Interesting point. I see the confrontation with the stranger as the moment that really sums up Lee's character, especially on darker-playthroughs. He can be a flawed anti-hero who is genuinely remorseful about the horrible things he had to do or an asshole who is completely unrepentant about his vil deeds.
In the end, there's no villain in Season 1; the antagonist is the terrible situation and what it causes people to become.
The Stranger isn't the villain, if anything the group is. They took food and left his family to starve, leaving his wife and children to die, driving him to some sort of insanity. He wanted the best for the child, Clementine. Even then, it's a little vague.
That's what I like about The Walking Dead, there is no clear "evil" or "good," you have to determine these things yourself by others' actions and justifications for them. There is no black and white, God and Satan, just humans surviving like you or I.
Even though Lee is a player-dependent character in how he behaves, there is no changing his backstory. He had no children pre-apocalyptic so he could be just bad with kids (even though every sensible person should no not to tell an 8 year old her parents are dead without proof).
Also, if you were starving and just escaped from cannibals in an apocalyptic world and you see an empty car with food, I'm pretty sure most of us would take it. Killing the St. John brothers was necessary in my opinion because if they somehow survived the farm being taken over they could come after us. So you see, Lee is not the villain in the story. Even if he didn't take proper care of Clementine in your play through, he did choices that were necessary for survival.
The Stranger was for me because: I played as good Lee and always looked out for Clementine, never stole from the Stranger's car, didn't kill the St John's and was truthful with the cancer survivors (and got fucked over when they stole the boat!).
Ben is the real villain...if he didn't steal those meds or supplies and give it to those raiders..this wouldn't happened...
He should of man up about it and tell the group about the situation...
If Ben didn't give them any supplies they would have attacked earlier. Remember how they mentioned that the bandits hadn't attacked in awhile? That was because of Ben. More people would be dead if it weren't for Ben. The only reason the bandits didn't put a bullet in everyone when they had them hostage was because they still saw them as valuable and that they could still work out a deal. Otherwise, they had no reason not to just kill them and make that it. Ben's actions, which are normally perceived as stupid, may have allowed some of the group to survive longer than they would have if the bandits just killed them all.
Ben is the real villain...if he didn't steal those meds or supplies and give it to those raiders..this wouldn't happened...
He should of man up about it and tell the group about the situation...
I disagree, because even Telltale themselves have said that Larry breathes if you punch his heart enough times, but either way Kenny kills him.
Even though most of those things seem like the right thing to do, they are extremely immoral. Even if it was better for survival, murdering people who were not going to do you any harm is wrong. Besides, even if Larry died and turned, do you think he would have gotten up fast enough to kill any of them? No, he would be salt-licked before he even got a chance.
That last phone message sounded a lot like a last will to me. And that was a couple months before Lee first has the opportunity to tell Clem… more that her parents are dead. In all likelihood, they were dead.
No longer a danger? These are two guys who started trapping, dismembering, and eating people 2 months into an apocalypse. And now they have nothing left to lose, a huge vendetta against your group, and full knowledge of where your base is and how many people are there. I mean I let them live too, but to say that they no longer posed any threat is just false.
He had a heart attack with no medical help around. The likelihood of him coming out of that situation alive was not worth risking everybody in the group, including Clem. And she recognized that. Even Lilly said she understood why you did it.
Then that would have been shitty luck on our part. I would be upset that we lost our things, but not at the people who just happened by our l… [view original content]
Perhaps, but the excuse that we couldn't know anyone owned that car is countered by the fact that we didn't know if they were dead either. The act of taking the food comes with completely accepting the possibility that you may be condemning others to starvation, and to me, that puts it in the wrong category. Of course it's meant to be morally ambiguous since it was taken to save the group, but in the end, it still caused the heartache and deaths of innocents, however unintentionally.
He sorta takes a breath, but that could have been an agonal gasp. Pretty common in heart attacks. It was way too big a gamble to take. Besides, the person who was closest to him as he was dying was Lilly. if I were Larry, I would rather die than risk killing my own daughter.
Weren't going to do you any harm? One guy had a rifle pointed at Lee like 2 minutes before Lee could kill him and one guy was moments away from pushing Lee's face into an electric fence. Just because they were temporarily incapacitated does not mean that they weren't going to hurt us. They were proven dangers to not only Lee's group, but any passerbys.
I disagree, because even Telltale themselves have said that Larry breathes if you punch his heart enough times, but either way Kenny kills h… moreim.
Even though most of those things seem like the right thing to do, they are extremely immoral. Even if it was better for survival, murdering people who were not going to do you any harm is wrong. Besides, even if Larry died and turned, do you think he would have gotten up fast enough to kill any of them? No, he would be salt-licked before he even got a chance.
Actually, more people would be alive if Ben had just spoken up about the deal in the first place. Before the attack. Any sensible person would have given the bandits the supplies so that they stopped attacking if they were in the same situation as Lee's group, but what makes Ben so stupid is that he never told anyone and expected to get away with it. Him not telling anyone is what caused the disastrous chain of events that destroyed the group in Episode 3. His actions are perceived as stupid because they are stupid, just like Ben himself.
If Ben didn't give them any supplies they would have attacked earlier. Remember how they mentioned that the bandits hadn't attacked in awhil… moree? That was because of Ben. More people would be dead if it weren't for Ben. The only reason the bandits didn't put a bullet in everyone when they had them hostage was because they still saw them as valuable and that they could still work out a deal. Otherwise, they had no reason not to just kill them and make that it. Ben's actions, which are normally perceived as stupid, may have allowed some of the group to survive longer than they would have if the bandits just killed them all.
I'd say telling Clem her parents are dead isn't an evil choice, its kinda the same thing Uncle Pete did with Nick, Pete was brutally honest with Nick, that didn't make him evil, I thought Clem had the right to know her parents probably weren't alive, I told her that they were probably dead and that she shouldn't get her hopes up of finding them alive but i did still say we can look for them if she wants to, plus if you were Clems age what would you rather have? someone telling you that your parents are definitely alive and then you find them dead, or someone telling you the truth that your parents probably aren't alive and then you finding them dead, id say the second one would take a lot less of a toll on the emotions than the first one
No, they couldn't do anything. One guy had his leg caught in a bear trap that had no release, he was very likely going to bleed out. The other one was beaten to a pulp, and he could barely move, and the farm was surrounded by walkers. They were fucked. The main difference is not making Clementine see you brutally murder them, such as blasting one man's brains out(I believe you can kick him into the fence also?) or driving a pitchfork through another's heart. She didn't deserve to see that.
Also, when I say Telltale confirmed he was breathing, I meant that they confirmed Larry was actually alive. I read it in an interview somewhere, I'll try my best to find it if I can.
He sorta takes a breath, but that could have been an agonal gasp. Pretty common in heart attacks. It was way too big a gamble to take. Besid… morees, the person who was closest to him as he was dying was Lilly. if I were Larry, I would rather die than risk killing my own daughter.
