Why Your Choices Do Matter and why death shouldn't surprise you
The number one complaint is mainly about Sarah and saving her or not doesn't make a difference at all. That is wrong and for these reasons I've came up with during my hours of deep thought. Another problem I would like to post is about Nick and his character being killed off, and the Arvo decision.
Sarah being saved by the player and then dying later turns off many players. It does matter if you save her or not. Telltale gave you the chance to get rid of Sarah who many saw as a nuisance and let her die, or save her. Your choices cannot save everyone. Just because you chose to save Sarah doesn't mean she is invincible. Why does the choice even there? To give you the decision to save her or not on the spot! Why do people think just because you saved her mean she will never die? Some say it makes all the previous dialogue pointless, but no it doesn't. For the limited time you had with someone you could become her friend.
Nick dying is a prime example of no one is invincible in this game. In the making of Season One video, you hear some of the workers of the game say that no one is safe in the universe of Walking Dead. But Nick died, no explanation, he just randomly died. That is what happens in this universe! It's very good for shock and horror value. It shows you that again no one can be saved in this game, no one can escape the inevitable. This story is not supposed to be a very happy tale where everyone gets out alive.
Arvo's decision to rob you guys can be silly even if you took nothing from him. My only grip is why couldn't we have killed him on the spot?
No Eddie is another complaint. Wasn't Eddie on the roof?
Comments
I was mad about Nick since he was very unimportant in episode 3 and hoped that he would have a lot most dialogue even though i expected he would die.
Shock value got Omid killed, shock value got Nick killed, shock value gets MANY people killed. But do you know who didn't die for shock value? Lee, Duck, Carley/Doug, Ben, Walter, Alvin... Death, even in this case, should further the plot like all of those other deaths did.
The reason why Nick's death doesn't work is because once you save him, he is literally a nobody in episode 3 and then in episode 4, he dies off screen, and this is deeply unsatisfying and just feels lazy and rushed. Sarah's death actually was a little bit better, but the issue with that is that she also dies in the same episode, AT LEAST she could have died in episode 5 and have some kind of moment with Clem and SOME emotional pay off and actually felt like saving her actually led to something, much like Ben's yelling against Kenny in episode 5 also letting you know of his background of not knowing where his family was, arguably a good emotional scene, IF you save Ben.
You're right. Deciding to save Sarah twice did matter. We may not see it now, but if you decided to abandon her, it makes your Clem a harder individual who's losing her compassion. If you decided to save her twice, you lost Sarah knowing that Clem did it on a good a conscience (or as good as you can get in that situation).
My question is, with all these "good" choices, who's our judge? In season 1 we had The Stranger, in TWAU we had The Crooked Man and Fabletown judge us. So who's judging our actions in the finale this time?
I'll give you Sarah, as a storytelling point. But Nick was sheer laziness on telltales part, just like it always is when a character can optionally die. You save them, they say a sentence or two in the next episode, and then they're removed as an inconvenience anyways. You can defend that, but I won't. It happens too often, and I think it's lazy.
I'm ok with Sarah's fate. Sure, her death comes pretty quickly after you save her the first time, but all determinable characters get bumped off at some point, so it's not like they are always going to last another episode. Plus, one of the dialogue options while trying to get Jane to help Sarah is about how we need to at least try to help each other, and I think that really nails what is important in this game when making decisions. Something bad is almost always going to happen, but did you at least make an effort to help? Sure, you could help Jane and leave Sarah since she was a liability, but at the same time, anyone could have been trapped under some rubble. And as much as constantly helping someone might wear on you, how do you draw the line on when they are a lost cause? That becomes a very dangerous, and very slippery slope. So yeah, the final outcome might not be terribly different, but the thought process behind it has value.
I hope Christa, maybe you find her and she speaks with everybody, Kenny tells her about Sarita and about Carver, Arvo tells her about the robbery, maybe some carver's men told her about that happen in the refuge, or for "leaving" or "helping" her at episode 1, and then she will be mad at Clem after discovers Rebecca's baby... I know i'm just crazy u.u
At least Ben, Doug/Carley, and Alvin contributed awesome characterization while I had stood there and wished for Nick to get his awesome characterization.
I understand what you mean, this episode was filled with feels, I felt like I was getting shot by a tank full of emotions.
I wasn't shocked when I found Nick, though. The thing about shock value is, there is no shock value with the determinate characters. Telltale has made that perfectly clear: It's not just "anyone can die"; If a character is determinant, they will die. No exceptions, period.
