on Jan 18, 2012
I still think that the choice of letting Zeke go was a bit odd. For one thing, I thought, “Let Zeke go” sort of implied “in exchange for the hostage”. I thought that was the option for everyone to walk away, and the option on the right was if you wanted to capture Zeke AND free the hostage. Letting him go WITH the hostage? Why would Adam pursue that? It was strange leaving the room and finding the hostage dead, cops all around, Zeke gone, and no clear indication for how that set of circumstances came about. How did Zeke extricate himself from that many foes with itchy trigger fingers, escape unharmed, AND shoot the hostage? I mean, we can contrive our own scenarios to explain it, but I think extremely unlikely outcomes deserve some kind of explanation.
If nothing else, we need to know what happened so we know what to think of Zeke. Did he really shoot her, or did the cops do it as Rutskarn joked? Did he shoot the hostage once he no longer needed her, or was the shooting done when he was cornered?I don’t mind having a bad or sub-optimal option. I agree that dumb choices should have appropriately non-victorious outcomes, it’s just that this one didn’t feel like a failure, it felt like we skipped a page.
We’re not going to have a do-over every time we have one of these conversations, but I’m glad we did in this case.