Weren't going to do you any harm? One guy had a rifle pointed at Lee like 2 minutes before Lee could kill him and one guy was moments away from pushing Lee's face into an electric fence. Just because they were temporarily incapacitated does not mean that they weren't going to hurt us. They were proven dangers to not only Lee's group, but any passerbys.
The fence doesn't fail until after Lee makes his decision to kill or spare Andy. So at the time that you spared him, you were still leaving him alive and very pissed off at you and your group. Now, I also chose to spare him because I didn't want to give him the satisfaction of being killed by me, but I wouldn't say that choosing to kill him would be immoral. The guy was a monster who preyed on the weak and there was no reason for him to stop then. Sparing him because you didn't want Clem to see him die risked him continuing to trap, kill, and eat people.
No, they couldn't do anything. One guy had his leg caught in a bear trap that had no release, he was very likely going to bleed out. The oth… moreer one was beaten to a pulp, and he could barely move, and the farm was surrounded by walkers. They were fucked. The main difference is not making Clementine see you brutally murder them, such as blasting one man's brains out(I believe you can kick him into the fence also?) or driving a pitchfork through another's heart. She didn't deserve to see that.
Also, when I say Telltale confirmed he was breathing, I meant that they confirmed Larry was actually alive. I read it in an interview somewhere, I'll try my best to find it if I can.
In my game, the Stranger is definitely the villain.
I tried to do the most decent and honorable thing I could do.
This is speaking of my very 1st playthrough.
I saved Duck on Herschel's farm.
And I later stood up to Larry at the drugstore on Duck's behalf.
In episode 2, I helped Kenny put Larry down, mainly cause I didn't know if Larry would come back as a walker, and try to eat everyone.
I did not like doing it, but did not see a lot of choice.
And just stating a fact, after Kenny saved Lee at the drugstore, I knew that was a debt that had to be repaid.
And I killed Danny, mainly cause I didn't realize that throwing it into the hay bail was an option.
In the fight with Andy, I only had Lee beat him to an extent, and subsequently left him alive.
I felt enough harm had already been done, what with Jolene, Larry, Danny, and Brenda dying, and I simply didn't want to do anymore harm.
And when it came to the station wagon, I did not agree with looting it.
I did not know what became of the folks who owned it, and I was not going to possibly steal everything they had.
Since my character was a fellow survival, I was not going to leave a fellow survivor with nothing.
The poor woman at the drugstore in episode 3.
I did not, and could not leave her to suffer.
No matter how much the group was in need, I could not leave another person to die that way.
To me, that was just wrong!
Not to mention cruel.
I later on euthanized Duck, as well as the boy in the attic, so that Kenny did not have to do that.
With Duck, my reasoning was, "No parent should have to do something like this."
And with the boy in the attic, my reasoning was, " Kenny has been through so much, with losing his wife and son. If he is faced with something like this later on in the future, than maybe then I'll have him do this. But for right now, let me spare this poor guy from having to make a decision that he's not able to make at this point. Even though it's not his own son, it's still a tough decision to make. And it's something I am not going to put him through at this time."
In episode 4.
When Ben was in danger of being booted out of the group, I stood up for him.
I had the group put it to a vote.
I realized, before had Lee reply, that to not do so would make the group no better than Crawford.
When Clementine chimed in, it reinforced to me, that I was making the right decision.
I also saved him on top of the bell tower.
After seeing how remorseful the kid was, and the fact that he felt like he did not deserve to live, I couldn't let him die.
Episode 5.
After Kenny and Lee made their way to Vernon's "camp," I had Kenny remove Lee's arm.
Figuring it might save Lee's life.
When Kenny and Lee came back, to discover the boat missing, I pleaded for everyone to "Keep it together, stay the course, and not turn on each other."
After Kenny asked about what to do, after getting Clementine back, I agreed with Christa that the countryside was the best bet for safety.
Since the boat plan had turned out to be a bust, I felt, " The hell with this, let's get out into an isolated area, and try to live off the land as best as possible."
I was personally never really sure about the boat plan.
I just went along with it, cause it seemed like the best idea at the time.
Plus there was no dialogue option for Lee to suggest anything else, back at the motel.
After Ben fell in the alleyway, and Kenny was going to stay behind, I had Lee refused to leave him.
There was a loyalty, the two were friends, and I was not about to have Lee abandon him.
After Kenny pushed Lee back and slammed that gate door, I had Lee try to open it, all to know avail.
When asked if Lee wanted to talk, I had him respond, "Kenny could be tough to like, but I agreed with him.
So we were assholes together I guess."
When it came to the stranger, after I had Lee strangle him, I also had Lee shoot him in the head.
I thought, "Despite how this guy was, he didn't deserve to come back as a walker."
And finally, I had Clementine euthanize Lee.
I figured, " I gave the right example for her regarding Duck. This is something she may be forced to do someday. Plus it's the right thing to do, given the alternative."
When I played the 1st time around, I played according to how my conscious dictated.
What you've just read was the end result.
Even though I've stated my own opinion, I encourage you to judge for yourself, "Who was the real villain in my playthrough?"
And please leave your comments, as I'd like to hear what you all have to say.
I played as nice, helpful, and protective Lee. I was nice to my friends and rude to my enemies. I always protected Clementine and the group. I was the leader type who IMO, made the right choices and acted with smart moves and actions. So yeah, I think the stranger was the villain.
I guess that depends on if you view those "evil" actions Lee takes in those playthrough as evil acts and not for the overall benefit of Clementine. Which as we know is the main focus of all of Lee's actions in any playthrough.
If you are constantly telling Clementine her parents are dead
Chances are they were dead. What good does it truly do to convince her they are alive? So she can try to find them, possibly die trying? Or just to find out they were dead all the while and her actions of pursuit were for not?
if you murder multiple men in front of her face
All of which I can recall deserved to die, if nothing more than for the protection and welfare of Clementine?
if you help steal the Stranger's only hope of survival from them
All of which went to the betterment of the group and of Clementine. All from a vehicle seemingly abandoned with resources in it vital and pivotal to the survival of any group.
if you threaten or lie to innocent cancer survivor to get them to do what you want
You have to do what you have to do. If he needed to get back to Clementine and putting the cancer survivors in their place is what he needs to do to accomplish this task then that's what's going to happen.
if you are overall an evil player
Evil or pragmatic? Are you sure you have the standing to undoubtedly say it's one and not the other?
Added note. I didn't play my Lee as a pragmatic one, quite the opposite actually, but I don't see any version of Lee as evil for the actions he takes to protect Clem. My personal view.
I guess that depends on if you view those "evil" actions Lee takes in those playthrough as evil acts and not for the overall benefit of Clem… moreentine. Which as we know is the main focus of all of Lee's actions in any playthrough.