So, no, I don't think Nick's death was very good for shock or horror. It was unsurprising, unsatisfying, and overall incredibly lazy.
You miss the point entirely. Every character, in season 1 and in season 2, that can die at one point in the game MUST die at another point in the game.
So, yes, some characters are invincible. Those are the characters that for some reason never need saving, or that always give us a game over when they are not saved.
Yes, sometimes, it's all about deciding what type of person you want to be. Do you want to be the person that lets people die, or the person who helps keep people alive as long as possible?
That would be fine if it didn't happen with every single determinant character.
In Mass Effect, for instance, characters that can die in episode 1 will still factor heavily into the rest of the series if they are kept alive. Other characters who can die later are sometimes replaced by generic characters, but those generic characters are then not as skilled and the story changes.
It's actually kind of sad that I'd have to use Mass Effect as a good example of how character choice matters, but when it comes to NPC death, it works a hell of a lot better than The Walking Dead does.
I think that Nick shouldn't have died. It would be nice for once for a character who had a determined death be saved, at least one time. Otherwise, it would have been even nicer to let him live longer and have a more emotional death in episode 5, somewhat like Lee's death or maybe even Ben's death.
I get your point about how this is TWD universe and it not being uncommon for people to be killed off, especially in anticlimactic ways.
My main gripe with this season is that the characters don't react to those deaths like they should. We get one line of dialogue to announce their death to the rest of the group that might not have been there to witness it and that's all; pack up, move on, and they are never brought up again. The cabin group don't feel like a group, if you get what I'm saying.
As for Sarah's second death...why was she even out there in the first place? It makes more sense for her scared nature to keep her inside with Rebecca and she wasn't even armed. They had the whole gang out there—you're telling me more than one adult couldn't jump down and assist her while the others kept the walkers away with their guns? (Luke literally just watches from above the whole time like a damn statue). How come in the cut scene we only really see Jane and Clem's reaction to her death? Bonnie and Mike could have been playing patty-cake in the background for all we know.
I just feel like it was a waste to kill her off straight after you decide to save her and it does start to make you feel like your choices don't matter.. At least with Ben in season 1 if you decide to save him the first time, he does end up getting more screen time and development with the other characters (ex: Kenny) before the inevitable.
Ben's death scene in episode 5 was one of the most iconic scene in TWDG. It's high up there along with Clem's goodbye to Lee and Katjaa suicide/Kenny putting Duck out of his misery scenes.
I think Ben, even though he is determined, gave such an impact as a character whether we like or hate him. He is memorable. To me, he's up on par with Lee, Kenny and Clementine.
...Carley and Doug totally died for shock value. Hell, Walter died for in-game shock value.
Uh... can anyone confirm if Eddie being on the roof? Or maybe it's this guy who people confuse for Eddie on the roof: http://walkingdead.wikia.com/wiki/Lowell?
Yep, if you save Doug, he try to stop Lilly and she accidentally kill he. If you save Carley, well, Lilly shoot her in the head. Makes sense for me.
Exactly.
wat
Why there has to be someone to judge us? Why can't we judge ourselves and realize what is good and what is bad xD ?
They're confusing him with this guy:
http://walkingdead.wikia.com/wiki/Lowell
I hope it's in the form of a decision that we our self cannot make. The decision is based around what Clem had done throughout the series.
Oh yeah, that guy. The only thing remotely similar is the darkish skin and the hat.
Good thoughts, that's true and I get waht you are saying.
The problem here is not about being able or not to protect a character forever. When a character is saved and become determinant, we know that he is cursed and will inevitably die soon, and we are kinda ok with that.
The point is that we should be rewarded with some emotional impact or other character development value when we delay their deaths, since there will be little shock value since we already expect them to die soon. Nick´s and Sarah´s delayed deaths had absolute NONE of these, they added nothing at all, they just died to get cut off from the story, and some of the characters´ reaction are like "whatever" when they should be shocked and saddened. Even in WW world where people easily die, characters´ reactions, including Clementine´s, just doesn´t match with the close relationship they had with the person that died, and that is just TellTale´s poor writing.
I actually thought Padok Wiks was pretty awesome for a "generic" replacement, personally. Yeah it wasn't Mordin but that's a given.
While I agree on Sarah, Nick's death was still a shitty sendoff.