Yes, I definitely agree with this. Plenty of people are going to have an issue with a character that appoints themself judge, jury, and executionerQuote:
Originally Posted by Sevan
-
05-09-2022, 03:47 AMkpxmanifesto
-
05-09-2022, 03:49 AMRyuDragnierYet people don't have an issue with Emet-Selch, who does the same thing, ironically.Quote:
Originally Posted by kpxmanifesto
-
05-09-2022, 04:05 AMkpxmanifestoLuckily, we get to "kill" him.Quote:
Originally Posted by RyuDragnier
-
05-09-2022, 04:06 AMPawPawYou realize it's possible to like, even love a character and not condone their actions on a personal, real-life level, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by RyuDragnier
-
05-09-2022, 04:36 AMAllegor
To be entirely fair, Hydaelyn herself stated she's not 'the good guy' and constantly lamented/doubted her course of actions, whereas Emet and the other ascians couldn't care less if they tried and never hesitated to commit countless genocides. It's not much, but at least she's self aware rather than self righteous /shrug
-
05-09-2022, 04:39 AMKaoru_NagisaThe problem is, no one in the story ever calls her out for her actions. Not even Emet-Selch, at the last; he even compliments her, despite all the suffering she caused to him and the two other Unsundered.Quote:
Originally Posted by Allegor
I love Venat as a character, truly. But the way everyone was written to just not question her whatsoever or even condemn her actions as the cruelty it was - that she even says it was - is... a really icky feeling. -
05-09-2022, 04:45 AMPawPawI wouldn't call her acknowledgement of her crimes "constant". She does so once and Y'shtola immediately dismisses it at though we would have to be absolutely mad to even think for a second that she was in the wrong. The difference in the way the game treats two characters who both committed genocide is the issue here, not which one was more repentant. One is condemned to be a villain for trying to repair his world and, in the process, committing genocide. While the other betrays the very same world and splits it apart to begin with (incidentally, also knowingly creating the worlds the first character destroys). This is also committing genocide but is she a villain, like the other person was? No, now she's a hero and genocide is "OK" as long as it's being done for our benefit. And the game never lets you think for a second that this is not the right way to think or feel. It's a sickening double standard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Allegor
-
05-09-2022, 04:48 AMLaurontI don't really buy that. She only ever explicitly apologises to the sundered, and speculating, I think in part it was because life after the sundering turned out to be worse than she could've imagined. Not the unsundered whose world she destroyed and whose people she ended, which she treats as a necessity. At that point, an apology that is brushed past by Y'shtola and never commented upon elsewhere means little to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Allegor
There is this too. Apologies are fine and all but at the end of the day she is responsible for all of this, including putting Emet in a position where he sees his world and people torn up inexplicably and reduced to forms he no longer recognises and struggles to relate to, knowing he'd go on to perform the Rejoinings with the rest of them. Yet the story treatment of the two could not be more of a polar opposite.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawPaw
-
05-09-2022, 04:58 AMSkyborne
I now half-wonder what the reaction would be to an ascian who was actually genuinely apologetic and regretful for his/her actions, but nonetheless committed to them convinced it was the right thing. "I'm sorry, little ones, but the rejoinings must continue for your sake..." "With each Ardor, we bring horror and injustice beyond words. Yet, it means one less that our shattered people must suffer. One more piece of ourselves reclaimed."
No doubt, in my head, there would be plenty of "Being sorry is not good enough!" "Nothing can justify it!"
I mean, Elidibus could've been that, his portrayal from 'smug manipulative bastard' to 5.3 was already pretty jarring. -
05-09-2022, 05:04 AMPawPawIf only Emet had called us his "brave little spark " earlier instead of being a grumpy grump, everything would have been just fine then!Quote:
Originally Posted by Skyborne
-
05-09-2022, 06:01 AMRyuDragnierUnfortunately people in these very forums want to join Emet-Selch and condone his actions, so while I know it's possible, a number of players here are showing me the opposite.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawPaw
The Sundered cannot exactly judge her, because her actions led to their creation, their lives. To judge her harshly is to say they should never have existed to begin with. Though I have no doubt the Scions wanted to give her a piece of their minds for that cruelty, but her admitting to it being cruel meant it was a moot point, she already knew it, they didn't have to say anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoru_Nagisa
Emet-Selch btw, only mentioned that his methods never would have brought them that far. I have no doubt he'll forever judge her harshly (as he should). -
05-09-2022, 06:13 AMLauront
Well, I enjoy siding with the Sith in games like SWTOR without endorsing their viewpoints outside a game, so it's not like the two have to go together, although in this case I'm forced to take her side, and I don't identify with the sundered from the outset so much as it is a case of being put in their shoes whether I like it or not, and stuck on a course that is guided by her. It's down to personal beliefs whether one condones their actions or not, although I certainly believe the unsundered had every bit as much of a right to fight to restore their world and people, as do the sundered to preserve a status quo that benefits them and their existence. And yes, as far as I am concerned, I would have my character side with the Ascians given the choice - at least up to SHB's conclusion. After EW, the whole thing could've been resolved sooner with the creation of a branching AU.
