Strong Bad only got 5 from gamespot breaking CSI crime evidence by 5 points.Will it become the worst telltale game reception wise.
Yes, it got a low score from Gamespot because it is NOT a FPS title, or on PS360. They are Biased to anything that may be exclusive to the Wii and PC and not their precious lame systems... and doesn't involve running around shooting things on the same game engine that has been used the last 4 million years TO DEATH.
Yes, it got a low score from Gamespot because it is NOT a FPS title, or on PS360. They are Biased to anything that may be exclusive to the Wii and PC and not their precious lame systems... and doesn't involve running around shooting things on the same game engine that has been used the last 4 million years TO DEATH.
Yeah they are so biased. Especially against game like Mario Galaxy and Zelda.:rolleyes:
Yes, it got a low score from Gamespot because it is NOT a FPS title, or on PS360. They are Biased to anything that may be exclusive to the Wii and PC and not their precious lame systems... and doesn't involve running around shooting things on the same game engine that has been used the last 4 million years TO DEATH.
Yeah they are so biased. Especially against game like Mario Galaxy and Zelda.:rolleyes:
They said those were bad games?Oh, I'm so gonna kill them.They are a terrible review site.There was the guy who got fired for reviewing a bad game, and now this.I mean, can you imagine a Homestar Runner FPS?Because that would be way worse than the "Quickly tiring pointing-and-clicking."
Game rankings says 86.8% for Wii, 71.3% for PC. The GameSpot review isn't included in their stats, though. Still, not bad at all. I guess TTG should budget some "advertising" money on GameSpot.
Game rankings says 86.8% for Wii, 71.3% for PC. The GameSpot review isn't included in their stats, though. Still, not bad at all. I guess TTG should budget some "advertising" money on GameSpot.
--Erwin
as in Hiring a Hitman? Nice idea... we could wipe Gamespot off the face of the earth... >:-D
They said those were bad games?Oh, I'm so gonna kill them.They are a terrible review site.There was the guy who got fired for reviewing a bad game, and now this.I mean, can you imagine a Homestar Runner FPS?Because that would be way worse than the "Quickly tiring pointing-and-clicking."
Uh. I was joking they said those were good games. Note the rolling eyes. I was making fun of the guy who said they were biased against wii games. Yet Mario Galaxy is the number one rated game of all time.
Hate to disagree, but opinions can in fact, be erroneous and wrong.
One of the things that seems to cause way too many problems with the world today is the climate of our flawed social structure that leads people to believe that anytime that they open their mouth that they are instantly right about absolutely anything without even presenting a reason and backing it up.
Thus hiding behind the fallacy that "opinions can't be wrong" as some kind of all encompassing shield to delude themselves from the possibility they they could ever be incorrect about anything, and repeating "it's my opinion" like a broken record in any attempt to close a matter and keep on believing they are right, and growing up this way.
For example, if someone was to actually look up at a clear, blue sky, point at it and say "I think the sky looks to me, like it's purple and red, with orange polka dots and plaid stripes", they would in fact be wrong. No matter how strong or empathetically their ridiculous and incorrect "opinion" on the color of the sky is stated, it's still factually wrong.
No matter if it's a hallucination or somehow someone might actually legitimately believe the sky to be purple and red with orange polka dots and plaid stripes, does nothing to change the fact that they are completly incorrect in what they believe.
People can in fact, have opinions that are, in every way wrong, or at the least, based soley on ridiculous and uncredible criteria such as matters of extreme bias or ignorance of a given subject, opinions can be as wrong as any kind of statement from any kind of person can be.
Therefore all opinions aren't equal, and many of them (especially from most people today) aren't particularly based in anything resembling good common sense, knowledge, logic or actual truth, and as such many of them aren't worth even listening to.
Everyone has an opinion, no one is right all the time, therefore people often state "opinions" that are on occasion completly wrong.
There's never going to be any sort of end to people's "opinions" going against each other, nor is there ever going to be any stopping arguments or disagreements from taking place in the world. At the very least though, I would hope that we would recognize disagreements and arguments in society as a nessessary evil as long as people continue to feel "entitiled" to opinions that are sometimes right and sometimes wrong.
The point is that "right" opinions and "wrong" opinions are, very hard for humans to comprehend and can sometimes labor their entire moral decisions in life entirely on wrong opinions, incorrectly believing them to be the right ones. That's why disagreements exist at all. But just as humans make bad choices and good choices while not fulling knowing the extent of either, they also can state opinions that are right and ones that are wrong.