If you are constantly telling Clementine her parents are dead
Chances are they were dead. What good does it truly do to convince her they are alive? So she can try to find them, possibly die trying? Or just to find out they were dead all the while and her actions of pursuit were for not?
if you murder multiple men in front of her face
All of which I can recall deserved to die, if nothing more than for the protection and welfare of Clementine?
if you help steal the Stranger's only hope of survival from them
All of which went to the betterment of the group and of Clementine. All from a vehicle seemingly abandoned with resources in it vital and pivotal to the survival of any group.
… [view original content]
The idea of telling Clementine her parents are not dead, is to try to give her hope.
Hope is the one thing that can get a person through trying times.
And besides, without ironclad proof, there's really no reason to tell her they weren't still alive.
The message on the answering machine, didn't really prove anything, one way or another.
Yes it did arise suspicion, but not ironclad proof.
Murdering multiple men.
While killing might be necessary, that doesn't make it good.
Life is sacred!
And Clementine needs to be taught such.
If a person views life as unsacred, they are prone to commit all kinds of atrocities.
Like the ones the St.Johns and Carver committed.
Looting the station wagon.
One reason for not doing so, is obviously cause there was no way to know if it truly was abandoned, number 1.
And on that basis, that makes it wrong.
Plus, Clementine needs to see that, "old world values," still matter, and still have a place in this apocalyptic new word.
As far as threatening and lying to the cancer survivors.
If you paid attention, the way Vernon's hands were shaking when he had that gun on Lee.
He wasn't going to shoot Lee, so there was no need to get aggressive with him.
The point is, even though things are going to hell in a handbag, you can still be a nice guy.
It's about choosing who and what you're to be.
And the bottom line is, you don't have to become the bad guy in order to survive.
If that were true, than everyone returning home from Vietnam, would've have been nothing more than a savage killer.
But not all came back that way.
My uncle being one of them.
He's a good, decent, hardworking and honest man.
I guess that depends on if you view those "evil" actions Lee takes in those playthrough as evil acts and not for the overall benefit of Clem… moreentine. Which as we know is the main focus of all of Lee's actions in any playthrough.
If you are constantly telling Clementine her parents are dead
Chances are they were dead. What good does it truly do to convince her they are alive? So she can try to find them, possibly die trying? Or just to find out they were dead all the while and her actions of pursuit were for not?
if you murder multiple men in front of her face
All of which I can recall deserved to die, if nothing more than for the protection and welfare of Clementine?
if you help steal the Stranger's only hope of survival from them
All of which went to the betterment of the group and of Clementine. All from a vehicle seemingly abandoned with resources in it vital and pivotal to the survival of any group.
… [view original content]
This is a cool way to look the game, some people might not accept it but you can become into the villian or atleast someone like Larry if your choices are the "bad" ones. Also i had never seen the Stranger as the main villian, i don't think there is a main villian actually.
What the game shows, is that when people are under pressure, their true nature's emerge.
And it's either good, or bad.
And even if someone is initially bad, it doesn't mean that they are programmed to be that way.
As human beings, we are in complete control of who and what we become.
Anyone can become whatever type of person they choose to become.
We do not have to allow a bad situation determine how we are as people.
You'll often here the expression, "That experienced changed him/her."
Well with all do respect, that's not quite true.
Anyone can have something bad happen to them.
It's how a person chooses to cope, or not to cope, is what makes the difference.
And in that respect, the person is still choosing what he will be as a person.
Situations in themselves do not mean anything, until we assign a meaning to them.
For example, I am an alcoholic.
I started drinking after a couple of individuals I was very close died, within 10 months of each other, due to cancer.
The 2nd one passing away quickly and unexpectedly!
My family begged me to quit, cause of how much it hurt them to see me destroy myself.
But I would not quit drinking.
After two years, I started working for a friend.
I worked hard, but was still drinking.
One night I had a big fight with a family member, cause I was drunk.
Drunk and really mad!
And as a result I berated my family member, who in hindsight did not deserve it.
The next day, my friend confronted me about it, and told me that if I did not stop drinking, he could no longer keep me in his employment.
And practically begged me to quit, so it didn't come to that.
Well here I had a decision, either I could ignore his plea like I ignored my family's pleas for 2 yrs.
Or I could choose to head it, and take action.
Well I chose to take action!
And I quit drinking, even though doing so was one the hardest things I've ever done.
I did slip up, after 6 months however, which went on for 3 months, mainly cause I was fooling myself into thinking I could drink, and be ok.
But after I saw that the same old garbage was comming back into my cause of drinking, I again quit and have been sober ever since.
Cause I did not, and do not wish to live my life like that!
It's been 3 months, and I'm still going strong.
Now you might say, when my friend confronted me, that was a defining moment in my life.
But as I stated, I could've ignored him, or listened to him.
So rather, it was the choice that I made, that defined me.
I chose how I was going to deal with my issue, what caused to me drink.
And to in turn stop hiding in a bottle.
And by doing so, I chose what I kind of person I am, and what kind of person I want to be.
So that's why I say, situations have no definition on who we are and who we become as people.
Our choices do.
This is a cool way to look the game, some people might not accept it but you can become into the villian or atleast someone like Larry if yo… moreur choices are the "bad" ones. Also i had never seen the Stranger as the main villian, i don't think there is a main villian actually.
The idea of telling Clementine her parents are not dead, is to try to give her hope. Hope is the one thing that can get a person through trying times. And besides, without ironclad proof, there's really no reason to tell her they weren't still alive. The message on the answering machine, didn't really prove anything, one way or another. Yes it did arise suspicion, but not ironclad proof.
Enough proof to help bring her to the realization that he parents are most likely dead. Hope is good, it comes in many forms. Like a man jumping over a wall to take care of you, a random car with food and other supplies in it placed in front of you, finding a train that just happens to take you all the way to your destination, or finding a boat in perfect condition. These are all examples of things that bring hope without making a (false) assumption. Something that can be proven. Telling her her parents are alive plays at nothing but childish wishing.
Murdering multiple men. While killing might be necessary, that doesn't make it good. Life is sacred! And Clementine needs to be taught such. If a person views life as unsacred, they are prone to commit all kinds of atrocities. Like the ones the St.Johns and Carver committed.
Life is not sacred, not anymore. If that were true then the group would surely be dead for refusal to do the necessary killing. If a person views life as unsacred they will take the steps required to ensure survival of themselves and the ones they care about.
Looting the station wagon. One reason for not doing so, is obviously cause there was no way to know if it truly was abandoned, number 1. And on that basis, that makes it wrong. Plus, Clementine needs to see that, "old world values," still matter, and still have a place in this apocalyptic new word.
Old world values died with the old world. Why would a struggling man, with a child no less, not to mention with a full group of people to feed, leave such amenities to probably be left to rot or taken by another random group. That's just senseless.
As far as threatening and lying to the cancer survivors. If you paid attention, the way Vernon's hands were shaking when he had that gun on Lee. He wasn't going to shoot Lee, so there was no need to get aggressive with him.
