there's the previously mentioned fact that it is probably a bit difficult to introduce an intimate, true character development in Clem this late in the season. I actually had that exact mentality when I went into episodes 1 and 2 and even 3. I thought, "surely they'll handle this next episode, right?"
However, I do want to clarify that, well, in my opinion, this season is still pretty awesome. Although it may not be as gut-wrenching as season 1 because of the lack of a character-development-driven story arc, it still offers at least something to think about with Clem (like an entire forum of discussion posts!). I find the plot events intriguing, and it's always nice to see new characters and new situations come up. And that "Entropy" scene in episode 3, walking through a herd of walkers - that was pretty awesome. :P
So I'll say what I have said on many other posts - we'll just have to wait and see. And if they don't provide a satisfactory last two episodes, we'll certainly wait for season 3. :)
> many of us have been on almost the same page all along on a number of things but have only now following the release of the 3rd episode… more begun dissecting these issues carefully and giving voice to those opinions
I believe that many people were giving it the benefit of the doubt. Plus, the usual "they will handle it in episode 2". Well, that turned into "they will handle it in episode 3". I think that many are not willing to let history repeat itself, with only two episodes left. I do wonder, what difference *can* this all make at this point? I grow somewhat disillusioned with each passing day and thread.
Well said and analyzed!
Your comment was not vague at all! In fact, you hit exactly what I had intended to say in my earlier reply to Clem_Everett's comments! "Although the season ended in the same physical way, we all ended our seasons with a different Lee that has gone through a unique character development personalized for each player." (except I think you explained it more thoroughly xD). Indeed, the character that developed was us, the players, and consequently, Lee becomes a more developed character from our perspective as the player.
Also, I think you made a good observation that Clem's lacking development may in fact simply be caused by how the changing aspects of her personality are not brought up again after the initial conversation's scene. Somehow, I missed DomeWing333's point (sorry! D: ) but now that you brought it up again, I can see how important this observation is. TTG doesn't even need to make fancy symbols, subtle behavior, or complex plot devices to develop Clem's character. They can just start by giving Clem's decisions and moral choices some more "continuity," as DomeWingg333 also pointed out, and Clem's development would already be much better. As also kind of mentioned previously on this thread, I think much of the context is already there - all these dramatic, morality-heavy events have already occurred, whether it is with Omid, Pete, Carver, or Kenny. It's just that the depth and impact of these decisions and outcomes need to be drawn further out in a similar way to how our decisions with Lee were drawn out in Season 1.
Clementine... she's trouble to write, and to write about :) I apologize if the following seems incoherent or vaguely connected; these are my… more general thoughts on what has been discussed here in broad terms.
I am of the mind that everything in the development of this game is connected. Gameplay, character interaction, development, the characters themselves... nothing stands on its own here. Clementine is no exception.
I like Domewing's interpretation, but I believe that is giving too much credit to Telltale. It is not that I think that they could not do that, but it does not *feel* like they are doing that. He nails the problem in the head: "the aspects of her personality that these conversations explore aren't really brought up again after the scene concludes."
Clementine is our protagonist and as so, we develop her according to what we think she would do, or we project ourselves into her. Whatever the case, we are the ones who … [view original content]
Thanks for you observation!
Yeah, I'm not sure if this post would even be read by TTG. They claim that they actually use feedback to mold … morethe story as we go along (one of the reasons why they do episodic game adventures), but I don't know how much of that is true. Then there's the previously mentioned fact that it is probably a bit difficult to introduce an intimate, true character development in Clem this late in the season. I actually had that exact mentality when I went into episodes 1 and 2 and even 3. I thought, "surely they'll handle this next episode, right?"