Maybe someday people will realize that and stop trying to hide behind the semantic nonsense that "opinions can't be wrong.".
It's the kind of touchy-feely nonsense that only serves to let unintelligent or ignorant people feel confident to be as ignorant as they want to be without opposition from anyone else. Todays society is built on nonsense like this to let people with an IQ of, say, 97, act like they are better and much more intelligent than people whose IQ is tested at 200 or more.
Yes, opinions can absolutely be factually wrong.
Merely believing that someone is right in what they say doesn't automatically make it true or relevant. Not everyone is a special and unique snowflake and sometimes people honestly just don't have any clue what they are talking about when they say it.
Amen. For example, my opinion that this entire essay about a game review is an example of the "Internet Is Serious Business" taken a bit too far must be correct. Also, I must put up an totally correct opinon that when discussing reviews, we are dealing with subjective feelings here. If we both look up in the same sky, and I say the sky is ugly, and you say the sky is beautiful, then that does not mean that we should get in an heated argument on who is correct and who is not. Such an argument over subjective stuff (as opposed to objective stuff such as the "sky being blue") can fuel people's egos, and waste valuable time that would be better spent doing something more productive...like playing the games.
Alright, so the above "totally correct opinons" are not totally correct. Yes, scarcam is the lowest form of wit, but that post honestly ticked a nerve.
And actually, one thing I miss in SBCGAP that was in the Sam and Max series is the ability to get different reactions when you do dumb things. I like this sort of stuff in the Sam and Max series, and I didn't see that in the SBCGAP (instead I get the generic: "Nah"). It is this small detail that differnates Sam and Max from other adventure games...and SBCGAP doesn't have that. Meh.
Reviews are opinions. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion... and it doesn't necessarily mean it'll match yours.
No, ****. Every review I read for a bad game, I give the game a try for myself, and normally I like it. I really like the strong bad game, I played it nonstop until I beat it, just like the penny arcade game. So I can't wait for ep 2 (of both games!)
Some games get a bum rap, some games get far more than they deserve because the kinds of games that the gaming community likes get hyped into 9-point-somethings because they can't EVER use a perfect 10 more than twice a freaking decade.
But yeah. Take Endless Ocean as an example. I find the descriptions of the game that is given by reviewers to be completely false. They say the game is more of a relaxing toy than a game, which I found to definitely not be the case after actually pursuing the story and hidden treasure for more than an hour or two.
Some games are just made for the kinds of people who decide "Wow, I want to review video games". For the rest of us, well. We can either decide to be like most gamers and CARE about these scores and argue over them like screamy toddlers. OR we could just play the games we like, regardless of the opinions of reviewers.
Reviews are subjective. Let's get that right out of the way. Some things just cannot be quantified objectively, and one of those things is the quality of an entertainment product. However, reviews are also important. Games are expensive, and it's only good common sense to look into something before you buy it.
It is for this reason that websites which review games must, if they are to be taken seriously, assure that the person reviewing a game is right for that game. There was a person in another thread stating that Star Wars KotOR was one of his personal worst games ever. This person is not an RPG fan and, were they a reviewer, should not be given an RPG to rate.
Reviews are subjective. Let's get that right out of the way. Some things just cannot be quantified objectively, and one of those things is the quality of an entertainment product. However, reviews are also important. Games are expensive, and it's only good common sense to look into something before you buy it.
It is for this reason that websites which review games must, if they are to be taken seriously, assure that the person reviewing a game is right for that game. There was a person in another thread stating that Star Wars KotOR was one of his personal worst games ever. This person is not an RPG fan and, were they a reviewer, should not be given an RPG to rate.
KotOR was awesome, Jade Empire is a 6gig XBox Live download as part of Ninja Month (July). It should still be up as far as I know. For the uninformed, Jade Empire is KotOR with kung-fu instead of Jedi. Very fun, but short if you don't do side quests.
After reading several reviews, I've noticed that a lot of the concerns stated were actually problems I had, too- it was just too simple and lacked a certain element of randomness and faux-episcosity that SBEmails tend to have. Now, for me, these were just slight issues that I was more than willing to put up with under the assumption that the more random and out-there things would come in later episodes, with this one mostly serving as a starting point. From what I've seen of Strong Badia The Free, this is almost certainly the case. Heading a revolution against the Municipality just seems more like the Strong Bad we know and love than beating up Homestar. Wrap your head around that one.