As for the sundered? Of course they can judge her. Doing so would not undo their existence. All it's saying is that the cost that was paid for it was steep. -
05-09-2022, 06:17 AMKizuyaKatogamiThe problem here is what she did is something the scions have called out constantly, so for them to not do so is extremely biased.Quote:
Originally Posted by RyuDragnier
Alphinaud once said in Shadowbringers that living in a Rejoined world would be against his beliefs, saying, "But what value is there in surviving when all our history, all our struggles will be erased? I cannot conscience such an act." I'm sure the irony of that statement is not lost on just me. -
05-09-2022, 06:56 AMKaoru_NagisaThey absolutely can judge her, 'creator' or not. I don't know, that comes off like saying "you can't judge your parent for abusing you and doing terrible things like murder" - you absolutely can, and should.Quote:
Originally Posted by RyuDragnier
Venat may have felt remorse and guilt for what she did, and that's fine - actually even paints her in a more humane light than just having a god complex, thinking she knows what was best for the Star and that her actions were justified. But feeling guilt and remorse for what you have done cannot erase the fact you've done it, nor does it obligate the Sundered to be forgiving of those actions. Especially given their stance against Emet-Selch essentially doing similar to Venat, just in reverse - attempting to snuff out the current Sundered lives for the sake of the Unsundered who were lost.
It just comes off as... lazy, almost. Especially with all of the revelations provided to us in Shadowbringers regarding the creation of Zodiark and Hydaelyn, I truly doubt the Scions would have normally chose to just skim over everything Venat has done - that she has fully admitted was wrong to do - no matter whether they felt it was a moot point to press or not.
You also are not understanding the fact that rather than admonishing Venat in any way, Emet-Selch basically compliments her: "our methods would have never brought us this far". That is essentially saying "your method was better in the end", which can be construed as an approval of everything that was done to the Unsundered in the name of the end goal - despite literally the entirety of Shadowbringers and even part of Elpis making it clear that is not the sort of reaction he should have.
It was just very flimsy writing that skimmed over and attempted to excuse or ignore the actual implications of what Venat chose to do, rather than address them properly. Even if she ultimately isn't evil, even if her goals were understandable - and even if the end result was the 'true answer' - just... gliding over everything she chose to do, rings incredibly hollow and icky. As if they didn't want people to see her in a bad light, despite their claims in interviews to the contrary. -
05-09-2022, 06:56 AMAllegor
loosely reminds me of Skyrim when Paarthy questions the dragonborn whether Alduin is truly the bad guy for simply doing his job, and we're just interferring with the birth of a new era, to which you can replay with something along the lines of "don't care, the here and now is what matters"
millennials:Quote:
Originally Posted by RyuDragnier
https://c.tenor.com/AwEUdiDrD2kAAAAC/sipping-tea.gif -
05-09-2022, 07:08 AMNilroreoI don't condone his actions. Emet is objectively a murderous psycho that had very little intention of compromising with us, but I'm not stupid enough to ignore why he became like this in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by RyuDragnier
Oh but I can, after all, she hypocritically preaches of her love and affection for life on Etheirys while simultaneously condemning inhabitants from at least 7 shards to their preordained deaths. We were the ones fortunate enough to be born in just the right era and shard to avoid becoming collateral damage in Hydaelyn's machinations, so of course the sundered in the present day would be more inclined to let her off the hook. I have enough self awareness to recognize Hydaelyn as a mass murderer. She took our side yes, and we did indeed benefit from her actions, but she is a mass murderer.Quote:
The Sundered cannot exactly judge her, because her actions led to their creation, their lives. To judge her harshly is to say they should never have existed to begin with. Though I have no doubt the Scions wanted to give her a piece of their minds for that cruelty, but her admitting to it being cruel meant it was a moot point, she already knew it, they didn't have to say anything.
-
05-09-2022, 07:21 AMYukikoKurosawa
I'll be completely honest, I don't really understand the hatred of Venat that has become commonplace. It's already made clear in one of the recent live letters that the sundering wasn't a mass-genocide event as they said the ancients survived sundering but were left "various deformities". So I don't know where this "Venat literally committed genocide" meme came from or why it's still being pushed. While yes she still ended Ancient society she didn't kill everyone. At no point did I feel the story was trying to excuse her either way, not anymore than it has blatantly excused Emet which nobody seems to have a problem with.
I also think it's extremely disingenous to say the game is excusing Venat while excusing Emet when 1. What emet did was a thousand times worse regarldess of motive, he actually killed millions, destroyed multiple entire worlds. and 2. He is completely whitewashed and you are very, very, very clearly meant to like him by the end of EW. Since 5.3 the game has beat you over the head with "Emet goodboy".
I genuinely do not understand how anyone can have a seething hatred of Venat but be perfectly ok with Emet. Like either way I don't care nor do I understand why we routinely have pages upon pages of mad over her. Like ok, character in story did a bad. What's the problem? Her soul has literally been destroyed, meanwhile Emet gets to be reborn and is pretty much completely excused for everything he did. I don't know what more you want. I don't even mind Emet being excused I just don't understand why so many people get so mad over Venat not being crucified by the story for what she did. Like I just don't know what some of you want. Characters, yes even "good" characters can do bad thin. The writers don't need to blatantly blackwash a character because they did something bad. Which just seems to be the complaint, that the writers did not just completley villify her for what she did, which is nowhere near as bad as what Emet has done and he not only got off much better, but he is completely excused for his actions and made to be sympathized with.