When someone shoots a household intruder do you believe they are steadfast, confident, and not shaking? Far from it. Coupled with the fact he accidently found them would make shooting him harder, most everyone with some sense of compassion would shake uncontrollably. That doesn't mean he wouldn't have shot out of fear alone.
The point is, even though things are going to hell in a handbag, you can still be a nice guy. It's about choosing who and what you're to be. And the bottom line is, you don't have to become the bad guy in order to survive.
You can't be the angelic good guy and survive. You don't necessarily need to be the worst guy to survive, but you have to be bad in situations that call for it. The good die and the bad/neutral continue. The best you can hope for is to not be compassionless, and emotionless. Take for instance the SPOILERS people at Carver's institution. They didn't view themselves as evil or bad, simply doing what it takes to survive while still giving food and shelter to the workers they had. They no doubt ably viewed Clem's group as rvil, mean, and bad when they brought a herd of walkers to besiege their home. It's all perspective. Same with Lee's more pragmatic decisions. Whether right or wrong, good or bad is completely up in the air. What we do know is these actions led to the safety of Clem, and that is good... right?
Again I'm not saying I agree with the pragmatic Lee's decisions. I found many/most of them extreme. But from a pragmatic persons view (especially one who's actually in those circumstances) they were completely understandable and justifiable.
The idea of telling Clementine her parents are not dead, is to try to give her hope.
Hope is the one thing that can get a person through tr… moreying times.
And besides, without ironclad proof, there's really no reason to tell her they weren't still alive.
The message on the answering machine, didn't really prove anything, one way or another.
Yes it did arise suspicion, but not ironclad proof.
Murdering multiple men.
While killing might be necessary, that doesn't make it good.
Life is sacred!
And Clementine needs to be taught such.
If a person views life as unsacred, they are prone to commit all kinds of atrocities.
Like the ones the St.Johns and Carver committed.
Looting the station wagon.
One reason for not doing so, is obviously cause there was no way to know if it truly was abandoned, number 1.
And on that basis, that makes it wrong.
Plus, Clementine needs to see that, "old world values," still matter, and still have a place i… [view original content]
This is a very interesting way of looking at it, and it has some merit. But I'd have to say, in the end, the Stranger is always a villain, no matter how you play Lee, because the Stranger straight up kidnapped Clementine. She didn't want to go with him, and he had no right to tell her what to do. He wasn't her parent. He wasn't even sane. She loved Lee and wanted to go with him. I know a lot of people are going to disagree with me, but since both her parents were absent/dead and the world was in total ZA chaos, Clementine had full rights to deciding her own path, no matter how old she was. And she chose Lee, not some stranger who had never really done anything for her except lie to her about having her parents. Our smart little Clem KNEW what she wanted and the Stranger denied her that choice.
Say Clem had chosen the Stranger instead, because she loved and trusted him. It would have been the wrong choice, because he was crazy, but it still would have been BAD for Lee to then kill the Stranger so that Clem would have no way out and then forcefully grab Clem and drag her away to be with him. Note that this is exactly what the Stranger was planning to do toLee and Clem.
But then again, letting her go with the Stranger would also be bad, being that he was crazy and who knows what he would do to her eventually (I could definitely see him beheading her and adding her head to his collection at some point). And that's part of the artistry of TWDG. It puts you between a rock and a hard place and makes you question whether either choice is really right. And seeing how almost no one plays Lee nice all the way through and Lee starts off a murderer regardless, it makes you question how many villainous ACTS a person can commit before they become a VILLAIN. (I am NOT saying, btw, that there is no right or wrong in the ZA. It really annoys me when people say that because it means that hard times is all it takes to erase all morality in the universe.)
I did only four bad things - stole the supplies, killed Larry, abandoned Lilly and didn't kill the girl on the street. I don't know if I'm a villain or not.
Oh, there are villains. There's a very real difference between doing something immoral for the good of many and doing something immoral for the good of the self, or to merely exert pain on another. There are minds that enjoy being cruel to others, and use terms like "the good of the whole" to justify their actions (when it's what they wanted in the first place), and then others who perform similar actions to save lives, and torture themselves over it. You see multiple examples of it in the other mediums of the series (comics and the show) moreso than I think the game has done thusfar (although this season certainly seems to be fitting the bill).
Clementine was 8 years old, and 9 at the end of season 1.
Sometimes, people, children included, need to find out things for themselves.
Plus, teaching people to hang on to hope, even though things look bleak, is a very powerful thing.
If life was not still sacred, and if old world values no longer matter, and it's all about "survival of the fittest," ...... then why did Lee look after Clementine?
Why did Kenny continue to try and provide for and protect his family, instead of just running off and looking after himself?
Why did Lilly try to save her dad?
Why did Lilly object to taking from the station wagon, if it turned out not abandoned like it appeared to be?
Why did Chuck, not only share what he had with the group, but later on save Clementine's life?
And as far as being tough when the situation calls for it, I'll give you that.
To protect yourself, and the ones you care for, you have to be.
But the point is, you don't have to become animalistic to survive.
As Dale, on the tv show, once so eloquently put it when speaking to Andrea, "The world we know is gone.
Keeping our humanity, that's a choice."
And as far as Carver's camp, they may have not viewed their actions as wrong.
But the fact is they were.
If their actions were good, then they wouldn't have treated the group like dangerous prisoners.
Nor would they have practically enslaved them, to ensure their own survival.
Carver ran nothing but a dictatorship.
Bonnie was the only real decent one, of Carver's crew.
And once she saw how things really were, she did the decent thing, and helped the group escape.
The idea of telling Clementine her parents are not dead, is to try to give her hope. Hope is the one thing that can get a person through try… moreing times. And besides, without ironclad proof, there's really no reason to tell her they weren't still alive. The message on the answering machine, didn't really prove anything, one way or another. Yes it did arise suspicion, but not ironclad proof.
Enough proof to help bring her to the realization that he parents are most likely dead. Hope is good, it comes in many forms. Like a man jumping over a wall to take care of you, a random car with food and other supplies in it placed in front of you, finding a train that just happens to take you all the way to your destination, or finding a boat in perfect condition. These are all examples of things that bring hope without making a (false) assumption. Something that can be proven. Telling her her parents are alive plays at nothing but childish wishing.
… [view original content]
I say that early into the end, you'd probably end up feeding the girl's hope as at least some of us did.
That being said... is it really better to keep going "Yeah clem! I'm sure they're fine! When we get there, we'll all go out for milkshakes!" and then run the risk of her getting the rug ripped out from under her? This is kind of one of those situations where I would have liked a good middle ground. "Look, we don't know what happened. We'll do our best to find them, but we're going to be here to keep you safe no matter what, ok?"
Clementine was 8 years old, and 9 at the end of season 1.
Sometimes, people, children included, need to find out things for themselves.
Pl… moreus, teaching people to hang on to hope, even though things look bleak, is a very powerful thing.