Yes it does, but i have one aching problem with the second episode.... He is wearing a collar that is set to explode, how does he rally everyone from inside his house except by e-mail? And an episode of nothin but e-mail might get boring.
shouldn't we wait for the actual release of episode 2 before we take this discussion further into that direction?
anyway, what bothers be about this whole review mess, is that these days review are done by nearly everyone. back in the old times, where you had to buy a magazine for reviews, the people that wrote these things were journalists. today, some kid, that's playing fps all the time and is hardly able to write two sentences, can review an adventure game and someone might actually give a crap about it. so, with reviews on the internet you can never be sure...
Yes it does, but i have one aching problem with the second episode.... He is wearing a collar that is set to explode, how does he rally everyone from inside his house except by e-mail? And an episode of nothin but e-mail might get boring.
Source is HRWiki page for Episode 2
Well, I'd assume that you'd get rid of the collar first. Almost like some kind of puzzle, you know?
shouldn't we wait for the actual release of episode 2 before we take this discussion further into that direction?
anyway, what bothers be about this whole review mess, is that these days review are done by nearly everyone. back in the old times, where you had to buy a magazine for reviews, the people that wrote these things were journalists. today, some kid, that's playing fps all the time and is hardly able to write two sentences, can review an adventure game and someone might actually give a crap about it. so, with reviews on the internet you can never be sure...
I'd like to call you out on that penultimate statement. If you're taking some quasi-illiterate kid's opinion on an adventure game seriously, something is wrong.
Well, after reading the Gamespot review myself, I must say the guy does make some valid points. (Hey! HEY! Don't throw stuff at me! I'm talking now.)
His main gripe seems to be that a lot of stuff from the web cartoons are just tacked into the game and just kind of hangs there, without beeing funny by themselves and also without any real relevance to the story. I couldn't agree more, and that's not an issue of whether the reviewer "gets" the concept or not. I've been following HR since before Trogdor, and still I don't get what's funny about being able to throw a lightswitch rave or hearing Strong Bad comment on the quality of Fluffy Puff mayonaise or even seeing the Blubbo whale (to name a few examples). Neither of these appearances are relevant to this episode, and what's worse, they don't contribute to the original jokes from when they first appeared the website. I don't agree with the reviewer that Telltale should have included "an option to view the original content" (sic), but just tossing random artifacts in there for no other reason than letting the long-time fans go "ooh! That item's taken from sbemail1X6!" doesn't cut it for me.
His second complaint is that the cartoons doesn't work too well in the more open-ended format of an adventure game. I don't agree with the people who are saying that the reviewer apparently doesn't like adventure games in general, or that he doesn't get the Homestarrunner comedy. At least from what he let's on in this review, he seems to know the Homestar universe quite well, but thinks that its brand of comedy works better in a cartoon where the creators have full control over the comedic pacing. A valid complaint as well, as I see it.
... even seeing the Blubbo whale (to name a few examples). Neither of these appearances are relevant to this episode...
I won't speak to the other objections since you are certainly welcome to your opinion, but the Whale actually is relevant to the episode.
If you listen closely to what the Whale says, some of the lines are obtuse hints. Admittedly, some of the hints are harder to figure out than the puzzles themselves, but it's still something.
I won't speak to the other objections since you are certainly welcome to your opinion, but the Whale actually is relevant to the episode.
If you listen closely to what the Whale says, some of the lines are obtuse hints. Admittedly, some of the hints are harder to figure out than the puzzles themselves, but it's still something.
Yes it does, but i have one aching problem with the second episode.... He is wearing a collar that is set to explode, how does he rally everyone from inside his house except by e-mail? And an episode of nothin but e-mail might get boring.
Source is HRWiki page for Episode 2
Fortunately we wouldn't ever make a Strong Bad game that was nothing but him sitting at his computer in his room sending emails, so don't worry.
I think reviews are a small part of games. If your a Homestarrunner or point N Clickm up games then buy it. Besides theres gonna be more episodes so ya.
I think reviews are a small part of games. If your a Homestarrunner or point N Clickm up games then buy it. Besides theres gonna be more episodes so ya.
i'm not a homestarrunner, but i'm a point n clickmup game.