I just did not feel they were excusing Venat at all, and they've already confirmed the sundering wasn't a mass-extinction event for the Ancients, so she is nowhere near as bad as Emet, who quite literally murdered millions and nobody in the fandom cares. Like you cannot get angry at Venat and then excuse Emet. EIther way I don't really care, their fictional characters in a story who did a bad and now they're both dead, one super-dead. There much more serious narrative problems to focus on not getting angry that a specific character was not sufficiently blackwashed or punished for their actions. -
05-09-2022, 07:31 AMLaurontWhere did they say it wasn't a genocide? All they said is that the remnants of the ancients had to form new adaptations in response to the situation they were left in. How is this different to poisoning someone to cut their lifespan and remove other attributes of theirs (echo, creation magicks, more besides), to the point that even their progeny are afflicted by this decayed state? You are both killing the individuals (cutting their lifespans) and ending the species in question as something different forms out of it because it has been mutilated and needs to find new ways to adapt to its environment, which is now aetherically more depleted.Quote:
Originally Posted by YukikoKurosawa
Hmm no, I don't recall it doing that at all. It had the Scions voice their opposition to him in no uncertain terms, with Alphinaud even voicing that quote Kizu posted. Your character also opposes him and only throws him a bone in choosing to honour the memory of his people. 5.3 has him honour his part of the bargain and has him put Elidibus to rest.Quote:
I also think it's extremely disingenous to say the game is excusing Venat while excusing Emet when 1. What emet did was a thousand times worse regarldess of motive, he actually killed millions, destroyed multiple entire worlds. and 2. He is completely whitewashed and you are very, very, very clearly meant to like him by the end of EW. Since 5.3 the game has beat you over the head with "Emet goodboy".
As for his actions being worse? She allowed for them by letting him escape the Sundering as per the Q&A, creating a loophole he could exploit. Whatever her reasons for doing it, she knew from your recollection of events how that would end, and if she thought things might pan out differently this time, by the point that they began rejoining the 13th, it is clear that was not going to be the case, so she set in motion this entire chain of events whilst doing nothing to clear up the misunderstanding in Emet's mind born of his memory being wiped. Even if she later moved to oppose the Rejoinings (dubious in the event that she wants the timeline to play out the same way...), she still is the one who instigated this. She is the one who gets a pat on the back at the end even from Emet, whilst your character has no opportunity to voice disapproval, and whilst Y'shtola is quick to want to derive a more positive message out of her own self-admitted apologies (to the sundered.) The codex entry of her is positively gushing with praise and banging you over the head about her "love", whilst caricaturing the reasons behind summoning Zodiark, who receives very little in the way of credit for what he did. EW is meant to show how much Emet changed over time thanks to the bloody toil of the Rejoinings, and people already liked him before, in SHB.
Well since you don't care, I suppose that's the end of that. But they didn't confirm anything of the sort in terms of the sundering not being a mass extinction event - it is and no amount of trying to fluff it up is going to change what it was: the end of their kind. Many here are just wishing they had the chance to express disapproval towards her. That is all. She is central to the story, a 10 year arc and at the root of why many people were dissatisfied with the plot, so I can certainly understand why people might be mad.Quote:
I don't really care
-
05-09-2022, 08:14 AMPawPawI am not sure why it's confusing to people that what Venat did is responsible for the loss of exponentially more lives than what the Ascians managed. I am not condoning what they did, either. I understand it, but genocide is never right. And no matter which way you'd like to spin it to be more flowery, Venat committed genocide.Quote:
Originally Posted by YukikoKurosawa
Not only did she take the knowledge that we gave her and actively chose not to save 75% of her planet's population, she then took the remainder and divided their souls to the point that they had no recollection of their selves, their memories, their culture, their loved ones, their world, nothing.
From the U.N.
https://i.imgur.com/NeJ9axg.jpg
To add to this, she is responsible for introducing mortality to the world. Something that had not been present before, unless the Ancients wished it for themselves. This makes her indirectly responsible for the loss of all life due to old age, illness, disease, warfare and strife (which also never existed prior) across fourteen shards over the past twelve thousand years and onward into the future. What did you think those images being shown to you in her music video were referencing? It was all the trauma she had introduced to the world by breaking it.
Then those seven worlds that The Ascians killed so heartlessly, have you never stopped to consider why Venat allowed those worlds to even exist? Considering that she knew (because we'd told her) that they would all be destroyed? Yeah, she created them knowing that they would have to be sacrificed to create us. They were just pawns in her overall machinations. The Ascians? Wouldn't even exist if not for her and her solo decisions for the planet and the fact that she let them go and allowed their formation. Does this sound like something we should just look the other way about and ignore? really?
I also feel that you're not understanding the point of many here which is that, no one cares if Venat is a villain or not. She would have been far more interesting if the game had actually portrayed her and her actions in the light they deserved, namely those of a narcissistic despot. Instead the game goes above and beyond to excuse her for everything she has done and instead actively makes her out to be a hero. In the same way that you can't understand how people can dislike Venat and like Emet and the Ascians in the same breath, I do not understand how you cannot see that they are both responsible for committing reprehensible deeds, Venat even more than the Ascians; it's just that only one side here is ever being vilified for it while the other is held up as some goddess that we should all be grateful to. No thanks. -
05-09-2022, 08:29 AMYukikoKurosawa
Perhaps I misinterpreted it, maybe many Ancients still died and some remained but were left sundered. Either way.
She literally couldn't do anything but what she did because she knew doing anything else would mess up the timeline and you would cease to exist. There was no avoiding what she did because paradox. Like you can get mad but she legitimately could not do anything else unless you would've preferred to be erased along with your entire timeline from existence. While that also means that she is responsible for what Emet did there is nothing she could've done to avoid that without completley messing with the time-loop because by the time you even go back into the past and meet her, you have already wiped out the Ascians. Anything that happened up until the point where you go back to Elpis and tell past-Venat everything would still have to have happened. I don't know how this wasn't explicity clear, she could not have done anything different because time paradox.
