Are <5.0 main villain> fanboys also supportive of <6.1-6.5 main villain>? *SPOILERS*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SannaR

I have to assume you and I are either both being ignored or on their block list. That and it feels as though they really don't want to help us see the error of our ways. Or where we might try to clarify things.

---

Yeah, I'm getting the idea that they don't want to see improvement, they want to see an antagonist.

Which itself sort of explains their behavior about the Zodiark-Hydaelyn conflict; a 'no right or wrong answers' question doesn't work in the eyes of someone who needs to see themselves as a good versus a bad. So, their argument revolves not around why their side is right, but why the other side is wrong. And no form of 'wrong' is off the table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

Yeah, I'm getting the idea that they don't want to see improvement, they want to see an antagonist.

Which itself sort of explains their behavior about the Zodiark-Hydaelyn conflict; a 'no right or wrong answers' question doesn't work in the eyes of someone who needs to see themselves as a good versus a bad. So, their argument revolves not around why their side is right, but why the other side is wrong. And no form of 'wrong' is off the table.

---

No, it's that Venat does the exact things the that game calls the ascians out for but when Venat does it's fine. It's not needing a right or a wrong it's that Venats as big a monster if not worse than the games villains and the story just shrugs while provinding a sick subtext of if your not the correct forms of life you don't deserve to live.

Edit Also I am getting really tired of these personal attacks where you make up stuff about the people on here posting what you don't like, It's why I don't normal respond to your points directly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jameseoakes

No, it's that Venat does the exact things the that game calls the ascians out for but when Venat does it's fine. It's not needing a right or a wrong it's that Venats as big a monster if not worse than the games villains and the story just shrugs while provinding a sick subtext of if your not the correct forms of life you don't deserve to live.

---

So what you're saying is that her actions are identical to the Ascians ('does the exact same things'), but for unstated reasons you consider her worse.

Got it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

So what you're saying is that her actions are identical to the Ascians ('does the exact same things'), but for unstated reasons you consider her worse.

Got it.

---

She outright betrays her own race and personally betrays serveal people who trusted including the outright horror she inflicts on the 3 unsundered ascians by intentionally letting them witness and survive the complete extermination of the race and culture. Oh and then she creates a world of suffering a misery for some frankly vile logic of only through suffering can you know joy which honestly a vile ideology

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jameseoakes

She outright betrays her own race and personally betrays serveal people who trusted including the outright horror she inflicts on the 3 unsundered ascians by intentionally letting them witness and survive the complete extermination of the race and culture. Oh and then she creates a world of suffering a misery for some frankly vile logic of only through suffering can you know joy which honestly a vile ideology

---

So, to quantify, you believe Venat's crimes are:

1. Betrayal,
2. Planet-smashing,
3. Leaving survivors (I'm unclear how this is a crime but I'll run with the concept),
4. Causing suffering and misery.

I'm unclear about why this list of crimes isn't held completely equally by the Ascians. They orchestrate betrayals as part of their M.O., to cause Calamities that destroy planets, that leave at least some amount of the Source alive, and cause immense suffering and misery. In particular I would put Emet-Selch with the Garleans, Elidibus with... basically everyone he's ever manipulated, Fandaniel with the Allagans, and Igeyorhm with the Thirteenth as fitting these basically exactly.

The one thing that I can think causes a difference is that Venat did it to people she would recognize as 'like her', while the Ascians were manipulating something else? I hardly think otherizing is an acceptable or positive element, but if you do, then that still leaves Fandaniel's obliteration of Allag as Amon being equal. Emet-Selch, too, if your view is that he 'went native' at any point with us, Garlemald, or Allag.

I get that you disagree with her, and agree with the Ascians, but I don't think that even by your own logic she's actually worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

I get that you disagree with her, and agree with the Ascians, but I don't think that even by your own logic she's actually worse.

---

I'm getting really tired of you putting words in my mouth, I don't agree with ascians I just think Venat was worse. I'm also quite confused as to why it maters if Venat hadn't have have sundered the world none of the other crimes would happen and if those crimes and it really messed up how hard the game excuses Venats genocide as hard as the game does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

Yeah, I'm getting the idea that they don't want to see improvement, they want to see an antagonist.

Which itself sort of explains their behavior about the Zodiark-Hydaelyn conflict; a 'no right or wrong answers' question doesn't work in the eyes of someone who needs to see themselves as a good versus a bad. So, their argument revolves not around why their side is right, but why the other side is wrong. And no form of 'wrong' is off the table.