I won't speak to the other objections since you are certainly welcome to your opinion, but the Whale actually is relevant to the episode.
If you listen closely to what the Whale says, some of the lines are obtuse hints. Admittedly, some of the hints are harder to figure out than the puzzles themselves, but it's still something.
I actually played through the episode again just to listen to the whale's lines (and some other things that I missed before, like Strong Mad's Total Load lines), and I must say that using the whale as a hint system is bloody brilliant.
Though the hints are very, VERY subtle, and I'd never recognize them unless I knew to look for them. But anyway, I guess you can take the Blubbo whale off of my list of unnecessary references.
My other complaints about the throw-back references used remain, though. In my mind, a good throw-back artifact should fall into one of the following three categories:
1. the artifact is part of the background and is unclickable (like SB's morning cereals),
2. the artifact is funny without knowing its backstory, or
3. the artifact uses its backstory and the long-time fans knowledge of this, but adds something to the original joke or to the ongoing story.
Like I wrote before, I find that too many of the useless clickable items in the episode are simple throw-backs that just repeat their original jokes that we've already seen on the web site.
And yet, when you insult the GENRE in your review, then perhaps you shouldn't be publishing this particular review.
You wouldn't ask a person that is an ardent Japanese RPG fan to review the next big FPS. You wouldn't ask someone that only plays casual games like Wii Sports to give an opinion on, say, Metal Gear or an Elder Scrolls game.
I mean, a person trying to get into SBCG4AP should be informed that it IS an adventure game and what an adventure game IS, since there are so few around nowadays that the genre can not even exist on some gamer's radars. But to make someone who would never buy the game in the first place to review it...is a disservice to people considering a purchase. And this appears to be the case with the Gamespot review.
THIS. Truer than that it can't get.
Also, Gamespot lost all credibility over the years. First they lay-off of one reviewer after the Kane & Lynch review (despite the fact they claim this was not the cause). Also, most gamers feel Gamespot is biased towards XBox360. Whether or not this is true I leave aside, but the sad fact is that recent reviews don't really help getting rid of this rumor.
Another thing is that Gamespot tries to act like the saviour of the press. For example, they refused to go to the preview event for Metal Gear Solid 4, stating they find the whole event not done. Of course, it is true that the press got monitored while playing the game, and that they had to socialize with some of the development staff, but most of the press didn't mind. You know why? Because in the end Kojima actually did something with the feedback given by the press. It wasn't a preview event for nothing.
The second press trip was better, since the reviewers could just replay the game in their own tempo, mostly because they already finished the game beforehand, so they knew what was coming.
And another thing Gamespot complained about was the fact that the install screen couldn't be included in the review, as well as the length of the cut-scenes. While this may be a bit too much, you'll have to consider the fact that the company tries everything to surprise the gamer in any way. And sure, the reviews weren't really that complete, but that didn't mean you couldn't actually write a decent review with all the restrictions.
In conclusion, I just like to say that Gamespot after this event not only lost a lot of credibility but also a lot of respect, both from gamers as well as the press.
Also, that being said, I disagree about the necessity of the references.
Sure, some "references" were unnecessary. But they made it more Strong Bad. Why? Because they're the Easter Eggs we know from the cartoons themselves. They can't create new content as easter eggs, or use some gags from the game itself and build upon it like in Strong Bad's e-mails.
Example is the raveswitch. I won't say I agree or disagree with you on the meaningfulness of the switch, however, if this light switch would just be a throwback to something done earlier in the game, it wouldn't have that same Easter Egg feeling.
Face it, SBCG4AP isn't made for the casuals, it's made for those who know about HomestarRunner.com and Strong Bad's e-mail.
Besides, in next episodes, we can expect some throwback to episode one.
But I do need to say that the game needs more
Yes, I am aware that the "i" should be lower case, but that wouldn't really be consistent with the Newcomers fad.
On the rave switch: It does add something to the joke. "I sometimes get tired of that" is a perfectly serviceable standalone joke even if you don't know the origin of the switch itself.
Since I also didn't see the second comment about SBCG4AP not really working well as an open-ended way of telling things, I have to say I disagree on that one as well. Mind you, if it weren't for the fact that Sam & Max were more known for the game(s), they would have commented on the story being too slowly paced in comparison to the comics.