If life was not still sacred, and if old world values no longer matter, and it's all about "survival of the fittest," ...... then why did Lee look after Clementine?
Why did Kenny continue to try and provide for and protect his family, instead of just running off and looking after himself?
Why did Lilly try to save her dad?
Why did Lilly object to taking from the station wagon, if it turned out not abandoned like it appeared to be?
Why did Chuck, not only share what he had with the group, but later on save Clementine's life?
And as far as being tough when the situation calls for it, I'll give you that.
To protect yourself, and the ones you care for, you have to be.
But the point is, you don't have t… [view original content]
That's reasonable.
I honestly wish that would've been a dialogue option.
Asking a person to do their best, is all anyone can ask, even of themself.
And if you examine the dialogue options, Lee can try to be more neutral in that respect.
In the beginning, he can tell Clementine that they'll look for them.
On the train, when Clementine asks about finding them, he can ask, "Where would we even look?"
That shows that even though he still agrees to continue to help Clementine look for them, after she remembers a place they could be at, he also softly indicates that it may be a fruitless endeavor.
When Kenny and Lee head down towards the water front, if Clementine asks if she can come along and look for her parents on the way, Lee can ask her to wait a while longer.
Even though Lee indicates he is still willing to help her, he is telling her that it's not all about her and her parents.
That there are other people who have to be taken into consideration.
And finally, after the group returns from Crawford, when Clementine asks if whether or not they'll have time to look for her parents before they leave on the boat the next day, Lee can either be honest and say that there may not be time to do so, or he can be very direct and tell her they are dead, and that she needs to focus on keeping herself alive.
I say that early into the end, you'd probably end up feeding the girl's hope as at least some of us did.
That being said... is it really … morebetter to keep going "Yeah clem! I'm sure they're fine! When we get there, we'll all go out for milkshakes!" and then run the risk of her getting the rug ripped out from under her? This is kind of one of those situations where I would have liked a good middle ground. "Look, we don't know what happened. We'll do our best to find them, but we're going to be here to keep you safe no matter what, ok?"
Would that have been so bad?
That's reasonable.
I wish that would've been a dialogue option.
If you noticed however, Lee in effect can take that course.
For example, when he first finds her, he naturally encourages her to think of them as alive.
On the train, when asked about finding them, he can respond, "Where would we even look?"
Although Lee agrees to continue to help her look for them, once she remembers a place they might be at, he also hints at that continuing the search may prove to be a fruitless endeavor.
When Kenny and Lee are about to take off for the waterfront, and Clementine asks if she can come so they can look for her parents on the way, Lee can ask her to wait longer.
While still agreeing to help her, he also tells her that it's not all about her and what she wants.
And that she has to to take the feelings and wishes of others into account.
And finally, when Clementine asks if they can look for her parents, before they leave the following day on the boat, Lee can say, " I'd like to Clementine, but their may not be time."
In other words, he's politely saying that she needs to drop it, even though it is painful, and focus on getting herself to safety.
That they done everything possible, and now they have to focus on their own survival.
I say that early into the end, you'd probably end up feeding the girl's hope as at least some of us did.
That being said... is it really … morebetter to keep going "Yeah clem! I'm sure they're fine! When we get there, we'll all go out for milkshakes!" and then run the risk of her getting the rug ripped out from under her? This is kind of one of those situations where I would have liked a good middle ground. "Look, we don't know what happened. We'll do our best to find them, but we're going to be here to keep you safe no matter what, ok?"
Would that have been so bad?
That's reasonable.
I wish that would've been a dialogue option.
If you noticed however, Lee in effect can take that course.
For examp… morele, when he first finds her, he naturally encourages her to think of them as alive.
On the train, when asked about finding them, he can respond, "Where would we even look?"
Although Lee agrees to continue to help her look for them, once she remembers a place they might be at, he also hints at that continuing the search may prove to be a fruitless endeavor.
When Kenny and Lee are about to take off for the waterfront, and Clementine asks if she can come so they can look for her parents on the way, Lee can ask her to wait longer.
While still agreeing to help her, he also tells her that it's not all about her and what she wants.
And that she has to to take the feelings and wishes of others into account.
And finally, when Clementine asks if they can look for her parents, before they leave the follo… [view original content]
As someone who thinks of life as being sacred the villain for me would be the one who kills the most people, so who is that?
Lee: man sleeping with his wife, andy and/or Danny (determinate) , Jolene (D), women in street (D), a bandit (D), five bandits, the stranger (D) 6-12
The stranger: his son (sort of) , lee (sort of) 0-2
Saint johns: mark, Travis, mr Parker, Jolene (D), jolene's daughter (probably), Larry (sort of) 3-6
Lilly: Carly/ Doug, bandit, possibly some more bandits. 2-5
Kenny: Larry, Shawn (sort of), 1-2
Katjaa: katjaa 1
Walkers: Shawn, Carly or Doug, the police officer, Chet (D), Travis or mr Parker, Brenda, that girl in the street (D), a bandit, duck, chuck, Brie, Ben, lee 9-12
I don't think I've missed any, but oh my god lee can determinately kill more people than the walkers are seen killing! Wow, was not expecting that...
Comments
I played as a caring and helpful Lee.
Who's Cany0udance?
I never even considered the Stranger to be the main villain. I always thought Season 1 didn't have one.
What about the walkers?
Interesting point. I see the confrontation with the stranger as the moment that really sums up Lee's character, especially on darker-playthroughs. He can be a flawed anti-hero who is genuinely remorseful about the horrible things he had to do or an asshole who is completely unrepentant about his vil deeds.
In the end, there's no villain in Season 1; the antagonist is the terrible situation and what it causes people to become.
The Stranger isn't the villain, if anything the group is. They took food and left his family to starve, leaving his wife and children to die, driving him to some sort of insanity. He wanted the best for the child, Clementine. Even then, it's a little vague.
That's what I like about The Walking Dead, there is no clear "evil" or "good," you have to determine these things yourself by others' actions and justifications for them. There is no black and white, God and Satan, just humans surviving like you or I.
Even though Lee is a player-dependent character in how he behaves, there is no changing his backstory. He had no children pre-apocalyptic so he could be just bad with kids (even though every sensible person should no not to tell an 8 year old her parents are dead without proof).
Also, if you were starving and just escaped from cannibals in an apocalyptic world and you see an empty car with food, I'm pretty sure most of us would take it. Killing the St. John brothers was necessary in my opinion because if they somehow survived the farm being taken over they could come after us. So you see, Lee is not the villain in the story. Even if he didn't take proper care of Clementine in your play through, he did choices that were necessary for survival.
The Stranger was for me because: I played as good Lee and always looked out for Clementine, never stole from the Stranger's car, didn't kill the St John's and was truthful with the cancer survivors (and got fucked over when they stole the boat!).
Ben is the real villain...if he didn't steal those meds or supplies and give it to those raiders..this wouldn't happened...
He should of man up about it and tell the group about the situation...
