The story of season 2, and why it works
I think the story of season 2 is horribly misunderstood. It's not about some big bad in the end, it's really just a character study on Clementine. Jane was a terrible character, because she was nothing more than a plot device by the writers in a ton of different ways, as was Carver and really the entire "group" you join in the beginning of the season, but who is Clementine? Is she this hardened survivor who will do whatever it takes, like Carver, like Jane, and even perhaps shades of Kenny, or does she still maintain her humanity, like Luke, like Lee, like Walter?
I was wondering on my first playthrough why me watching Carver didn't seem to mean a thing. On my second playthrough, I got shit about it from Luke, asking me how I could be so cold.
While some things have been handled poorly, and season one wasn't perfect either, this story is really about Clementine and what degree of humanity she has left. Early in the season Clem warned Sarah: most of the people who are her "friends" wind up dead. She already was hardened to begin the season, but can she come back from that? Was Carver right or wrong?
That is what this season is about, and which is why I am really enjoying it. Luke vs. Kenny, all the other crap, it doesn't matter. When it's all said and done, and Clem is stripped of everything, what will she be? I have a feeling the final episode will allow us to answer this question.
Comments
Clem won't die physically, if she did.it would be pointless , but I think there could be a decision where depending on what we choose Clem could kind of die mentally or become like Carver.in a way, or if we choose the other option she'll be more like Lee ,SEASON 3 CONFIRMED
For Clementine
True, the whole season is about Clementine.
I highly disagree that Jane was a terrible character. But I do agree that the season itself has just been mostly just giving us a chance to define Clem's character through her various interactions with different philosophical viewpoints.
When does Luke give you hell about watching Carver die? I never got that dialogue.
She was a well-written character, but merely a plot device for one episode. She was a re-hash of Carver's ideologies and what we have been hearing all season: Clementine is special and the weak get left behind. She didn''t go as far as Carver, but why not give her role in the episode to someone already established? To me it felt like a waste.
Yes she was a well-written character, but it was one and done. I wish it wasn't. And her exit felt too much like Molly. Maybe Episode five will give more into her reason for being from a writer's standpoint.
Sorry my clarification was bad. Why couldn't Jane be there since the beginning? Her leaving would then have such a bigger impact.
When you're leaving the observation deck and decide to steal from Avro. I told him I stole from someone and he gives me shit about it.
I was pleasantly surprised.
For the downvoters, why don't you explain why you disagree instead of just clicking a button?
I think Jane's character explored different aspects of survivalism than Carver. Whereas Carver was sadistic and brutal and simply didn't care about the helpless, Jane did care but in seeing that there was nothing she can do to help them, she distanced herself from them as a defense mechanism.
No incarnation of Clementine's character would be able to follow Carver's path of cruel domination and control. But with the group breaking down more and more, Jane's lone-wolf mentality was starting to become more and more appealing. I can very easily imagine Clem becoming like Jane. And that's a pretty concerning thing.
Because it's easier.
Don't pay the downvotes too much mind. One of the staff has already expressed interest in getting rid of the downvote button anyway.
It's interesting; I see Molly and Jane as two opposites of the same coin. I think Clem could follow in Molly's path at the end of the season, or a more hardened version in Jane. Interesting both were prodominant in episode four of their respective seasons and then left.
I hate that nothing we taught Sarah seemed to have any meaning, but I think some of that actually has meaning itself; some people just cannot be saved. Jane was the writers literally telling us that, which I dislike, but Sarah was going to die in the episode no matter what.
Did you choose to shoot Rebecca? I did, every time. I also shot Lee, axed Sarita, and have a feeling at the end, the only family I have left (an echo to Kenny's words in Season one Episode Four), I will need to mercy kill once again. Not to mention Nick who I stuck up for when his best friend didn''t give a shit.
Season Two's ending, IMO, will be very bleak, with season three finishing out a trilogy that is the story of Clementine. I actually hope they split from the comics and age Clem a few years. For the people complaining, read the comics. The game is way better anyhow.