Also it's very clear the writers want you to sympathize with and like Emet, even in ShB 5.0 that was made clear by the end, only further reinforced since then and with any and all subtly removed in EW. You literally have a scene where you stretch out your arm longingly towards Emet as you are forced to flee ktisis hyperboreia. It's not even subtle. He is blatantly whitewashed. If you dislike how Venat was excused, than I don't know how you can be okay with Emet's treatment by the writers, who is orders of magnitude worse. Emet doesn't have the excuse she did, while yes he had good reason it still doesn't make what he did justified. The amount of lives Venat may have ended and the suffering she caused does not remotely compare to the amount of death Emet is directly responsible for. He is responsible for the deaths of Minfilia, Moenbryda, and arguably Paplymo. Just off the top of my head. And by the end of the story you're all cool with him.
If you wanted an option to tell Venat to piss off, I don't see how you aren't clamoring for the same option towards Emet, especially when he said "Remember that we once lived". My entire point is you cannot be angry with Venat or how the arguable moral dissonance of how the writers handled her than be perfectly fine with Emet and how the writers handled him. Either way it just comes down to "character did a bad". And all I can think is "okay." They're both dead now. You killed both of them. One of them, the one you're angry with, is super dead. What else do you want? -
05-09-2022, 08:32 AMredheadturk
Personally? I would have preferred the paradox.
-
05-09-2022, 08:49 AMPawPawI honestly do. not. care. about the idea that "if she hadn't committed all these crimes, you wouldn't exist!". We are talking about a relationship that lasted for maybe half a day, and in that half a day she somehow came to form the unshakeable belief that my single life was worth literally becoming a subversive agent, killing billions and sentencing endless more to suffering and misery? It's absurd. It's storytelling at its absolute nonsensical rock bottom. I have no doubt that the writers fully intend you to see that as a viable excuse and just nod and lap it up, but I'm sorry, I can't do that, it's an outright insult to intelligence.Quote:
Originally Posted by YukikoKurosawa
And of course the writers intend for you to sympathize with Emet. He was our best friend a dozen millennia ago and the entire point of ShB was allowing us to see a different side, to understand that the story wasn't as straightforward as we had been previously led to believe. I was totally supposed to find Emet morally gray and I did. That's what made ShB so fantastic. But at the end of the day, the game never tries to tell me that simply making Emet and the Ascian plight relatable also made them "correct". I didn't get an Emet minion at the end of ShB proclaiming "HERO, HERE'S A BIG HERO HERE!". There was no belief forced upon me, it was up to me to decide how I felt about him and I APPRECIATED THAT. EW? The complete polar opposite somehow. Also, whitewashed? No, disagree. What we saw was an Emet-Selch the way he had been in his life, before he became the person we knew. There is no need to "whitewash" someone who has done nothing wrong at that point in time. And no one has ever tried to brush off or excuse the crimes committed by the Ascians after the Sundering, so that is incorrect.
I think it's funny that you are claiming that I had options to show empathy to Emet or to any Ascian at any point during the game. My options in dialogue are either "aggressive" or "more aggressive" because the game will never let me forget that this is, ultimately, a villain. Flip the script to Hydaelyn/Venat. Where is my option to be aggressive? Nowhere. All I can show is love, thankfulness and a bit more love. The bias and imbalance is quite plain if you care to see it. As for what do I want? I'll just give you the same response that everyone who asks that question in this thread gets: We can't change the story that has happened so far, but we can certainly make it known how we felt about the story for anyone who cares to find out and keep a place alive where others who feel like us but have been bullied out of other places can come and speak freely about what they liked and didn't like. Because that is definitely a thing that happens. That's all.
Also, sorry I missed this but Emet is now responsible for the deaths of Minfillia, Moenbryda and Paplymo? Have you forgotten that the Ascians are an organization of thirteen people? I love how everyone just dogpiles Emet-Selch with everyone's misdeeds when the guy has been asleep in the Rift since his death as the Emperor in 2.0. -
05-09-2022, 09:08 AMTheodric
The writers were fully prepared to resort to memory wipes, the power of friendship, dead characters coming back to life and time travel. With that in mind, the idea that Venat could not do anything differently simply doesn't hold up under scrutiny. She was possessed of knowledge of the impending arrival of the Final Days. A literal apocalypse. Instead of using that knowledge to protect and preserve she stood by idly and allowed disaster to strike. Many of her people were wiped out by the Final Days, which in turn led to the planet itself being at risk of dying. Had it not been for Zodiark being summoned, Etheirys never would have recovered.
So we have a bunch of Ancients who lost loved ones to the Final Days that Venat is indirectly responsible for. Then we have many Ancients sacrificing themselves to Zodiark in order to protect and preserve what remains of their loved ones and the planet itself. Only for Venat to throw a petulant fit and inflict genocide upon the Ancients that remained based on a belief that they would, in the distant future, die out. This belief is never confirmed to be a certainty, either - and it was fed to her by a biased third party at that.
If that wasn't atrocious enough? Not only did Venat inflict genocide upon her own people, she lied about the nature of Zodiark and the Ascians and sought to eliminate all knowledge and memory of the Ancient world. Which in turn, is yet another trait and goal associated with genocide.
That the Sundered benefit from Venat's actions and Emet-Selch did questionable things is irrelevant in the context of the story. Especially a story that has proven to be more than willing to moralise elsewhere and show contempt for decisions made for the alleged 'greater good' if the cost is considered to be too high.
