Is Episode 5 Really That Bad?

2

Comments

  • The part of Gared's story I'm most interested in is him finding the North Grove. Barring that, him figuring out where it is, and heading his ass in that direction. We don't know any more about that friggin' Grove than we did before. Sylvi doesn't know for sure and she's not interested in helping him (us) find it. I didn't care about Sylvi or her backstory.

    Finn doesn't die, that we know of, if we don't bring him along. I did, because I figured he could help. When I saw that he couldn't, I rewound it and deliberately pissed him off so he wouldn't.

    Mira's meeting with Tyrion was frustrating because there was no way to signal to him about Cersei without her finding out. I wanted more interaction with Morgryn, and to find out whether our choice or not to keep the decree helps to get gold so that they can hire sellswords. Her scene felt rushed.

    Nah, Finn's death, Sylvi's backstory, Sera abandoning Mira, a deal with Cercei and Mira meeting Tyrion again definetly didn't advance the plot. You serious?

  • Yeah, what you said basically proves that the story tailors by how you play.
    It's not the game's fault if you don't talk to people enough, or don't explore enough. That is, frankly your fault.

    dojo32161 posted: »

    Finn's death really doesn't add anything (since he isn't there for everyone), just gets rid of a determinant character. You don't have to le

  • dojo32161dojo32161 Moderator
    edited August 2015

    What are you talking about? I always love to explore, but what I'm saying is that Sylvi's back story contributes zilch to the overall plot. It may add to her character, but it doesn't to the plot (at least in episode 5).

    Yeah, what you said basically proves that the story tailors by how you play. It's not the game's fault if you don't talk to people enough, or don't explore enough. That is, frankly your fault.

  • Nope, people are just assholes...

  • edited August 2015

    Alright, you wanna dance? Let's dance!

    :/

    What do you mean by an "extreme set of circumstances"?

    The fact that you chose a sentinal and then sided with said sentinal every time, thats the extreme set of circumstances and with duncan as sentinal its likely the way the traitor scene makes the most sense ( though I did already cover how it still doesnt really fit). Your defending the situation specifically for how it played out for you

    Gared got sent to the wall in ep 1. The traitor wasn't revealed until episode 3 so we can assume he wasn't spying on us till then

    Que Duncan going to give gared advice in episode 3 and royland attempting to kill gryff if ordered in the same episode. Also the fact he doesnt mention the grove means its even more bizzare so he'll betray the family for peace but not tell of the apparent secret weapon

    that only makes his betrayal more unexpected

    Of course its unexpected i never said it wasnt unexpected. Unexpected doesnt mean good or well done, its clear that was the writers aim by trying to provoke emotion through shock, but it doesnt work if the shock twist has no logic or rationale behind it

    Alright, you wanna dance? Let's dance! What do you mean by an "extreme set of circumstances"? Royland and Duncan gave their opinions, I ch

  • Well, then if you don't care about the details or the subplots that's not anyone's problem but yours.

    Yeah. Its called a choice and and an outcome. You either bring Finn or you don't. And as you can see the outcomes quite wary.

    We don't always get what we want in life now, do we? Well, I can say Morgryn is confirmed for ep six so we'll find out.

    ShampaFK posted: »

    The part of Gared's story I'm most interested in is him finding the North Grove. Barring that, him figuring out where it is, and heading his

  • edited August 2015

    Of course I am defending the situation specifically for how it played for me, you are doing the same thing.

    Royland attempting to kill Gryff only happens when he is your Sentinel. In that case he couldn't have been the traitor.

    Duncan's relationship with Gared CAN be called out during the traitor scene, Duncan says he did what he had to.
    No, it can have logic and rationale behind it unless you yourself play unlogically and unrationally.

    (Oh and please stop using simple lines from my sentences, it kinda ruins my arguments. Of course that is what you are trying to do, but please stop. Thank you)

    Alright, you wanna dance? Let's dance! What do you mean by an "extreme set of circumstances"? The fact that you chose

  • edited August 2015

    It is entirely the game's fault, especially in a game that is marketed as being tailored by your choices.