If Ben didn't give them any supplies they would have attacked earlier. Remember how they mentioned that the bandits hadn't attacked in awhile? That was because of Ben. More people would be dead if it weren't for Ben. The only reason the bandits didn't put a bullet in everyone when they had them hostage was because they still saw them as valuable and that they could still work out a deal. Otherwise, they had no reason not to just kill them and make that it. Ben's actions, which are normally perceived as stupid, may have allowed some of the group to survive longer than they would have if the bandits just killed them all.
I disagree, because even Telltale themselves have said that Larry breathes if you punch his heart enough times, but either way Kenny kills him.
Even though most of those things seem like the right thing to do, they are extremely immoral. Even if it was better for survival, murdering people who were not going to do you any harm is wrong. Besides, even if Larry died and turned, do you think he would have gotten up fast enough to kill any of them? No, he would be salt-licked before he even got a chance.
I'd say both Lee and The Stranger are villians, but The Stranger is more of one because he wanted to kidnap Clementine for himself.
Perhaps, but the excuse that we couldn't know anyone owned that car is countered by the fact that we didn't know if they were dead either. The act of taking the food comes with completely accepting the possibility that you may be condemning others to starvation, and to me, that puts it in the wrong category. Of course it's meant to be morally ambiguous since it was taken to save the group, but in the end, it still caused the heartache and deaths of innocents, however unintentionally.
He sorta takes a breath, but that could have been an agonal gasp. Pretty common in heart attacks. It was way too big a gamble to take. Besides, the person who was closest to him as he was dying was Lilly. if I were Larry, I would rather die than risk killing my own daughter.
Weren't going to do you any harm? One guy had a rifle pointed at Lee like 2 minutes before Lee could kill him and one guy was moments away from pushing Lee's face into an electric fence. Just because they were temporarily incapacitated does not mean that they weren't going to hurt us. They were proven dangers to not only Lee's group, but any passerbys.
Actually, more people would be alive if Ben had just spoken up about the deal in the first place. Before the attack. Any sensible person would have given the bandits the supplies so that they stopped attacking if they were in the same situation as Lee's group, but what makes Ben so stupid is that he never told anyone and expected to get away with it. Him not telling anyone is what caused the disastrous chain of events that destroyed the group in Episode 3. His actions are perceived as stupid because they are stupid, just like Ben himself.
I'd say telling Clem her parents are dead isn't an evil choice, its kinda the same thing Uncle Pete did with Nick, Pete was brutally honest with Nick, that didn't make him evil, I thought Clem had the right to know her parents probably weren't alive, I told her that they were probably dead and that she shouldn't get her hopes up of finding them alive but i did still say we can look for them if she wants to, plus if you were Clems age what would you rather have? someone telling you that your parents are definitely alive and then you find them dead, or someone telling you the truth that your parents probably aren't alive and then you finding them dead, id say the second one would take a lot less of a toll on the emotions than the first one
No, they couldn't do anything. One guy had his leg caught in a bear trap that had no release, he was very likely going to bleed out. The other one was beaten to a pulp, and he could barely move, and the farm was surrounded by walkers. They were fucked. The main difference is not making Clementine see you brutally murder them, such as blasting one man's brains out(I believe you can kick him into the fence also?) or driving a pitchfork through another's heart. She didn't deserve to see that.
Also, when I say Telltale confirmed he was breathing, I meant that they confirmed Larry was actually alive. I read it in an interview somewhere, I'll try my best to find it if I can.
The fence doesn't fail until after Lee makes his decision to kill or spare Andy. So at the time that you spared him, you were still leaving him alive and very pissed off at you and your group. Now, I also chose to spare him because I didn't want to give him the satisfaction of being killed by me, but I wouldn't say that choosing to kill him would be immoral. The guy was a monster who preyed on the weak and there was no reason for him to stop then. Sparing him because you didn't want Clem to see him die risked him continuing to trap, kill, and eat people.
Very interesting argument.
In my game, the Stranger is definitely the villain.
I tried to do the most decent and honorable thing I could do.
This is speaking of my very 1st playthrough.
I saved Duck on Herschel's farm.
And I later stood up to Larry at the drugstore on Duck's behalf.
In episode 2, I helped Kenny put Larry down, mainly cause I didn't know if Larry would come back as a walker, and try to eat everyone.
I did not like doing it, but did not see a lot of choice.
And just stating a fact, after Kenny saved Lee at the drugstore, I knew that was a debt that had to be repaid.
And I killed Danny, mainly cause I didn't realize that throwing it into the hay bail was an option.
In the fight with Andy, I only had Lee beat him to an extent, and subsequently left him alive.
I felt enough harm had already been done, what with Jolene, Larry, Danny, and Brenda dying, and I simply didn't want to do anymore harm.
And when it came to the station wagon, I did not agree with looting it.
I did not know what became of the folks who owned it, and I was not going to possibly steal everything they had.
Since my character was a fellow survival, I was not going to leave a fellow survivor with nothing.
The poor woman at the drugstore in episode 3.
I did not, and could not leave her to suffer.
No matter how much the group was in need, I could not leave another person to die that way.
To me, that was just wrong!
Not to mention cruel.
I later on euthanized Duck, as well as the boy in the attic, so that Kenny did not have to do that.
With Duck, my reasoning was, "No parent should have to do something like this."
And with the boy in the attic, my reasoning was, " Kenny has been through so much, with losing his wife and son. If he is faced with something like this later on in the future, than maybe then I'll have him do this. But for right now, let me spare this poor guy from having to make a decision that he's not able to make at this point. Even though it's not his own son, it's still a tough decision to make. And it's something I am not going to put him through at this time."
In episode 4.
When Ben was in danger of being booted out of the group, I stood up for him.
I had the group put it to a vote.
I realized, before had Lee reply, that to not do so would make the group no better than Crawford.
When Clementine chimed in, it reinforced to me, that I was making the right decision.
I also saved him on top of the bell tower.
After seeing how remorseful the kid was, and the fact that he felt like he did not deserve to live, I couldn't let him die.
Episode 5.
After Kenny and Lee made their way to Vernon's "camp," I had Kenny remove Lee's arm.
Figuring it might save Lee's life.
When Kenny and Lee came back, to discover the boat missing, I pleaded for everyone to "Keep it together, stay the course, and not turn on each other."
After Kenny asked about what to do, after getting Clementine back, I agreed with Christa that the countryside was the best bet for safety.
Since the boat plan had turned out to be a bust, I felt, " The hell with this, let's get out into an isolated area, and try to live off the land as best as possible."
I was personally never really sure about the boat plan.
I just went along with it, cause it seemed like the best idea at the time.
Plus there was no dialogue option for Lee to suggest anything else, back at the motel.
After Ben fell in the alleyway, and Kenny was going to stay behind, I had Lee refused to leave him.
There was a loyalty, the two were friends, and I was not about to have Lee abandon him.
After Kenny pushed Lee back and slammed that gate door, I had Lee try to open it, all to know avail.