The story simply has an unpleasant habit of gifting the protagonists every possible advantage only to blame the antagonists for not just rolling over and allowing themselves to be wiped out.
It doesn't help, of course, that many Venat enthusiasts insisted that there was never a good excuse for genocide only to turn around and resort to moving the goalposts when it turned out that the Sundering was no accident and was, in fact, a deliberate act on Venat's part.
All in all, Endwalker was very much FFXIV's version of the 'Burning of Teldrassil' and 'Game of Thrones: Final Season' moment for many of us. -
05-09-2022, 09:08 AMSpectrePhantasiaI do actually agree with this; I think Emet too got some of the "EW writing woobification" treatment that kind of sidesteps the atrocities that he committed, even though you know exactly why he's doing it and you can find it sympathetic. I was more than happy in 5.0, where the respect and assurance you give him is to his history and loved ones that he fought to the point of orchestrating rejoinings to bring back. However, even I, a big fan of the Ancient society, found it going a bit far for the WoL to appear like they care that deeply for him as was shown in Elpis. Then again, I find this, in Emet's case to be a lot easier to justify. Firstly, he was one of your closest friends before the Sundering, meaning that part of that attachment can come from lingering remnants of Azem. And secondly, the Emet you encounter and treat as such is the one of the past, who has yet to do anything wrong. When you meet him again in Ultima Thule, he makes no excuses for himself and doesn't back down on why he fought you in the first place. No such distance is given to the present Venat of Hydaelyn, when you once again encounter her.Quote:
Originally Posted by YukikoKurosawa
In a perfect world, I think the player should be able to distance themselves from both characters, as both are very morally dubious; but the fact of the matter is that one of them we fought as an actual antagonist final boss of an expansion, and the other is being regarded as a hero, with no opportunity to denounce or combat her ideals in the way Emet's were. I agree with the heart of what you're trying to say, but trying to argue that there isn't an incredible bias towards Venat in the writing is simply madness. -
05-09-2022, 09:09 AMDevonEllwood
I had completely forgotten about this:
@Ayuhra
"Now two expansions of the story, where one ended in Anima with the post MSQ ending on the moon and the next started up with the world in flames would mean a whole lot of Fandaniel and Zenos which probably would upset people.... Fandaniel is my favorite character in the game but I know most people dislike him and his archetype."
More Fandaniel? I wish. He's my second favorite only because Beatin comes off more as a person and less of a "character" character. I see him in people I know and in myself and I am glad so many events happen in Gridania because that just means he has more chances to appear. I'm still miffed at all you people not voting for Bert. You denied the world more Beatin and that is a crime.
I used to hate Hermes though, I felt he was a complete letdown and he kinda still is. After several months though, I realized I agreed with a lot of what he had to say. His statements on souls was almost completely forgotten through the rest of endwalker and I really wish it had more focus, but, no one else agreed with them. Venat didn't care, and the sundered definitely don't care. I like that he never gives a direct answer of Meteion having a soul or not. Instead we get a long explanation and demonstration on it doesn't matter if she has one or not. It doesn't matter for anything because we all share the same basic needs and justify our existence. I really would like to see more on that in future expansions. Maybe we can have a character that is born like everyone else but doesn't have a soul. Make there be a reason, make it a mystery to figure out. How would the character feel being denied something that everyone else has? How would they feel knowing upon death their entire existence is null and void and this single life ticket is all they have?
Another thing I agreed with is that not everyone needs to have a purpose. Or really everyone has the same goal in life as everyone else: to be happy. I really wish Endwalker would have focused more on this than some more "concrete" concept of purpose. There could be a person who spends their entire life working as a grocery store clerk, never changing. They could die unhappy knowing they could have done more with their life, or die happy just vibing with whatever is thrown at them. The same for the scientist who works to better humanity; die happy knowing you did a good job, or die unhappy because you could have done more. This is just basic philosophy but Endwalker seemed to have favored the "concrete" niche approach. I just don't buy the "you need to find your place in the world/society" bs. This could be "oh, cultural differences" except this is prevalent in humanity everywhere.
I just really hate Hermes's whole " I feel I am the only one that suffers therefore everyone else needs to suffer" schtick. It just brings back bad memories.
If everything was taken away from the stories of the expansion, all the music, all the cinematography, all the voice acting, and just leave the "on paper" stories, I feel every expansion is roughly the same. Excluding Heavensward patches and some aspects of Shadowbringers ("And all the friends were actually okay!"), they're all just adequate. Except Endwalker. Endwalker, with the exception of a few instances, comes off as a confused collaboration between a teenager and a 9 year old. I'm not saying a 9 year old can't write a good story, but why is the moon a spaceship. Is this some other game reference I'm not understanding?
People have brought up "bringing characters back" and I am okay with the writers doing that. As long as they DO something with it. Should Gosetstu have died? Probably, but I really like the interaction between him and Tsuyu. Him seeing his dead daughter in her, her getting her memories back but hiding it because she was happy for once in her life. I love that she, found her own self irredeemable and would rather die with her happy memories with "grandpa". The scions all being alive for Shadowbringers actually brought something; further characterization and conclusions to their arcs. Them being alive for Endwalker brought almost nothing except for npcs to have to do stuff with.
@Skyborne
We had a character like that, not by your specific example, but that was literally Emet. He traveled the world and was willing to throw everything away after the birth of his son. The line people like to throw around is him relating the sundered to ants or something. I don't know who is weirder: The people who take him literally and say "he has a point", or the people who say "cool story, still genocide". It's a coping mechanism. If you are killing people you either accept it for what it is or you dehumanize the enemy. He took the second option and tried convincing himself even though deep down he knew it wasn't true. He saw the sundered as children, just like Hydaelyn. He was delusional and so was she, the difference being he cracked after 12k years of suffering and pressure, she was coo coo out of the gate.