However, I do want to clarify that, well, in my opinion, this season is still pretty awesome. Although it may not be as gut-wrenching as season 1 because of the lack of a character-development-driven story arc, it still offers at least something to think about with Clem (like an entire forum of discussion posts!). I find the plot events intriguing, and it's always nice to s… [view original content]
I see the issue of Clem's development being a meta one. While I have enjoyed the season overall, Clem's development does come off as stagnant. While Telltale has included the frame work for development they have left it up to the player to decide how her circumstances have changed her. There have been many moments and decisions that could define Clem but they never expounded on them in a meaningful way. telltale has left almost all of Clem's development up to us, we decide how Clem reacts, we have to keep the running tally in our heads of wether we think Clem is still innocent or if she has become hardened. So for me her character development is completely abstract, it's happening, most definitely, but it's happening in a vacuum. What we all as players need is a touchstone, we need someone or something in game that defines what the people around her think of her. In my head Clem is a strongly drawn but when she gets dissected she falls apart. Because leaving all of her character development up to individual players head canon makes her a weakly drawn character when the Vaccum is broken on review sites and forums.
Look, maybe I'm going to play devil's advocate here but I wish sometimes Clementine can respond some things depending our choices from Season One automatically. Her mood, her special dialouge choices based on our save files from S1. (Don't tell me this is a hard thing to do. If they can work 4 games at once this is easy as pie for them.) Like if you didn't kill BOTH brothers, Clementine will go with Sarita. Also that dialouge option ''Everything will not be fine.'' with Walter I was like; ''WHAT. THE. DUCK.'' I replayed the entire Season One only changing this choice to ''Yeah, you're right.'' or ''Everything will be fine.'' and expecting to see if I did something wrong. But nope. I shared my hope in ''Starved For Help'' and ''Around Every Corner'' to her and that's... it? Another thing Season 2 loses is... based on actions. I know. Playing as Clementine I HAVE TO remember my previous choices but c'mon? Telltale Staff!!! Hear me out. Please?
Well described!
Yeah, I agree - it's hard to develop Clem just based on the player choices. There needs to be some set-out exposition - touchstones, as you said - to really develop Clem. In order to develop this character that we control, TTG needs to balance player autonomy with a clear narrative; they need to more carefully choose what to put into canon, and what to leave in the vacuum.
Also, I would argue that I would be fine with some "abstract" character development, but it is not really occuring at all in S2 in my opinion. The fact is, TTG is relying too much on player imagination. As DomeWing333 said earlier, changing aspects of Clem's character may be brought up in a conversation, but never touched on again. In order to have those "building blocks" of character (see my reply to Clem_Everett about subplots), there needs to be some continuity with Clem's character development, and some "touchstones" scenes as well.
I see the issue of Clem's development being a meta one. While I have enjoyed the season overall, Clem's development does come off as stagnan… moret. While Telltale has included the frame work for development they have left it up to the player to decide how her circumstances have changed her. There have been many moments and decisions that could define Clem but they never expounded on them in a meaningful way. telltale has left almost all of Clem's development up to us, we decide how Clem reacts, we have to keep the running tally in our heads of wether we think Clem is still innocent or if she has become hardened. So for me her character development is completely abstract, it's happening, most definitely, but it's happening in a vacuum. What we all as players need is a touchstone, we need someone or something in game that defines what the people around her think of her. In my head Clem is a strongly drawn but when she gets dissected she falls apart.… [view original content]
Your comment brings up another interesting aspect of this topic!
One issue that is raised in this thread is how to balance player control with a set narrative. However, here, you bring up another good way in which TTG can balance the two. TTG can bring up some scenes in S2 that seem to be out of player control (for example, Clem choosing to watch Carver's death without an offered choice) but in reality, are affected by our choices way back in Season 1. In the scene, there can be a subtle reference to the previous event that decided what Clem would do in this scenario. This way, the player's choices are technically honored, and at the same time, TTG can further develop a narrative around Clem as she grows in S2.
And I agree with your last statement - TTG, please hear us out??