They actually really should. The opinion isn't a bad one; it at least has substance.
I guess some people prefer just to hate rather than to formulate ideas for themselves.
This is the probably one of the best ways to explain what the main focus is on Season 2.
You're right about what the season is supposed to be about: Clementine changing, growing up, dealing with people, and acting on who she is. However, Season 2 fails to deliver on this premise. It's mostly about Clementine going places, things happening, and not much of it mattering to Clementine's character. The season doesn't live up to its potential.
Compare Season 2's failed story about Clementine to Season's 1 successful story about Lee. In Season 1, Lee (and everyone else!) made tough choices about the kinds of people they would be when the world ended. Kill the cannibals or not? Who eats first: the kids, the women, the men, families? Pull Ben up or kill him? Shoot the woman attacked by walkers or not? Steal from the car? Shoot Duck or make Kenny do it? What about the kid in the attic? Lily? Larry? The religious woman? Things like that.
Few of Clem's choices in Season 2 define her. They're mostly small things that have vague interpretations so it's not clear what they mean. Steal the watch ... take the friendship photo ... pinky swear ... backtalk Carver or stay quiet ... lie to a suspicious stranger ... run to Pete or Nick ... watch Carver die ... give water to a dying man who might have information ... cut Sarita's arm or kill the zombie ... Many of these choices can be interpreted in different ways. For the most part, the player picks one and sees what happens, instead of making a choice based on who Clementine is.
One of Clem's big season 2 choices is a popularity contest of sitting with her old friends or her new friends. That kind of petty drama is nowhere near the type of development that was going on with Lee.
There have been a couple decisions that help shape Clem. Also, Episode 4 delivers on some of what Season 2 was supposed to be about, and brings back some of the themes from TWD1. Did Clem give up on Sarah? Did she rob Arvo? How did she respond to Kenny's abuse?
Season 2 is supposed to answer the questions of whether Clem is a leader or a follower, a kid or an adult, a loner or a team member, but it mostly fails.
Maybe you're right that the final episode will deal with Clem's character development better than the rest of the season.
Carver was an amazing antagonist though...
I've always really enjoyed Clementine as a character, but I have to disagree that season 2 can work based on it solely developing on her and her alone.
A character needs other developed characters and conflicts to play off of in order to define them. Lee was a great protagonist, but it was his relationship with Clem and the rest of the group dynamic that really allowed me to grow attached to his character. If supporting characters like Larry, Lilly, and Kenny hadn't gotten development as well, choices like the Meat Locker ultimatum wouldn't have hit as hard in defining Lee's morality as much as it did.
I agree. Season 1 was about Lee, the convicted murderer who could turn out to be a decent guy (depending on how you played, but for the most part he was a good guy). Clementine was a great character, but her choices weren't the main point of the story.
With Season 2, it might seem like her choices don't mean that much. I would forgive anybody for saying they're trivial (points well taken, IndigoHawk), but most of them come down to one thing: she gets a chance to be a jerk. We all remember the car problem in Season 1--Clementine was the group member most strongly against the theft. Since then, she's got used to a world where relationships don't last. Will that make her more likely to be a jerk when the opportunity comes up? Or less likely, since you have to be kind where you can in such a world?
She doesn't have a lot of options to choose from as far as role models. Kenny was all about family, but look where that got him; he's quickly coming unhinged. And then there's Carver--"What's the most important thing in the world?" shudder
But Jane is a lesson that loners aren't happy either. She and Carver both say Clementine can make it on her own, which is probably true, but how miserable will she be, and how likely to survive? On the other hand, if she's not tough, she might suffer the same fate as Sarah. Lee was probably her best chance for a role model--but he was a hero, and now he's dead. Luke has echoes of Lee in his own personality--I'm not banking on him to make it to Season 3.
Those are the conflicts, and while they're harder to see than Lee's conflicts in Season 1, it seems to me that they make up the main part of the story. It's hard to say which way she'll go. For me, that's pretty compelling, but I can see why a lot of players are unhappy after the more black-and-white world of Season 1.