Hydaelyn only acknowledged what she did once and that's because she realized the amount of suffering she caused was horrible, but it had already been done. She based her understanding of the sundered world on a single individual and a massive outlier. What story did we tell her on the bridge? You think we told her about the two sisters who got mauled to death in the snow? Maybe everyone getting massacred in the waking sands? The dragon who had to kill her own tempered children? The refugees starving in the streets? No we probably just told her about some arbitrary crap that wasn't scary and it probably involved moogles.
I was going to add on more stuff after work, but pawpaw beat me to it. I'll just put in Venat should have lost her memory too and the sundering should have been an accident. Problem solved. -
05-09-2022, 09:12 AMYukikoKurosawaYou....don't care that if she hadn't done what she did you and your ENTIRE reality would not exist? Are you actually being serious? Your entire reality would cease to exist along with you which would also have the added consequence of creating a time paradox. Even Eldibus tells you you cannot change the past no matter what you do. There was nothing else she could do other than what was destined to happen. And the writers never let you forget Emet is a villain? They could not be sublte in beating you over the head that he's really a good boy who just did bad things. Even Darth Vader was not this blatantly whitewashed and Darth Vader didn't even do as much evil. Vader only blew up one world. Emet blew up, what was it, 8?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawPaw
Considering this and what you said above, sort of confirms that your issue is they didn't just blackwash her completely. Yes, she would've probably done the same thing even if you hadn't gone to the past and told her everything. She already has her own motivation (seeing what her people were resorting to to restore the world, taking what Meteion said about the fate of other worlds who led a similar fate, and deciding forcibly sundering the world and her people and confemning them to live with suffering so they can appreciate joy and have meaning rather than ignore suffering like they had always done), still either way she knew she had to do it for the sake of maintaining our future. But at no point did I think the writers were excusing her completely, they just weren't villifying her and obviously wanted you to sympathize with her, but that's not the same as totally absolving her. Your problem is you're mad that she wasn't just blatantly villified and treated as such by us. Zero moral ambiguity, just straight up "Hydaelin evil".
But Emet is fine. Okay. You literally kill her and destroy her soul. Emet doesn't even get such a horrible fate.
The bigger problem is the fact that they've, once again, used time travel as a literary crutch, creating more headaches and arguable plot holes in the process. I am still confused how ShB even makes any sense considering Alexander estalbished you cannot change the past, and then we do just that in ShB. Unless Exarch Graha was from an alternate timeline entirely......which just creates even bigger questions and is actualy worse because now we have to deal with the existence of alternative timelines. Like Did Venat still Sunder the world in Graha's timeline considering the 8th calamity happened, the WOL is dead, the Ascians were never stopped. EW made this problem orders of magnitude worse. -
05-09-2022, 09:22 AMTheodric
As an addition to my previous post, though, I don't really care much about the 'misdeeds' of particular characters and factions themselves. I like a bit of edge and grit in the games that I play and I'm comfortable enough in my moral compass that I don't need fictional fantasy stories to conform precisely to modern day real world takes on 'good' and 'bad'.
It's entirely the double standard that bothers me. The lengthy string of 'it's okay when we do it' present throughout the story. The inability for the player to be left to come to their own conclusions and opinions. It'd be entirely possible to have more variety in terms of dialogue whilst still keeping the story entirely on rails. The game isn't shy about having a lot of dialogue in every patch and expansion.
We'd still have fought Hydaelyn no matter what, so it strikes me as odd that the player wasn't given access to more scathing dialogue options both before and after the battle against her. Certainly, there was never any shortage of blunt dialogue available for those who begrudged the necessity of having Emet along for the ride for portions of Shadowbringers. -
05-09-2022, 09:38 AMPawPawNo...I really don't care. In what headspace could I possibly justify my single life being more valuable than an entire planet's and generations of people yet to be born? Also, just to clarify, this is not real and is all make-believe. If this scenario happened in any form of media that I was consuming, I would laugh and shut the book, turn off the TV, leave the theatre, whatever. And then I'd leave a scathing review of the media. It's just that bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by YukikoKurosawa
Guess we'll have to agree to disagree on Emet. I don't consider showing us his real self before he became the Emet-Selch of our time to be whitewashing as he had committed no crimes that needed to be glossed over. And I never felt before then that I was supposed to unilaterally agree and love him. It was a decision that I could come to on my own after hearing the entire story (at the time) for myself. Some people liked him, some didn't and that's fine. The game does not force the issue either way, unlike with Venat.
No, my issue is not that they didn't paint Venat as being an outright villain, my issue is that they paint her as objectively good instead of as what she is which is morally gray. Period. They tell me that she is good, that she is my mother, that she did this because she believed in me, that this was all for the best and what they accomplished was making my character an unwitting accomplice to her genocide. You keep trying to drive home this idea that "Emet killed so much more! he was responsible for more death!" as though that makes it alright and absolves Venat of her setting up all that death to begin with. Venat is responsible for death in masses, far more than the Ascians, and I would have liked for that to have been meaningfully reflected in the game. Not in some silly music video propaganda piece meant to make me feel sympathy for her while downplaying the atrocity of her acts, but plainly and honestly. And I would have liked for my character to be able to call her out on her actions and show their displeasure at allowing their actions to be the cause of death for their past self and all of their friends and loved ones, at the bare minimum. In the last expansion pack this game did a wonderful job of giving me the pieces and allowing me to come to my own conclusions, in this one, they took all that away and instead told me exactly what I believed and felt.