When asked if Lee wanted to talk, I had him respond, "Kenny could be tough to like, but I agreed with him.
So we were assholes together I guess."
When it came to the stranger, after I had Lee strangle him, I also had Lee shoot him in the head.
I thought, "Despite how this guy was, he didn't deserve to come back as a walker."
And finally, I had Clementine euthanize Lee.
I figured, " I gave the right example for her regarding Duck. This is something she may be forced to do someday. Plus it's the right thing to do, given the alternative."
When I played the 1st time around, I played according to how my conscious dictated.
What you've just read was the end result.
Even though I've stated my own opinion, I encourage you to judge for yourself, "Who was the real villain in my playthrough?"
And please leave your comments, as I'd like to hear what you all have to say.
I played as nice, helpful, and protective Lee. I was nice to my friends and rude to my enemies. I always protected Clementine and the group. I was the leader type who IMO, made the right choices and acted with smart moves and actions. So yeah, I think the stranger was the villain.
The World!!!!!!!!!!
I guess that depends on if you view those "evil" actions Lee takes in those playthrough as evil acts and not for the overall benefit of Clementine. Which as we know is the main focus of all of Lee's actions in any playthrough.
If you are constantly telling Clementine her parents are dead
if you murder multiple men in front of her face
if you help steal the Stranger's only hope of survival from them
if you threaten or lie to innocent cancer survivor to get them to do what you want
if you are overall an evil player
Added note. I didn't play my Lee as a pragmatic one, quite the opposite actually, but I don't see any version of Lee as evil for the actions he takes to protect Clem. My personal view.
The idea of telling Clementine her parents are not dead, is to try to give her hope.
Hope is the one thing that can get a person through trying times.
And besides, without ironclad proof, there's really no reason to tell her they weren't still alive.
The message on the answering machine, didn't really prove anything, one way or another.
Yes it did arise suspicion, but not ironclad proof.
Murdering multiple men.
While killing might be necessary, that doesn't make it good.
Life is sacred!
And Clementine needs to be taught such.
If a person views life as unsacred, they are prone to commit all kinds of atrocities.
Like the ones the St.Johns and Carver committed.
Looting the station wagon.
One reason for not doing so, is obviously cause there was no way to know if it truly was abandoned, number 1.
And on that basis, that makes it wrong.
Plus, Clementine needs to see that, "old world values," still matter, and still have a place in this apocalyptic new word.
As far as threatening and lying to the cancer survivors.
If you paid attention, the way Vernon's hands were shaking when he had that gun on Lee.
He wasn't going to shoot Lee, so there was no need to get aggressive with him.
The point is, even though things are going to hell in a handbag, you can still be a nice guy.
It's about choosing who and what you're to be.
And the bottom line is, you don't have to become the bad guy in order to survive.
If that were true, than everyone returning home from Vietnam, would've have been nothing more than a savage killer.
But not all came back that way.
My uncle being one of them.
He's a good, decent, hardworking and honest man.
Just offering a different perspective.
Hey, Ben was the anti-hero.
This is a cool way to look the game, some people might not accept it but you can become into the villian or atleast someone like Larry if your choices are the "bad" ones. Also i had never seen the Stranger as the main villian, i don't think there is a main villian actually.
It all depends on how you played your Lee!
But I would've still taken the food in the car simply because it saved many and screwed over 3 people only.
What the game shows, is that when people are under pressure, their true nature's emerge.
And it's either good, or bad.
And even if someone is initially bad, it doesn't mean that they are programmed to be that way.
As human beings, we are in complete control of who and what we become.
Anyone can become whatever type of person they choose to become.
We do not have to allow a bad situation determine how we are as people.
You'll often here the expression, "That experienced changed him/her."
Well with all do respect, that's not quite true.
Anyone can have something bad happen to them.
It's how a person chooses to cope, or not to cope, is what makes the difference.
And in that respect, the person is still choosing what he will be as a person.
Situations in themselves do not mean anything, until we assign a meaning to them.
For example, I am an alcoholic.
I started drinking after a couple of individuals I was very close died, within 10 months of each other, due to cancer.
The 2nd one passing away quickly and unexpectedly!
My family begged me to quit, cause of how much it hurt them to see me destroy myself.
But I would not quit drinking.
After two years, I started working for a friend.
I worked hard, but was still drinking.
One night I had a big fight with a family member, cause I was drunk.
Drunk and really mad!
And as a result I berated my family member, who in hindsight did not deserve it.
The next day, my friend confronted me about it, and told me that if I did not stop drinking, he could no longer keep me in his employment.
And practically begged me to quit, so it didn't come to that.
Well here I had a decision, either I could ignore his plea like I ignored my family's pleas for 2 yrs.
Or I could choose to head it, and take action.
Well I chose to take action!
And I quit drinking, even though doing so was one the hardest things I've ever done.
I did slip up, after 6 months however, which went on for 3 months, mainly cause I was fooling myself into thinking I could drink, and be ok.
But after I saw that the same old garbage was comming back into my cause of drinking, I again quit and have been sober ever since.
Cause I did not, and do not wish to live my life like that!
It's been 3 months, and I'm still going strong.
Now you might say, when my friend confronted me, that was a defining moment in my life.
But as I stated, I could've ignored him, or listened to him.
So rather, it was the choice that I made, that defined me.
I chose how I was going to deal with my issue, what caused to me drink.
And to in turn stop hiding in a bottle.
And by doing so, I chose what I kind of person I am, and what kind of person I want to be.
So that's why I say, situations have no definition on who we are and who we become as people.
Our choices do.
The idea of telling Clementine her parents are not dead, is to try to give her hope. Hope is the one thing that can get a person through trying times. And besides, without ironclad proof, there's really no reason to tell her they weren't still alive. The message on the answering machine, didn't really prove anything, one way or another. Yes it did arise suspicion, but not ironclad proof.
Murdering multiple men. While killing might be necessary, that doesn't make it good. Life is sacred! And Clementine needs to be taught such. If a person views life as unsacred, they are prone to commit all kinds of atrocities. Like the ones the St.Johns and Carver committed.
Looting the station wagon. One reason for not doing so, is obviously cause there was no way to know if it truly was abandoned, number 1. And on that basis, that makes it wrong. Plus, Clementine needs to see that, "old world values," still matter, and still have a place in this apocalyptic new word.
As far as threatening and lying to the cancer survivors. If you paid attention, the way Vernon's hands were shaking when he had that gun on Lee. He wasn't going to shoot Lee, so there was no need to get aggressive with him.
The point is, even though things are going to hell in a handbag, you can still be a nice guy. It's about choosing who and what you're to be. And the bottom line is, you don't have to become the bad guy in order to survive.
Again I'm not saying I agree with the pragmatic Lee's decisions. I found many/most of them extreme. But from a pragmatic persons view (especially one who's actually in those circumstances) they were completely understandable and justifiable.