I'm wondering at this point what happened to Christa's baby--it seems like having it die in game would have been too grim for many players to cope with. But if it did die and Clementine was present, how will that influence her behavior toward Rebecca's baby? It doesn't have a name yet--maybe she'll name it Omid?
And the people around her seemed to inconsistently react (if at all) to those possible attitudes from her until now. It is compelling to see your protagonist grow, but that is often hard to see with RPG/dynamic protagonists without feedback from the characters around you. Amid The Ruins brought back some of that, I thought. Up until then, Clementine said and did things and other than an immediate reaction, that was about it.
Echoes, as in a child wanting to be a hero, I think. I see Luke as a flawed idealist who would like to be the good guy, but has not come to terms that he doesn't really have or will not always be able to adopt the moral qualities of a selfless hero. Neither could most of us, in the situations that TWD would put us on.
Black and white? I don't view Season One as black and white, but I guess that when you put Clementine's struggles this season to a different perspective, they can be grayer than S1.
I agree with this. The secondaries are not there as killing props. At least, they shouldn't be.
I got it without stealing from him. I think I got it when I said that Kenny was just trying to protect us.
I think it works, when looked at in a way that maybe I was not expecting. My major gripe with the season has always been its treatment of the cast. I even got used to Clementine almost right away as my avatar for the season (although I had and still hold some lingering concerns about how she works as a protagonist) but I think my discomfort lies mostly with the cast.
For me, the battle of ideals is best appreciated not only through actions, but through words, and that is something that Season One had aplenty. The illusion of choice and the development of our lead are solidified for me through actions and words of others, directed towards other people in the story, but also towards us; the eyes from which this story is told and whose growth as a character should be apparent.
Telltale may be opting to use the same tactic they employed from Season One and, more recently to an extent, The Wolf Among Us, where someone will judge the protagonist. I think that may have worked long-term with Lee, as the story's focus and moral compass was always arguably present in the form of Clementine. However, Clementine lacks that constant focus to tell her who/what she is becoming, plus the events surrounding the secondary characters that should evoke strong reactions from us lack strength because they were not fleshed out.
My thoughts are a mess.
I agree that season 2 is about Clementine. Season 1 too as well as about Lee trying to survive with that little girl. I think that in season 2 it's not only about seeing Clementine survive each day and if she's able to maintain her humanity or become as cold as Carver but also it's about Clementine dealing with her past. There are references to season 1 where we can see that she's damage by the events from season 1 and she feels guilty about what happened to Lee and the others so... I think that in season 2 it's about Clementine trying to deal with the ghost of the past too.
I agree
This is the thread I was looking for.
I see season 3 as either Clem's redemption or her passing on Lee's legacy, possibly to the baby. I think the series should break away from the comics continuity. Age clem a few more years and finish her story, but don't kill her.
Individually it may seem like that, but, if you look at all the choices collectively you can see an overarching theme prevailing which I think you can at least recognize, even if you don't agree with the direction of the story or like it much. Season One was still about Clem and teaching her how to survive. There was very little character development with Lee Everett IMO, as much as I loved him; there was so little you could define about him. The opposite is true in season two and Clementine. This has always been her story, and in my humble opinion, should always be her story, which is why I am actually really enjoying this season.
I hope Season Three finishes out Clementine's story and brings it full circle. Nick Breckon is the man to do it IMO and has done a really good job thus far this season. I can't wait for the finale and what Clementine has yet to face.
THEY TOTALLY SHOULD.
I feel that this season was just a warm up for season 3
Some emotive introspection and self-reflection in the context of past experience and memories (including SI variables) and through discussion with strong secondary characters and perhaps especially with Kenny, with whom she has been through much, both having shared a common arduous past experience, is a necessary mechanism that has been underutilised here. (it should not have to be contrivedly dry and philosophical either; I remember something as stirring as her simple remark "I don't want anybody else to die" before leaving for Crawford.)