Look, maybe I'm going to play devil's advocate here but I wish sometimes Clementine can respond some things depending our choices from Seaso… moren One automatically. Her mood, her special dialouge choices based on our save files from S1. (Don't tell me this is a hard thing to do. If they can work 4 games at once this is easy as pie for them.) Like if you didn't kill BOTH brothers, Clementine will go with Sarita. Also that dialouge option ''Everything will not be fine.'' with Walter I was like; ''WHAT. THE. DUCK.'' I replayed the entire Season One only changing this choice to ''Yeah, you're right.'' or ''Everything will be fine.'' and expecting to see if I did something wrong. But nope. I shared my hope in ''Starved For Help'' and ''Around Every Corner'' to her and that's... it? Another thing Season 2 loses is... based on actions. I know. Playing as Clementine I HAVE TO remember my previous choices but c'mon? Telltale Staff!!! Hear me out. Please?
Comments
Episodes would have to be longer in this way, since the story was enriched with additional content.
TT please read this thread!!! *_*
I am of the mind that everything in the development of this game is connected. Gameplay, character interaction, development, the characters themselves... nothing stands on its own here. Clementine is no exception.
I like Domewing's interpretation, but I believe that is giving too much credit to Telltale. It is not that I think that they could not do that, but it does not *feel* like they are doing that. He nails the problem in the head: "the aspects of her personality that these conversations explore aren't really brought up again after the scene concludes."
Clementine is our protagonist and as so, we develop her according to what we think she would do, or we project ourselves into her. Whatever the case, we are the ones who dictate much of what she becomes. Is being the protagonist, a "blank slate" (although this one has baggage, and that is the reason why some still can't get into her), something that negates the chance of meaningful character development? No, I do not think so.
I think that the development a protagonist receives in a game that puts *you* into a role is a tad different one than that of an NPC. Clem has been both.
This is where I go back to my "everything is connected" argument. You were Lee Everett, a character with an arc that I would argue that outside of taking care of Clementine, did not have much to it. Many people call his arc an arc of redemption, I say that the player could make that theirs or ignore that angle completely as they advanced through the season. There was only one constant: Clementine.
You were projected into that world, and in a way, the character that developed was *you*. How? Well this was achieved in a large part thanks to the cast, and the interactions you had with them. "the aspects of her personality that these conversations explore aren't really brought up again after the scene concludes" this is a problem that plagues Season Two. People reacted to what you were doing, you as the lead, were confronted many times by the characters who either agreed, disagreed; liked you or hated you based on what you had molded your Lee Everett to be. You changed or stood by your attitude based on your convictions, but also on the emotional, "ethical" feedback you received from the others. Clementine's choice of words and actions are ignored, and as so, I believe that her development is hindered.
Many criticized Season One by saying that it did not vary enough; that the choices were meaningless. No, this is not the case (completely). The defenders have a point. Yes, the outcome was practically the same, but the journey changed and so did your relationships with the people who ventured with you. That is development, for me, too. Not only for the main character, but for the people around him/her that became like real people because of how they evolved *with* me and *thanks* to me. You did not need various outcomes to show that the journey had changed. (I'm not saying that they are bad, though)
I believe that many people were giving it the benefit of the doubt. Plus, the usual "they will handle it in episode 2". Well, that turned into "they will handle it in episode 3". I think that many are not willing to let history repeat itself, with only two episodes left. I do wonder, what difference *can* this all make at this point? I grow somewhat disillusioned with each passing day and thread.