This is a very interesting way of looking at it, and it has some merit. But I'd have to say, in the end, the Stranger is always a villain, no matter how you play Lee, because the Stranger straight up kidnapped Clementine. She didn't want to go with him, and he had no right to tell her what to do. He wasn't her parent. He wasn't even sane. She loved Lee and wanted to go with him. I know a lot of people are going to disagree with me, but since both her parents were absent/dead and the world was in total ZA chaos, Clementine had full rights to deciding her own path, no matter how old she was. And she chose Lee, not some stranger who had never really done anything for her except lie to her about having her parents. Our smart little Clem KNEW what she wanted and the Stranger denied her that choice.
Say Clem had chosen the Stranger instead, because she loved and trusted him. It would have been the wrong choice, because he was crazy, but it still would have been BAD for Lee to then kill the Stranger so that Clem would have no way out and then forcefully grab Clem and drag her away to be with him. Note that this is exactly what the Stranger was planning to do toLee and Clem.
But then again, letting her go with the Stranger would also be bad, being that he was crazy and who knows what he would do to her eventually (I could definitely see him beheading her and adding her head to his collection at some point). And that's part of the artistry of TWDG. It puts you between a rock and a hard place and makes you question whether either choice is really right. And seeing how almost no one plays Lee nice all the way through and Lee starts off a murderer regardless, it makes you question how many villainous ACTS a person can commit before they become a VILLAIN. (I am NOT saying, btw, that there is no right or wrong in the ZA. It really annoys me when people say that because it means that hard times is all it takes to erase all morality in the universe.)
I did only four bad things - stole the supplies, killed Larry, abandoned Lilly and didn't kill the girl on the street. I don't know if I'm a villain or not.
There really is no true villain that's the beauty of the walking dead.
Oh, there are villains. There's a very real difference between doing something immoral for the good of many and doing something immoral for the good of the self, or to merely exert pain on another. There are minds that enjoy being cruel to others, and use terms like "the good of the whole" to justify their actions (when it's what they wanted in the first place), and then others who perform similar actions to save lives, and torture themselves over it. You see multiple examples of it in the other mediums of the series (comics and the show) moreso than I think the game has done thusfar (although this season certainly seems to be fitting the bill).
Clementine was 8 years old, and 9 at the end of season 1.
Sometimes, people, children included, need to find out things for themselves.
Plus, teaching people to hang on to hope, even though things look bleak, is a very powerful thing.
If life was not still sacred, and if old world values no longer matter, and it's all about "survival of the fittest," ...... then why did Lee look after Clementine?
Why did Kenny continue to try and provide for and protect his family, instead of just running off and looking after himself?
Why did Lilly try to save her dad?
Why did Lilly object to taking from the station wagon, if it turned out not abandoned like it appeared to be?
Why did Chuck, not only share what he had with the group, but later on save Clementine's life?
And as far as being tough when the situation calls for it, I'll give you that.
To protect yourself, and the ones you care for, you have to be.
But the point is, you don't have to become animalistic to survive.
As Dale, on the tv show, once so eloquently put it when speaking to Andrea, "The world we know is gone.
Keeping our humanity, that's a choice."
And as far as Carver's camp, they may have not viewed their actions as wrong.
But the fact is they were.
If their actions were good, then they wouldn't have treated the group like dangerous prisoners.
Nor would they have practically enslaved them, to ensure their own survival.
Carver ran nothing but a dictatorship.
Bonnie was the only real decent one, of Carver's crew.
And once she saw how things really were, she did the decent thing, and helped the group escape.
I say that early into the end, you'd probably end up feeding the girl's hope as at least some of us did.
That being said... is it really better to keep going "Yeah clem! I'm sure they're fine! When we get there, we'll all go out for milkshakes!" and then run the risk of her getting the rug ripped out from under her? This is kind of one of those situations where I would have liked a good middle ground. "Look, we don't know what happened. We'll do our best to find them, but we're going to be here to keep you safe no matter what, ok?"
Would that have been so bad?
That's reasonable.
I honestly wish that would've been a dialogue option.
Asking a person to do their best, is all anyone can ask, even of themself.
And if you examine the dialogue options, Lee can try to be more neutral in that respect.
In the beginning, he can tell Clementine that they'll look for them.
On the train, when Clementine asks about finding them, he can ask, "Where would we even look?"
That shows that even though he still agrees to continue to help Clementine look for them, after she remembers a place they could be at, he also softly indicates that it may be a fruitless endeavor.
When Kenny and Lee head down towards the water front, if Clementine asks if she can come along and look for her parents on the way, Lee can ask her to wait a while longer.
Even though Lee indicates he is still willing to help her, he is telling her that it's not all about her and her parents.
That there are other people who have to be taken into consideration.
And finally, after the group returns from Crawford, when Clementine asks if whether or not they'll have time to look for her parents before they leave on the boat the next day, Lee can either be honest and say that there may not be time to do so, or he can be very direct and tell her they are dead, and that she needs to focus on keeping herself alive.
That's reasonable.
I wish that would've been a dialogue option.
If you noticed however, Lee in effect can take that course.
For example, when he first finds her, he naturally encourages her to think of them as alive.
On the train, when asked about finding them, he can respond, "Where would we even look?"
Although Lee agrees to continue to help her look for them, once she remembers a place they might be at, he also hints at that continuing the search may prove to be a fruitless endeavor.
When Kenny and Lee are about to take off for the waterfront, and Clementine asks if she can come so they can look for her parents on the way, Lee can ask her to wait longer.
While still agreeing to help her, he also tells her that it's not all about her and what she wants.
And that she has to to take the feelings and wishes of others into account.
And finally, when Clementine asks if they can look for her parents, before they leave the following day on the boat, Lee can say, " I'd like to Clementine, but their may not be time."
In other words, he's politely saying that she needs to drop it, even though it is painful, and focus on getting herself to safety.
That they done everything possible, and now they have to focus on their own survival.
Actually, the walkers aren't that big of a problem. It's the alive people.
Not sure why my answer posted twice.
As someone who thinks of life as being sacred the villain for me would be the one who kills the most people, so who is that?
Lee: man sleeping with his wife, andy and/or Danny (determinate) , Jolene (D), women in street (D), a bandit (D), five bandits, the stranger (D) 6-12
The stranger: his son (sort of) , lee (sort of) 0-2
Saint johns: mark, Travis, mr Parker, Jolene (D), jolene's daughter (probably), Larry (sort of) 3-6
Lilly: Carly/ Doug, bandit, possibly some more bandits. 2-5
Kenny: Larry, Shawn (sort of), 1-2
Katjaa: katjaa 1
Walkers: Shawn, Carly or Doug, the police officer, Chet (D), Travis or mr Parker, Brenda, that girl in the street (D), a bandit, duck, chuck, Brie, Ben, lee 9-12
I don't think I've missed any, but oh my god lee can determinately kill more people than the walkers are seen killing! Wow, was not expecting that...