Yeah, she's deader than dead. At least I can take that small concession away from all of this.
On your last point, we can agree wholeheartedly. Time Travel is a damn menace and it was a mistake to use it at all. Without Elpis and the absolute mess it created, EW would actually have been a fun EP for me. -
05-09-2022, 09:44 AMEagleDynamicsif me not existing means that millions would be spared then id choose that option too.Quote:
Originally Posted by YukikoKurosawa
-
05-09-2022, 09:45 AMXirean
@YukikoKurosawa
Just a quick note on the time paradox bit. We know for a fact that changes can be made to the timeline and things continue uninhibited. G'raha still exists. The crystal tower still exists. He time traveled to undo a tragedy and as far as we know, that timeline still exists. Buildings and a person from that timeline still exist. This is why that idea that we can't change things falls flat. I've been shown through Alexander that time loops are a thing. I've also been shown through ShB that timelines are a thing. I see no reason to commit atrocities in the name of a time loop. I've mentioned this much previously in this thread, but put simply, it's obvious they didn't want to deal with multiple timelines, which is fine. Just don't do time travel then. Do time viewing. Let us see what happened without being able to interact with it. The sundering is a horrible event that occurred and was somewhat implied to be an accident. Now with EW that event was given purpose and intention. All other issues with EW aside, this is the single biggest issue I take with the games story. Especially because it's so easily resolved even without deleting existing content.
Sorry, can't resist.Quote:
Originally Posted by YukikoKurosawa
https://pbs.twimg.com/tweet_video_th...scXgAIAc_Q.jpg -
05-09-2022, 09:47 AMRyuDragnierI think I see the issue here...you're currently believing it was only for YOUR life. It was not...it was for the lives of all that would follow, not just yours. The Ancients in the flashbacks showed they were willing to sacrifice newer life (meaning essentially children) to safeguard their own way of life. Venat and the ones with her who summoned Hydaelyn were against that, feeling that they should do everything in their power to leave things to the newer life and safeguard them.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawPaw
-
05-09-2022, 09:50 AMLaurontAll this would actually be relevant if AUs didn't form in this setting... but they do. And hey, if it's good enough for the Ironworks to make a decision like that for a "brighter tomorrow", my character could roll those dice, too...Quote:
Originally Posted by YukikoKurosawa
And yet she says she will take nothing for granted.Quote:
Even Eldibus tells you you cannot change the past no matter what you do. There was nothing else she could do other than what was destined to happen. And the writers never let you forget Emet is a villain? They could not be sublte in beating you over the head that he's really a good boy who just did bad things. Even Darth Vader was not this blatantly whitewashed and Darth Vader didn't even do as much evil. Vader only blew up one world. Emet blew up, what was it, 8?
At this point, we know the Exarch did not cease to exist as well even though his timeline had been averted. Even if Elidibus does not fully grasp the implications of this, the MC is cognisant of this fact and it is offered up as a possibility from G'raha himself. Really, the issue here is why employ time travel yet again, and then not make use of the one advantage it could provide over other methods (e.g. using the Echo to show flashbacks of the past), which is to allow for an AU... and they keep this gate to Elpis open so you can go back to do Pandaemonium to add injury to insult.Quote:
Venat: Heavy will weigh the burden of guiding this legion of souls...
Venat: Yet I have faith in mankind's potential. As long as he believes in himself, there is naught he cannot achieve. So I will not give up on him. On us.
Venat: You may find your world to be very different. Or perhaps the erasure of our friends' memories has sown the seeds of a conjunction between us.
Venat: We cannot know until the moment is at hand. So shall I strive to do my best, taking naught for granted as I walk my path.
The rest of your post is just bizarre. Emet-Selch is shown as his ancient persona to underscore how much he changed by SHB. The entire crew of Scions with you in the Tempest is against him, ranting against him, and your character challenges him. EW showcases his persona before all this. It is not a "whitewash", it is a: here is how having your entire civilisation and planet shattered while having no understanding why (due to a memory wipe) can change you. You keep trying to bring up Emet's actions but you refuse to acknowledge or deal with the fact that she allowed for it all; whether that was "necessary" to preserve the timeline or not, she took the conscious action to enable it.
Pure strawmanning of that poster at this point. There is not a single negative reaction to her actions, barring Y'shtola not questioning her words - and even then, she wishes to re-cast them in a positive light. As Kaoru mentions, even Emet in an out of character fashion, blunts any criticism he has to praise her. And if I may correct you on a point: you aren't the one who decides to kill her - she decides to draw on her remaining life energy to "test" the group. This happens by her will, much as it is Emet's decision to confront the WoL.Quote:
Your problem is you're mad that she wasn't just blatantly villified and treated as such by us. Zero moral ambiguity, just straight up "Hydaelin evil".
But Emet is fine. Okay. You literally kill her and destroy her soul. Emet doesn't even get such a horrible fate.
