That girl is gonna die.

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.

User Info: mudelledge

mudelledge
5 years ago#31
^ I'm the foreman get to work.....

*tractor gets put out of park*

Yeah I blame the parents....Kenny is okay in my book, but I can't help to wonder how much sugar intake that kid induces.
I don't like anything in the mainstream and they don't like me.~ Bill Hicks

User Info: Hiroshi_Mishima

Hiroshi_Mishima
5 years ago#32
I'll be honest, I'm not fan of the series and the whole "nobody is safe" thing is part of the reason. I'm not gonna sit through and become attached to a character just for their card to be drawn and get eaten or raped or murdered or whatever the hell the writer thinks will shock you more.

If the little girl dying becomes part of the game it'll not only be a first for Telltale, but it'll also be one more game I'll likely never touch again. Hell, if she were to die in the 3rd episode, I'd probably stop playing right there.

I mean, I'm a friggin' pessimist and I don't think Clementine is going to die, largely cause I'm very used to video games, how they work and how they're written.

As for the series itself... he can kill RIck off if he wants to, I've kind of been half-expecting it, but I think it's gonna see a sizeable change in the readers/viewers. It doesn't matter how strongly you disagree with that, I know fans (being one myself for various series out there). The only way I think he might be able to swing it is if they pass the Main Character Baton to a character like Carl who's already survived so much.

Then again, maybe Carl'll die first. It's already been shown the author doesn't really care much about his characters. Thank gods the game isn't being written by him directly.

User Info: bluetoast

bluetoast
5 years ago#33
He does care for the characters. But he's not going to let that dictate where the story goes. Kirkman has said before that he sometimes regrets killing people off early, or that he had plans for a character down the road, but had to kill them early in a given situation.
http://i52.tinypic.com/jj8jtu.gif

User Info: pothocket

pothocket
5 years ago#34
Just because he's willing to kill off characters doesn't mean he doesn't care about the characters. Personally, I'm sick of reading/watching a book/TV series where it's clear that every major character is safe because the author is too self aware about how many fans specific characters have and would be hurt if they died (not to mention the author him/herself becoming too attached to characters, or placing too much of the narrative dependent on that character NOT dying).

NO ONE IS SAFE in Walking Dead at any time, ever, and it's a breath of fresh air not knowing if characters are going to be able to get out of the next dangerous situation with their lives. Otherwise, what's the point? Where's the drama if it's safe to assume they somehow find a way to save everyone?

It's the zombie apocalypse. What are you guys expecting to happen? There's no happy end here. Get used to that.
well I am not like your dad. I worked as a chef at TGIF-Mattson

User Info: Tsukasa1891

Tsukasa1891
5 years ago#35
No one is safe is why i like zombie stuff the most. walking dead isn't the first to do this. Return of the living dead 2 had a kid get infected and become a zombie. Return of the living dear 4 showed a kid get the back of his head bitten off just like the older people in the movie. They need to keep killing kids off so people can become desensitized to it in movies or video games and make them more realistic. in the early 90s the media raged over fatalities in mortal combat, but now people are desensitized to it to the point they would find those fatalities in the original to be comical.
GameFAQs, where the glass is always half empty.

User Info: mudelledge

mudelledge
5 years ago#36
^not just comical....more like man that looks so fake., a heart could never be ripped out like that....why you eat the heart? Obviously the liver is th most nutritional. I wonder if hearts taste good.

Yea desensitizing is just curiously learning....which is ****ed up if you don't have morals....or sanctity of whats right ..that's what survival horror portrays. If its zombies or a natural disaster in any part of the world...its really all the same. If you oppose a child being killed in a game movie comic or.story. chances are your instinct is to save a child in need...that's why THIS as well as all media types give a relation to.how you feel about the conflict.....they don't do it out of senselessness....

".I wanna kill a.kid off because I thought it would be funny"......now that would be a serial child rapist..


Now I.do.disagree with kids being in games like GTA ...just to be more realistic as many people has said on the old GTA3 board...yes I hope that person is ass raped in prison somewhere.
I don't like anything in the mainstream and they don't like me.~ Bill Hicks

User Info: Tsukasa1891

Tsukasa1891
5 years ago#37
Just because I want to see kids get killed off in movies/video games doesn't mean i want them to be in real life. But in real life kids don't have some magical immunity to death and i'd like to see movies/games more realistic. what's the point in playing/watching if you know who the survivors are 5 minutes in. So all i'm saying is, either kill off a kid or don't even bother to have them in it at all.
GameFAQs, where the glass is always half empty.

User Info: pillerofautumn

pillerofautumn
5 years ago#38

From: Tsukasa1891 | #037
Just because I want to see kids get killed off in movies/video games doesn't mean i want them to be in real life. But in real life kids don't have some magical immunity to death and i'd like to see movies/games more realistic. what's the point in playing/watching if you know who the survivors are 5 minutes in. So all i'm saying is, either kill off a kid or don't even bother to have them in it at all.


No one said it was rational, but it's a reality. There's backlash to kids being killed, which is why devs stay away from it.

User Info: pothocket

pothocket
5 years ago#39
I don't think they'll chicken out. Everything I've seen in this game so far has shown me they understand the Walking Dead universe and aren't creating a generic zombie survival tale. This is a true Walking Dead game because of what it contains, not because they paid for a license.

So understanding that, and understanding that the physical and mental frailty of children is a part of the Walking Dead U.....I don't think TT will chicken out. Duck and Clem will either be dead or crazy by the end of the season. Count on it.
well I am not like your dad. I worked as a chef at TGIF-Mattson

User Info: pillerofautumn

pillerofautumn
5 years ago#40
Both The Walking Dead universe(TV show + Comics) has children, and they've been through a lot, through a lot of years and one thing they have shown is that children more than adults can adapt to that world and not lose it.

Pretty sure don't need to put spoiler tags anymore, but look at Carl. He lost his baby sister, his mother and his eye. And he has adapted. Even Sophia, who lost both her parents and a lot of friends, is about as normal as it gets. The only kids that died off the top of my head, are Hershel's two daughters(or nieces?) and we didn't get to know them, almost at all.

Doubt Clem is gonna die or go crazy. She survived before you came, and they made it a point in Episode 1 to say that she has survived and seen a lot. Kenny also said things just roll off Duck, doubt he'd be affected by anything that would make him go crazy. I think both kids will be alive and perfectly fine by the end of it. Especially Clem.

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived