I am definitely thinking of Fallout 3, while playing this game. That and the joke about not having to out run a bear, just outrun the guy you are with.
Still I think ammo would the top priority in Walking Dead universe. It looks like several billion rounds of small arms ammo is produced in this country each year, so it should not be huge problem to find it right after the apocalypse. It is not like they even are having to hump huge loads with their 3 strength, they drove to hospital in a bloody pick up truck.
These Zombie are ridiculously easy to kite and while fat Otis may not be in great shape Shane sure is. I also guess driving up to the place, with one in guy in the back of the pickup whipping out your assault rifle and shooting a boatload of zombies, while the other guy drives slowly away,would make lousy TV drama.
Pogo
1642
You seem to be straight up asking for spoilers. I suggest you read the wiki for the comic book if you really want them, instead of asking on here.
Athryn
1643
Hillbilly crossbow guy isn’t in the comic, so I think it’s totally safe to speculate.
DrDel
1644
Dude half the fun of watching TV and discussing on forums is the speculation…
walTer
1645
From one that has never read the comics, wow THAT was unexpectedly awesome and well, unexpected. Shane…heh.
Oh and I am really liking Daryl’s character.
Daryl is hands down my favorite character. Reedus is really nailing it.
Well THAT wasn’t very subtle. From the start of the episode I figured out what was going to happen to Otis. Which is a shame, because he was pretty neat. Still well executed.
Drawing on comic knowledge of what will inevitably happen
So, my guess is that we’re building toward “stop hurting my daddy” or whatever the line was. Eventually they’re going to get into a big yelling match and Shane is going to tell Rick about shooting Otis, possibly among other things. I really do wonder where they’re going to go with the season outside of that, though. The previews for next week made it look like they were already wearing out their welcome at Herschel’s Farm, and I don’t remember hearing anything about a prison, so they might have to shuck and jive a little.
Not to just pick on this one post, but I really find it odd when people are discussing Otis’ -murder-, they can rate it at varying levels of humane. Shooting him in the leg may be more cruel, but either way, it was inhumane. There’s no pragmatic/reasonable/logical part to this murder. With this viewpoint, Shane could reasonably murder everyone in the farmhouse so he has more supplies.
I can’t argue the morality of his decision, but I don’t agree that it wasn’t pragmatic and logical. He had a choice - sacrifice Otis, or they’d both die. The zombies were gaining on them, and there was no way either of them would escape unless something - a maimed live human, perhaps - drew them off.
At least this way one of them would get back to the farm with the supplies.
Kirkman hasn’t said whether a headshot on Otis would have been as effective as leaving him alive and wriggling, but I assume that’s the justificiation.
Also, when the dramatic reveal of Otis saving Shane happened, did anybody else immediately think, “Dude, you JUST fucking shot a kid by not clearing your line of fire. Maybe a ‘Heads Up!’ would have been appropriate?” Maybe the actual geometry of the scene was such that Otis was at an angle, but the impression I got from the way it was shot (direct on Shane, direct on zombies, boom, Otis behind the zombies) was that Otis had absolutely terrible gun safety habits.
The truck was like ten feet away when he shot Otis. It’s immaterial anyways because the writers did this to show that Shane is a bastard, which is fine. It just bothers me that anyone is trying to defend the decision, sympathizing with an action that is completely inhumane. And anyways, The zombies were not perceptively even gaining on them.
As a side point, it always irritates me when characters fire off rounds at a mass of zombies. Do the math people. There’s like 40 zombies stumbling towards you at the same steady rate, and you have one clip? No point in taking a handful out.
I’ve had players in pencil-and-paper RPGs who had this attitude. I never could fathom it, I guess some people really are chaotic evil, and the fear of getting caught is the only thing that keeps them in line.
I said very nearly the same thing at the commercial break. “Why are they wasting time and ammunition when it’s not going to make any difference in whether they get eaten?”
It’s a game thing. It’s the same reason why you’ll kind of want to roll around through the whole world in Dark Souls and kill all the NPCs to get whatever drops they have before you start your New Game+.
Of course, the problem is that there’s a big difference between Otis and the people back at the farm. Shane actually values the people back at the farm. He apparently still wants to get inside of Lori, and he still treats Carl like a surrogate son, so while killing the fat fuck that shot your surrogate son to turn him into the punchline in that running from a bear joke is of comparatively little expense to him, shooting up the people he actually gives a shit about would come with a cost. The writers could actually go interesting places with the whole “the only people that matter are the people that matter to you” thing if they wanted to - all the other post-apocalyptic stuff I’ve seen is either too short to get too far into it or on broadcast, where that sort of behavior would be deemed unacceptable.
I originally thought that exactly what’s driving Shane - that he cares about the well-being of his particular clan, mostly Lori and Carl, but to some extent the rest of his group, and doesn’t care so much that Herschel’s clan loses a member.
But then I remember that he was going to leave the group, so I guess his caring is limited to Lori and Carl (and maybe Rick).
I have not read the comics, so this is speculation, but I pretty much expect that at some point we’ll meet a group of survivors who do something similar to that. There is no organization or intelligence behind the zombies, they are quite literally a mindless and guileless enemy. That means a group of well armed and organized people, soldiers or civilians, could conceivably defend, then begin to “clear” a safe zone in a rural area using tactics like you describe. Long term such an area could be secured with a high fence or a wall, and patrols would insure the integrity of the perimeter.
I find it hard to believe there isn’t a military or organized civilian presence somewhere that hasn’t gained a foothold against the infected, so sooner or later our little band of survivors will probably run into such a place.