Hmm no, it doesn't mean "essentially children". It is heavily implied from the JP version of the Hyth dialogue to be "life" seeded by Zodiark. Knowing what we do now of how the ancients created life, this is likely to be beings similar to those in Elpis, i.e. creations fit to gain souls. Nowhere is any indication given that these would be ancients. It's at the point where I am beginning to think, given her penchant for lying to achieve outcomes she desired, that she took advantage of this whole issue to set up opposition to the sacrifices as before the Anamnesis Anyder scene (noting she does not chide the Convocation for them... kinda odd if this is child sacrifice of their own), there was more widespread opposition to them. We now know that her opposition to the sacrifices is instrumental, in the sense that they would enable restoration of the ancient civilisation and her concern is, above all else, the ancients heading for a fate like the Plenty; that is why she opposes them.Quote:
Originally Posted by RyuDragnier
-
05-09-2022, 09:53 AMredheadturkNew life could have been plants, animals, or familiars as far as we know. And they had as much right to feed their familiars to Zodiark as we do to slaughter cattle for food.Quote:
Originally Posted by RyuDragnier
-
05-09-2022, 09:57 AMPawPawNo..no they did not. We actually have no idea what the third sacrifice would entail but there is no reason to believe that it wouldn't have been arcane entities such as those we came across in Elpis. The writers have chosen to leave this ambiguous for some reason, but absolutely nowhere is it stated that human lives would be sacrificed to facilitate the return of the lives in Zodiark. And that doesn't change my stance. No, my single life and existence is not worth the destruction of a world. And you assume that Zodiark needed to exist at all. We have no idea what might have happened if the Ancients had actually been told about the dangers facing them before everything went to hell. All we have is the thought process of a single person who thought she knew what was best for everyone on the planet.Quote:
Originally Posted by RyuDragnier
-
05-09-2022, 10:14 AMLaurontAgree with this - some more control over how the character reacts in general would be good.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpectrePhantasia
-
05-09-2022, 10:16 AMaveyond-dreams
There is an alternate timeline somewhere where the writers didn't take this convoluted route and wrote an Endwalker without any time travel or blue haired bird people, where both Zodiark and Hydaelyn were fleshed out and given enough depth and better rationales underscoring both of their chosen courses of actions.
Instead here we are, several months later after all the hype has worn off and still trying to process just how many ways Endwalker went wrong in terms of its writing. I'm not going to read through the bulk of the last few posts given their length so I'll summarize my thoughts below (again):
Venat / Hydaelyn is lying, hubristic, and manipulative individual who should not have been so readily "forgiven" by the game. She is a beautiful yet deeply flawed woman who I found likeable as a person, but felt betrayed by later on due to her lack of taking appropriate action and deliberate omission of key information that could have helped avert the coming catastrophe. This caused me to severely question and reassess my stance on her and ultimately I feel she was mismanaged.
She is a villainess. A vain, proud angel who challenged "God" and then quite literally spent the next several millennia in the frozen/crystallized centre of the world. From her actions, all malice and evil began to form in the hearts of humanity. Immortality was lost. Paradise was lost. Humanity was condemned to a lesser state, forced to survive in a broken world that was only made viable due to the actions of Zodiark, her opponent. This isn't a character who needs constant praise and repeated attempts from the game to forgive - I would rather the player be given more agency to make up their minds about her actions rather than being conditioned into a certain view of her.
Zodiark as a God even gave his people a "son" of sorts to help guide them in the form of the returned Elidibus, a messianic embodiment of hope for the Ancients. This Elidibus later went on to sacrifice himself in the name of his brothers, loyal and faithful to his duty until the end. Whether or not the original Elidibus remained within as the main puppeteer of the God is a question we likely won't get the chance to explore, but it is possible that his essence may have faded with time in the same way that the souls within Hydaelyn faded over time as well, or else was destroyed or "silenced" when Hermes took control.
We have one "supreme deity" whose actions resulted in mostly unspeakable cruelty and mass destruction. We have another whose actions were for the specific purpose of safeguarding his people's interests. -
05-09-2022, 12:13 PMSkyborneOh, yes, I agree with that assessment. I was more thinking in terms of an individual who was less in denial and more outright tormented over it taking the first route and with total sincerity. The way one carries themselves seems to be more important to some than their actual actions, after all, from what I've seen. Some found Emet to be annoying and unbearable, others found him charming.Quote:
Originally Posted by DevonEllwood
I don't really browse social media of my own volition, but every time I get linked something Emet-related there is bound to be some comment chain that goes on about how he is a fascist ugly genocidal maniac that is only carried aloft by crazed fujoshi so I'm not sure where some posters get the impression that no one has a problem with him!
A toast to mother dearest, btw, since it just happens to be that day. She may be gone, but we're forever the watered-down survivors of an apocalypse in a world that is literally drained of soul and color! -
05-09-2022, 12:45 PMYukikoKurosawa
So uh, why did Venat choose to try and grab Meteion with just her bare hand when she was chasing after her on Argos, when she could just generate a whip and yoink her from far away? Or hell, she could've just conjured her sword and slashed her, seeing as how she had already gotten within inches of her. By that point she could've easily hit her with her sword.
Or better yet, just blast her with magic.
Literally anything else besides her bare bloody hands. -
05-09-2022, 01:12 PMRaoabolicI assumed it was one of those anime moments where she used every ounce of her strength to accelerate and the moment she stopped to do something else she would lose her. My issue is why didn't they just delete the giant memory erasing analog clock to prevent said mcguffin from making a convenient excuse of why no one remembers anything and why we, the player, were not even given a hint of these events in the last 10 years, lol. I would have figured Emet would just blow the stupid thing up and tell the conclave.Quote:
Originally Posted by YukikoKurosawa
-
05-09-2022, 01:14 PMKizuyaKatogamiOr she could have just used yknow, the echo, that huge plot relevant thing that we’re specifically told there can be used to show others memories.Quote:
Originally Posted by Raoabolic