    When you choose a sentinel, you do so as Ethan. All the chances you have to pick the advice of one or the other is as Rodrik. That alone should be enough for the writers to stop and think "hey, maybe after such a shocking death some of the players will change the way they play the next lord to try to avoid him to have the same destiny". Because it is a logical thing to do.

    Any possible choice is "the way it is meant to be played" and should be taken into consideration. Not doing that is why we call it "lazy writing".

    Late edit: Grammar.

    But that is not the game's fault now, is it? Look, when you play it for the first time and choose Duncan as Sentinel it's logical you listen

  • it can have logic and rationale

    It really cant

    unless you yourself play unlogically and unrationally.

    How do you do that?

    Of course I am defending the situation specifically for how it played for me, you are doing the same thing. Royland attempting to kill Gr

  • edited August 2015

    I'll answer both your questionts at once kay?

    Playing unlogically and unrationally means for instance that you pick Royland as sentinel and then do the exact opposite of what he says. Why would you even pick him as sentinel then?!

    It really cant

    -Nice argument you got there.

    it can have logic and rationale It really cant unless you yourself play unlogically and unrationally. How do you do that?

  • Not that I'm saying the episode is bad but do you really need to call people assholes for having an opinion?

    Nope, people are just assholes...

  • I didn't think finding out about Sylvi's backstory did much for the overall plot either.

    dojo32161 posted: »

    What are you talking about? I always love to explore, but what I'm saying is that Sylvi's back story contributes zilch to the overall plot. It may add to her character, but it doesn't to the plot (at least in episode 5).

  • Playing unlogically and unrationally means for instance that you pick Royland as sentinel and then do the exact opposite of what he says. Why would you even pick him as sentinel then?!

    So your saying learning or adapting to past decisions (made by a different character) is not playing correctly? Your saying by choosing a character as sentinal you just 100% agree with them no matter what happens. Also choosing the sentinal is choosing an advisor it doesnt decide any policies or who you agree with.

    Nice argument you got there.

    I've said why its illogical numerous times above already (starting with the original comment I made). Im not going to repeat myself. And to be honest I'm replying to the one avenue you claim makes the massive shift in behaviour and character believable which seems so far to be that you need to choose certain decisions for it to make sense.

    I'll answer both your questionts at once kay? Playing unlogically and unrationally means for instance that you pick Royland as sentinel a

  • Not for having an opinion, for overreacting and making 100 rant pages...

    TJ3046 posted: »

    Not that I'm saying the episode is bad but do you really need to call people assholes for having an opinion?

  • Take you for instance...

    Nope, people are just assholes...

  • Alright, Im getting pretty tired of this so let's make it swift since you clearly won't accept that there are people with diffrent opinions then yours Doug.

    You are saying the traitor scene was horror. I am saying it wasn't. Which at least proves the "Choices don't matter" trend is bullshit.

    You are gonna tell me that you as player in ep 1 believe in Duncan. But in ep 2 you change your mind completly and say F*** it im gonna do what you say Royland cause... I can? I don't think that has anymore logic then any of my arguments.

    I could say the same thing.

    Playing unlogically and unrationally means for instance that you pick Royland as sentinel and then do the exact opposite of what he says. Wh

  • ouch

    -AsherGrin- posted: »

    Take you for instance...

  • edited August 2015

    So what you are saying is: Let's remove everything optional and take in consideration only the things that happen regardless.

    If that's the way you like to play Telltale games then I think you're gonna be pretty dissapointed.

    ShampaFK posted: »

    I didn't think finding out about Sylvi's backstory did much for the overall plot either.

  • Okay literally everything you just said was irrelevant to what we were talking about.