One might recall Lee's and Kenny's troubled reflections on what had occurred on Hershel's farm and the choices they had made. I remember even how such moments of discussion in Season I when they involved Clementine were signalled and punctuated by that well-known musical cue that helped to draw us in in such scenes as when moving the desk in the first episode and in the house before departing for Crawford.
I even remember Clementine's being forced to shoot the Stranger as something whose mark on character development the game immediately incorporates and explores briefly in context, as Lee, if memory serves, will immediately mention this act in his reasoning should you instruct Clementine not to kill you and then choose the rationale of avoiding succumbing to violence. "You had to shoot that man before, Clem... I don't want you getting used to it. Do you understand?"
I must admit I envy those who've had the clear head to focus and remark elaborately especially on the strong points of contention regarding the treatment of the secondary character arcs during this latest episode. I of course see the enormity of the issues, but have little drive to lay on the criticism with a heavy hand due to the already long-set-in ennui of acute dissatisfaction from early on this season, never having been truly invested in them (the characters), especially given that my primary gripes with Clementine have never faded away and have only been reinforced as the season progresses, though I understand (and those gripes are in good part due to that) that the role of secondary characters and of relationships forged is also very crucial in how it factors into the work of building the protagonist as MikeJames has said, especially when she takes on the burden of coming to terms with her experiences and with who she is becoming.
I think I should simply sum up one of the season's primary flaws in two sentences: it is a season almost empty of introspective depth, human, emotional responsiveness, and the necessary character relationships (and strong characters, especially the protagonist, that those relationships require) that are the foundations for these.
Across events within the same episode, across episodes, and especially across the two seasons, it shuns the concept of memory and the contextual framework it provides, lacking the strong and lasting continuity and consistency that provide the reservoir of accumulated experience the protagonist and other characters would draw from, reference, and incorporate in order to effect cohesive and coherent character building and mould strong, solid character development.
...I have to say this to you Spooch. I randomly saw someone comment on your avatar about 'melons', and I searched it up... And just... Thank you for that avatar, because it led me to find Facade. And I lol'd for about two hours straight.
Right now I'm playing the entire season in one sitting. It feels so much better and pieces together so well as opposed to playing them with our 2 month waits.
The Carver/Clementine scene in his office in Episode three may be my favorite scene yet, at least the way I played it.. such great acting and so much tension, but such a telling scene.
Yeah, not black and white really--pretty complicated actually, but I guess by "black and white" I meant "obvious"
It would add a new layer to discussions. It would also inspire debate instead of people spamming the dislike button.
Yay. Glad you liked it. My friend showed me it a long time ago, and we used to play it together over Skype.
I would love to see Clementine as someone in her late teens and start taking charge at Season 3. Clementine needs more action and physical fighting, not just running and hiding.
A shame. I would have personally liked to discuss and hear your particular input on a lot of things, over the months. I would have used the private messaging system, but ignoring the fact that it has been behaving erratically since before the site's most recent update, I am simply not that comfortable using it.
Five months ago, I would have offered words of encouragement to join in on the discussion under hopes of somehow radically change the course of the season. Who knows? Maybe the community has had some influence over some changes, but as no one can look at the possible alternatives, nor know exactly what changed, we will never be able to fully regret or appreciate the effects of the words exchanged here in the forums and in other places.
(?) The cast of Season Two will not remember that.
I saw improvement, with Amid The Ruins, which also came with what I perceived as failure in places that the community has been very vocal about and, of course, carrying the weight of everything I might have deemed was "wrong" with the season thus far. However, considering the series of disappointments that I have personally experienced with Season Two, I am happy to take anything remotely positive at this point. I try to look at different views on the overall season such as the one presented in this thread and consider them; I have had limited success in increasing my enjoyment of S2 this way. Nevertheless, it all comes back what the sentence above points out. Such subjective things, but then again, so are the ones that allow others to enjoy the season so completely.