season 1 was about lee protecting clem and choosing how to do it(be harsh or kind), season 2 should be about clem choosing what kinda survivor shes developing into and who she can trust, not about showing every 5 minutes how ''badass'' kenny is
Granted, Kenny may take quite a bit of attention in episodes 2 and 3, but I think TTG tries to develop other characters extensively too (such as Luke, Sarah, etc.). As I said in this post, I don't think they're developing Clem enough, although I don't know if I can say that is because they spend too much time on Kenny. But I do agree, the focus should not be all on Kenny this season, even though he does play a big role, and I think TTG knows this. They seem to have brought back Kenny not to make it his season or anything, but to further develop the characters around him, like Luke and maybe even Clem. Hopefully we see this balance of characters play out in the next two episodes. :)
Yeah, I'm not sure if this post would even be read by TTG. They claim that they actually use feedback to mold the story as we go along (one of the reasons why they do episodic game adventures), but I don't know how much of that is true. Then there's the previously mentioned fact that it is probably a bit difficult to introduce an intimate, true character development in Clem this late in the season. I actually had that exact mentality when I went into episodes 1 and 2 and even 3. I thought, "surely they'll handle this next episode, right?"
However, I do want to clarify that, well, in my opinion, this season is still pretty awesome. Although it may not be as gut-wrenching as season 1 because of the lack of a character-development-driven story arc, it still offers at least something to think about with Clem (like an entire forum of discussion posts!). I find the plot events intriguing, and it's always nice to see new characters and new situations come up. And that "Entropy" scene in episode 3, walking through a herd of walkers - that was pretty awesome. :P
So I'll say what I have said on many other posts - we'll just have to wait and see. And if they don't provide a satisfactory last two episodes, we'll certainly wait for season 3. :)
Your comment was not vague at all! In fact, you hit exactly what I had intended to say in my earlier reply to Clem_Everett's comments! "Although the season ended in the same physical way, we all ended our seasons with a different Lee that has gone through a unique character development personalized for each player." (except I think you explained it more thoroughly xD). Indeed, the character that developed was us, the players, and consequently, Lee becomes a more developed character from our perspective as the player.
Also, I think you made a good observation that Clem's lacking development may in fact simply be caused by how the changing aspects of her personality are not brought up again after the initial conversation's scene. Somehow, I missed DomeWing333's point (sorry! D: ) but now that you brought it up again, I can see how important this observation is. TTG doesn't even need to make fancy symbols, subtle behavior, or complex plot devices to develop Clem's character. They can just start by giving Clem's decisions and moral choices some more "continuity," as DomeWingg333 also pointed out, and Clem's development would already be much better. As also kind of mentioned previously on this thread, I think much of the context is already there - all these dramatic, morality-heavy events have already occurred, whether it is with Omid, Pete, Carver, or Kenny. It's just that the depth and impact of these decisions and outcomes need to be drawn further out in a similar way to how our decisions with Lee were drawn out in Season 1.
On the bright side, it has given us plenty to discuss, and it is still a story I look forward to conclude with our girl.
Ending twist will be some Looper shit where we find out she was actually holding herself up in the prologue before getting shot by Christa.
Well described!
Yeah, I agree - it's hard to develop Clem just based on the player choices. There needs to be some set-out exposition - touchstones, as you said - to really develop Clem. In order to develop this character that we control, TTG needs to balance player autonomy with a clear narrative; they need to more carefully choose what to put into canon, and what to leave in the vacuum.
Also, I would argue that I would be fine with some "abstract" character development, but it is not really occuring at all in S2 in my opinion. The fact is, TTG is relying too much on player imagination. As DomeWing333 said earlier, changing aspects of Clem's character may be brought up in a conversation, but never touched on again. In order to have those "building blocks" of character (see my reply to Clem_Everett about subplots), there needs to be some continuity with Clem's character development, and some "touchstones" scenes as well.
Your comment brings up another interesting aspect of this topic!
One issue that is raised in this thread is how to balance player control with a set narrative. However, here, you bring up another good way in which TTG can balance the two. TTG can bring up some scenes in S2 that seem to be out of player control (for example, Clem choosing to watch Carver's death without an offered choice) but in reality, are affected by our choices way back in Season 1. In the scene, there can be a subtle reference to the previous event that decided what Clem would do in this scenario. This way, the player's choices are technically honored, and at the same time, TTG can further develop a narrative around Clem as she grows in S2.
And I agree with your last statement - TTG, please hear us out??