---

I gues? Though it does explain their you lore forum regulars only want an echo chamber stance. Only to toss out a discord invite that reads as "come to our own echo chamber that totally isn't an echo chamber and even if it were it is better cause we uh have a discoball." (had to use something else other than cookies cause using the same references is lame and pathetic according to some.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jameseoakes

I'm getting really tired of you putting words in my mouth, I don't agree with ascians I just think Venat was worse. I'm also quite confused as to why it maters if Venat hadn't have have sundered the world none of the other crimes would happen and if those crimes and it really messed up how hard the game excuses Venats genocide as hard as the game does.

---

Your argument seems to be predicated on the notion that the Sundering 'created a world of suffering and misery'--thereby implying that the world before it wasn't. But even if you take the view that the Ancient world was without suffering (a view that doesn't hold thanks to short stories and Pandaemonium), she wasn't the one that broke that. Meteion did. By the time of the Sundering, three quarters of the population was either sacrificed or dead from the Final Days, the surviving population was divided, some amount of it was tempered, and who knows what other problems had sprung forth in the aftermath; paradise had already burned. And if you do think that the Ancient world had problems, then Venat's crime was... not immediately solving them?

Venat says she 'created a world of suffering' as a condemnation of herself, but it doesn't really hold. Her reasoning is actually something akin to me thinking I'd be a terrible mother because I'd be bringing a child into a world that I don't think will treat it well; I'd feel guilt for the pain that results, but that doesn't make me guilty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lady_Silvermoon

There were so many outs they had to make Venat good or at least morally grey. The Sundering could have been an accident. She could have been trying to lessen her people's power levels and was unaware of the devastation she'd cause. But no, they had her do it on purpose with full knowledge of what would happen. And then, as if that wasn't horrific enough, they tell us she purposely let the Ascians go so that they could go crazy mass murdering her children for 12k years to make her extra special child. So your very creation is built upon a pile of bones. If you didn't impress her so much, worlds full of people wouldn't have died horribly.

They had her pick the darkside option at every single prompt, but were like, she's pretty and wearing white, so she's a Jedi actually.

---

All that you said plus the fact that her back up plan, if all her original plans went sideways, was literally to say screw all the Reflections and save only the people of the Source. If we hadn't gone digging into the why of what was causing the Final Days (because we rightfully thought leaving the Star and letting the Reflections die was stupid), we would have been leaving without ever learning of Meteion too. That means that it only would have been a temporary fix.

I dislike basically everything Venat did in the end. From Sundering the planet, to never telling her people the truth, to setting up gods and a system that makes it so the world HAS to follow the measures she put into place so that it doesn't end up destabilising in its broken state. She was an narcissist that imposed her will on everyone, and she will never sit well with me. Her response to Hermes idiotic plan should have been to tell the Convocation and set Hermes in the jail he belonged in. Not help destroy her people.

I just wish the story would actually call her out on it. I don't expect the future to change or anything, but have the Scions and other people actually maybe condone what she did instead of acting like she's some paragon of love and virtue and not just as bad as half the villains we have fought against. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

Venat says she 'created a world of suffering' as a condemnation of herself, but it doesn't really hold. Her reasoning is actually something akin to me thinking I'd be a terrible mother because I'd be bringing a child into a world that I don't think will treat it well; I'd feel guilt for the pain that results, but that doesn't make me guilty.

---

It was more akin to killing your neighbor, stealing their organs and Frankensteining a better person with the parts. She didn't take the Ancients anywhere, she ripped them to pieces so that they no longer had the power to improve their material conditions because she believed comfort fostered weakness. And arguing both that she was right to kill them to stop them from improving their situation, but also, their situation sucked, so it's okay to kill them because they already had it bad is a contradiction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nayukhuut

All that you said plus the fact that her back up plan, if all her original plans went sideways, was literally to say screw all the Reflections and save only the people of the Source. If we hadn't gone digging into the why of what was causing the Final Days (because we rightfully thought leaving the Star and letting the Reflections die was stupid), we would have been leaving without ever learning of Meteion too. That means that it only would have been a temporary fix.

---

I never considered the evacuation plan as anything she was serious about given she knows the actual source of the problem and that there is nowhere for people to escape to given the entire universe is being destroyed. Like maybe she did it because she wanted to give people hope, or maybe she did it cause we told her she did and she wanted to maintain the timeline, but given no one even bothered to tell the Loporrits what size we were, I can't take the evacuation plan seriously. She just needed an excuse so we'd fight her in her assisted suicide, so she didn't have to look the people in the eye whose families she murdered and civilization she destroyed after they gave their lives to protect those things. Imagine being one of those people who sacrificed yourself to protect the star only to find out moments later Venat murdered your family and used their parts to make her familiars. I'm just saying, we know for a fact combat is possible in the aetherial sea. I get why she destroyed her soul instead of facing those people.