Ok, yes, but my response to that is that this is fiction and not real-life, and that because it's fiction, you have to make some concessions. Let me pose you a question. You have a long-running TV show. You've spent several seasons building up the main character, his relationships with the supporting characters. You've seen him overcome many challenges, seen him go through good stuff, bad stuff, and you know, as the writer, that the audience has really bonded with this character. And then, "because real life is sometimes like that," in the very next episode, he gets hit by a bus and killed. And not to set up dramatic storylines for the surviving cast, not to show how difficult it'll be for his family to get along without him, or how much his friends will miss him. No, you did it just because "well... random stuff in real life happens, doesn't it?"
Would this not alienate your audience? Would this not be a wholly unsatisfying experience for them?
That's the thing. Anything you can do in a work of fiction is a tool, and like any tool, it can be used well, or it can be used poorly. When used well, it can advance the storyline in ways that people might not expect, and it can be a boon to the story. It can make for amazing character development. Used poorly, it feels cheap, unsatisfying, and like a betrayal of everything that has gone before. It makes the audience stop caring about the characters, stop caring about how the story unfolds, and these are things that you do NOT want as a writer. It's a fine line to walk, and that's what a few of us have been saying - that the last episode felt like it was starting to drift over that line a bit, specifically because it sort of felt as if it was "drama" for the sake of drama. And not because it was setting up something bigger and better. Could we be wrong? Yes, we could. We hope we are. We'll see.