Comments
Yes, it got a low score from Gamespot because it is NOT a FPS title, or on PS360. They are Biased to anything that may be exclusive to the Wii and PC and not their precious lame systems... and doesn't involve running around shooting things on the same game engine that has been used the last 4 million years TO DEATH.
Yeah they are so biased. Especially against game like Mario Galaxy and Zelda.:rolleyes:
They said those were bad games?Oh, I'm so gonna kill them.They are a terrible review site.There was the guy who got fired for reviewing a bad game, and now this.I mean, can you imagine a Homestar Runner FPS?Because that would be way worse than the "Quickly tiring pointing-and-clicking."
--Erwin
Yeah, the company that made the game was sponsoring Gamespot at the time, and forced Gamespot to fire him.
Uh.
Amen. For example, my opinion that this entire essay about a game review is an example of the "Internet Is Serious Business" taken a bit too far must be correct. Also, I must put up an totally correct opinon that when discussing reviews, we are dealing with subjective feelings here. If we both look up in the same sky, and I say the sky is ugly, and you say the sky is beautiful, then that does not mean that we should get in an heated argument on who is correct and who is not. Such an argument over subjective stuff (as opposed to objective stuff such as the "sky being blue") can fuel people's egos, and waste valuable time that would be better spent doing something more productive...like playing the games.
Alright, so the above "totally correct opinons" are not totally correct. Yes, scarcam is the lowest form of wit, but that post honestly ticked a nerve.
And actually, one thing I miss in SBCGAP that was in the Sam and Max series is the ability to get different reactions when you do dumb things. I like this sort of stuff in the Sam and Max series, and I didn't see that in the SBCGAP (instead I get the generic: "Nah"). It is this small detail that differnates Sam and Max from other adventure games...and SBCGAP doesn't have that. Meh.
No, ****. Every review I read for a bad game, I give the game a try for myself, and normally I like it. I really like the strong bad game, I played it nonstop until I beat it, just like the penny arcade game. So I can't wait for ep 2 (of both games!)
But yeah. Take Endless Ocean as an example. I find the descriptions of the game that is given by reviewers to be completely false. They say the game is more of a relaxing toy than a game, which I found to definitely not be the case after actually pursuing the story and hidden treasure for more than an hour or two.
Some games are just made for the kinds of people who decide "Wow, I want to review video games". For the rest of us, well. We can either decide to be like most gamers and CARE about these scores and argue over them like screamy toddlers. OR we could just play the games we like, regardless of the opinions of reviewers.
Reviews are subjective. Let's get that right out of the way. Some things just cannot be quantified objectively, and one of those things is the quality of an entertainment product. However, reviews are also important. Games are expensive, and it's only good common sense to look into something before you buy it.
It is for this reason that websites which review games must, if they are to be taken seriously, assure that the person reviewing a game is right for that game. There was a person in another thread stating that Star Wars KotOR was one of his personal worst games ever. This person is not an RPG fan and, were they a reviewer, should not be given an RPG to rate.
KotOR was awesome, Jade Empire is a 6gig XBox Live download as part of Ninja Month (July). It should still be up as far as I know. For the uninformed, Jade Empire is KotOR with kung-fu instead of Jedi. Very fun, but short if you don't do side quests.
Source is HRWiki page for Episode 2
anyway, what bothers be about this whole review mess, is that these days review are done by nearly everyone. back in the old times, where you had to buy a magazine for reviews, the people that wrote these things were journalists. today, some kid, that's playing fps all the time and is hardly able to write two sentences, can review an adventure game and someone might actually give a crap about it. so, with reviews on the internet you can never be sure...
yeah, and then there's mass effect...that's like kotor, but with spaceships and telekinetic powers and lasers...
I'd like to call you out on that penultimate statement. If you're taking some quasi-illiterate kid's opinion on an adventure game seriously, something is wrong.
His main gripe seems to be that a lot of stuff from the web cartoons are just tacked into the game and just kind of hangs there, without beeing funny by themselves and also without any real relevance to the story. I couldn't agree more, and that's not an issue of whether the reviewer "gets" the concept or not. I've been following HR since before Trogdor, and still I don't get what's funny about being able to throw a lightswitch rave or hearing Strong Bad comment on the quality of Fluffy Puff mayonaise or even seeing the Blubbo whale (to name a few examples). Neither of these appearances are relevant to this episode, and what's worse, they don't contribute to the original jokes from when they first appeared the website. I don't agree with the reviewer that Telltale should have included "an option to view the original content" (sic), but just tossing random artifacts in there for no other reason than letting the long-time fans go "ooh! That item's taken from sbemail1X6!" doesn't cut it for me.
