If you just want to be told about things, listen to the radio. The first rule of storytelling: show, don't tell.

No, I did not. Read my comments again.

No, the article said it didn't serve the narrative, which is the point I'm disputing (and ostensibly the one you're defending, otherwise I don't know why you replied to me). I made no mention of the episode's quality.

You can judge an episode based on its individual quality, but you can’t judge it on how it serves the narrative if you don't yet know where the narrative is going. How can you say a scene didn't help the narrative get to its intended outcome if you don't know what the outcome is?

You're judging this scene based on your speculation of where it will lead, and not on its own merits.

Your comment is wrong and dumb.

Not in terms of how it serves the narrative it isn’t. Any judgment of how a scene serves the overall narrative must take into account the direction of the overall narrative.

No, you’re simply incorrect. This isn’t the law of the fucking jungle. We live in a civilization that has defined the right to life as a basic human right. Go live in the woods if you want to practice social Darwinism.

Translation: "being a lazy shithead is easier than giving a shit."

Your tinfoil hat is askew. Better fix it before they start monitoring your escaping brain waves and hypnotizing you into getting vaccinated.

Access to clean water is absolutely a basic human right. Part of the "right to life" is the right to the necessary components to maintain life.

Or it’s like a pretty accurate interpretation of the brutality of the middle ages (viewed, of course, through the lens of its own fantasy setting).

How do you figure that you’re qualified to say it adds nothing to the narrative when the narrative is unfinished and you, presumably, do not have any inside information as to what direction it's going? Without knowing what the narrative is, how can you say what does and does not serve it?

We won't know how it fits into the narrative until we see what direction the narrative goes.

People knowing it wouldn't get the support necessary to compete with a device already dominating the market is what killed it. And they were right.

Because no one bought it? Yeah, that's how it works.

Neither did practically anyone else. Most of us avoid betting on losing horses.

That's not an answer to my question.

I don’t know what “fanboys” tried to convince you the Wither 2 was, but what it is is one of the best fantasy RPGs of all time.

Yes, providing more options for your customers is always a terrible strategy.