    If your seriously saying that not keeping the exact same mindset from episode 1 all the way through the game means the characters actions shouldn't make sense then fine. (even if I for some reason agree with your belief that choosing a sentinal means you 100% agree with them in the first place) I still maintain that for me the scene never makes sense in any variation based on what we saw of the characters previously in canon scenes.

    "Choices don't matter"

    They dont and if anything this traitor choice is relevance to that and how an attempt to make choices matter just causes issues. Again though we are not even talking about that

    Alright, Im getting pretty tired of this so let's make it swift since you clearly won't accept that there are people with diffrent opinions

  • Ugh hes not saying that, the point is non of that changes the game "tailored" does mean anything actually ever changes, you still end up in the same situation

    So what you are saying is: Let's remove everything optional and take in consideration only the things that happen regardless. If that's the way you like to play Telltale games then I think you're gonna be pretty dissapointed.

  • Do you think what you just said counts as constructive criticism? Please, Yes or No.

    Okay literally everything you just said was irrelevant to what we were talking about. If your seriously saying that not keeping the exact

  • I'd say its debating you points, so I dont think its either why?

    On the traitor scene im critical as I honestly cant find a way to praise it, I dont outright hate the game or constantly go on about, constructive criticism is getting an overall balance, I'm usually more positive but when somethings bad its better to just say its bad

    Do you think what you just said counts as constructive criticism? Please, Yes or No.

  • Yeah. So what?
    You're gonna sit here and whine about it?
    I'd rather enjoy a good game with good characters, excellent voice-acting and amazing story then sit here listening to you and wasting time at this pointless hate crusade. Now that I think about it I think im gonna do just now. Play. An. Amazing. Telltale. Game.

    So, congratulation you did it. You manged to get a loyal Telltale Fan away from thes threads. Hope it was worth it. Good day.

    Ugh hes not saying that, the point is non of that changes the game "tailored" does mean anything actually ever changes, you still end up in the same situation

  • Let me contructively criticize your non-constructive criticizm.

    I don't care.

    I'd say its debating you points, so I dont think its either why? On the traitor scene im critical as I honestly cant find a way to praise

  • edited August 2015

    This is why I hardly ever bother arguing you cant find and debate faults in things you like or your running a "hate crusade". I think the game is overall good, its not perfect and critcism mixed in with praise is always good.

    Not to mention the other party throwing a mild "Im offended you dont agree with me" tantrum before announcing their exit

    Also I'm hardly whining I replied to things you posted, if its a thread about criticising an episode that wasnt all that good then yeah thats what the discussion is going to be about, I hardly just brought it up randomly; unless your idea is that you can argue against complaints but Im not allowed to reply

    Yeah. So what? You're gonna sit here and whine about it? I'd rather enjoy a good game with good characters, excellent voice-acting and ama

  • edited August 2015

    Let's remove everything optional

    I think you meant extraneous. And yes, I do consider Sylvi's storyline to be extraneous. Extraneous=unnecessary.

    So what you are saying is: Let's remove everything optional and take in consideration only the things that happen regardless. If that's the way you like to play Telltale games then I think you're gonna be pretty dissapointed.

  • Okay then I was just asking you to clarify what you meant

    Let me contructively criticize your non-constructive criticizm. I don't care.

  • I liked it. Really caught me off guard numerous times. The final choice smelled a bit like pure shock value to me, but 's how it is with TTG.
    I hope they handle the determinant character situation better than in previous games. It was real disappointing in their other games, so I hope they don't just
    waste the opportunity of making two (almost) completely different alternative storylines. Also hoping the previous choices will matter now. What you choose hasn't been a huge
    impact so far, so fingers crossed.

  • Really? cause I thought the Gared parts were the weakest.

    Compared to the others it is, The gared parts were the only moments I liked really

  • I like your optimism.