His second complaint is that the cartoons doesn't work too well in the more open-ended format of an adventure game. I don't agree with the people who are saying that the reviewer apparently doesn't like adventure games in general, or that he doesn't get the Homestarrunner comedy. At least from what he let's on in this review, he seems to know the Homestar universe quite well, but thinks that its brand of comedy works better in a cartoon where the creators have full control over the comedic pacing. A valid complaint as well, as I see it.
I won't speak to the other objections since you are certainly welcome to your opinion, but the Whale actually is relevant to the episode.
Umm, what "hints" are we talking about here?
Fortunately we wouldn't ever make a Strong Bad game that was nothing but him sitting at his computer in his room sending emails, so don't worry.
Like when he said you had to be beheaded to get food there. It was something like that when I checked.
Well yeah. It was still a hint.
He also says something about having to get a head to get ahead.
i'm not a homestarrunner, but i'm a point n clickmup game.
Well, I'm a trendy tote bag.
TO THE DEATH WE SHALL FIGHT!
I actually played through the episode again just to listen to the whale's lines (and some other things that I missed before, like Strong Mad's Total Load lines), and I must say that using the whale as a hint system is bloody brilliant.
Though the hints are very, VERY subtle, and I'd never recognize them unless I knew to look for them. But anyway, I guess you can take the Blubbo whale off of my list of unnecessary references.
My other complaints about the throw-back references used remain, though. In my mind, a good throw-back artifact should fall into one of the following three categories:
1. the artifact is part of the background and is unclickable (like SB's morning cereals),
2. the artifact is funny without knowing its backstory, or
3. the artifact uses its backstory and the long-time fans knowledge of this, but adds something to the original joke or to the ongoing story.
Like I wrote before, I find that too many of the useless clickable items in the episode are simple throw-backs that just repeat their original jokes that we've already seen on the web site.
What do you think?
THIS. Truer than that it can't get.
Also, Gamespot lost all credibility over the years. First they lay-off of one reviewer after the Kane & Lynch review (despite the fact they claim this was not the cause). Also, most gamers feel Gamespot is biased towards XBox360. Whether or not this is true I leave aside, but the sad fact is that recent reviews don't really help getting rid of this rumor.
Another thing is that Gamespot tries to act like the saviour of the press. For example, they refused to go to the preview event for Metal Gear Solid 4, stating they find the whole event not done. Of course, it is true that the press got monitored while playing the game, and that they had to socialize with some of the development staff, but most of the press didn't mind. You know why? Because in the end Kojima actually did something with the feedback given by the press. It wasn't a preview event for nothing.
The second press trip was better, since the reviewers could just replay the game in their own tempo, mostly because they already finished the game beforehand, so they knew what was coming.
And another thing Gamespot complained about was the fact that the install screen couldn't be included in the review, as well as the length of the cut-scenes. While this may be a bit too much, you'll have to consider the fact that the company tries everything to surprise the gamer in any way. And sure, the reviews weren't really that complete, but that didn't mean you couldn't actually write a decent review with all the restrictions.
In conclusion, I just like to say that Gamespot after this event not only lost a lot of credibility but also a lot of respect, both from gamers as well as the press.
Also, that being said, I disagree about the necessity of the references.
Sure, some "references" were unnecessary. But they made it more Strong Bad. Why? Because they're the Easter Eggs we know from the cartoons themselves. They can't create new content as easter eggs, or use some gags from the game itself and build upon it like in Strong Bad's e-mails.
Example is the raveswitch. I won't say I agree or disagree with you on the meaningfulness of the switch, however, if this light switch would just be a throwback to something done earlier in the game, it wouldn't have that same Easter Egg feeling.
Face it, SBCG4AP isn't made for the casuals, it's made for those who know about HomestarRunner.com and Strong Bad's e-mail.
Besides, in next episodes, we can expect some throwback to episode one.
But I do need to say that the game needs more
Yes, I am aware that the "i" should be lower case, but that wouldn't really be consistent with the Newcomers fad.