    SerMarve posted: »

    I liked it. Really caught me off guard numerous times. The final choice smelled a bit like pure shock value to me, but 's how it is with TTG

  • It wasn't so bad, but It wasn't good either. In my opinion, episode five was the weakest of all, it felt too short and somewhat rushed (Gryff's eye bug, for example). The whole port scene didn't make much sense... the Whitehills literally came out of nowhere with a large number of soldiers; how the Forresters, knowing of the ambush, won't notice all those men, it's strange to say the least.
    About the Mira-Tyrion scene: even Cersei cannot be so lacking of common sense to left a guard outside cell where Tyrion could easily see the man, and the guard then entering and scolding Mira... it's simply excessive.
    If episode six will be significantly better, I don't think it would make the whole game bad, and probably people playing the complete season in the future will not notice the not so good writing. But episode six has to be like the first four.

  • it was good, just short. one scene i didnt care for

  • I especially enjoyed playing episode four, and in comparison five was awful.

  • Yes, im am indeed serious. Finn is determinant so we all Know how that is gonna turn out. Sylvis backstory? You mean that two sentences about how everyone hates her. Sera abandoning mira? Well Yeah she Said that but 2 minutes later she is still Walking Right Next to Mira. You're Right about that Deal with cersei however you got Absolutly nothing from tyrion. We Are "hateing" got because we want it to be good.

    Nah, Finn's death, Sylvi's backstory, Sera abandoning Mira, a deal with Cercei and Mira meeting Tyrion again definetly didn't advance the plot. You serious?

  • And to all of you who Are defending this Game. You want Us (the Haters) to stop Hating the Game, but At the Same Time, you're Hating Us because we're "Hating" the Game. You want to stop Us opening Threads about how we Are "Hating" the Game, but you're Doing the same with how awesome this Game is! We "haters" want this Game to be As good As possible. Nothing more, nothing less. I Understand that this Forum can be toxic At times, but it's Not our fault. And sometimes it Needs to be that Way so TTG listens. It's like with your Child. Sometimes it does something wrong or stupid so you Need to Tell your Child what went wrong so it can learn from it. Because you want the best for your Child. Because we want the best for TTG.

  • even Cersei cannot be so lacking of common sense to left a guard outside cell where Tyrion could easily see the man, and the guard then entering and scolding Mira...

    About that, I'm starting to wonder if it was Lucan's doing and not Cersei's. I mean, maybe Cersei didn't tell him to give Mira the wine or to stand there the whole time. It is as you say, it wouldn't make sense for Cersei to do that, but maybe Lucan was so eager to get Mira in trouble that he did all of that on his own, since he couldn't get her for Damien's death.

  • I really wish to say something good about this episode, but I just can't. Don't get me wrong I think it's not that bad as some people say but it definetly is worst episode in game so far (hopefuly episode six won't be worse). This episode was made just to make things clear before last episode of game/season.

  • I've heard a lot of people saying that telltale should do better because the choices don't matter and there aren't enough choices. You have to think...In GoT there are very little choices that matter. And I prefer less choices that make you think about what you're doing rather than choices that matter. And that there's a lot of them.

    GSSalvador posted: »

    And to all of you who Are defending this Game. You want Us (the Haters) to stop Hating the Game, but At the Same Time, you're Hating Us beca

  • Oh really? Well you don't know that about Finn, I guess we will see. Sylvi's backstory is a completly optional matter that simply enriches the lore. Ugh yeah she was there but then she left, she wasn't seen the entire rest of the episode implying she doesn't give a crap about us. And you get 2 outcomes with Tyrion- either he tells you that no-one will testify or he lies to you.
    You are "hateing" (yeah that's not a word) because you want it to be good? It is far better then "good". It's excellent and currently the best GoT game to date.

    GSSalvador posted: »

    Yes, im am indeed serious. Finn is determinant so we all Know how that is gonna turn out. Sylvis backstory? You mean that two sentences abou

  • Not for having an opinion, for overreacting and making 100 rant pages..

    Thats the forums for ya.

    Not for having an opinion, for overreacting and making 100 rant pages...

Sign in to comment in this discussion.