What's the point with that quite lackluster story in Endwalker?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xirean

Too late, I looked more deeply. As far as I can tell, the moon is there until you finish the Elpis story; then it goes away.
During Elpis story

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...48/unknown.png

Post 6.1

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...62/unknown.png

---

But...why?

It doesn't go away.

There's a weird quirk that you can only see the moon while the Umbral Winds weather is active, which I can't help but find suspicious when the same weather is present on the moon itself as well as in Ultima Thule. It's also only visible from around 7 PM ET to 12 AM, as it suddenly manifests then disappears as quickly within that timeframe.

I'd like to think it's hinting at some metaphysical shenanigans that are going to become relevant moving into the future, but who knows.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KageTokage

I'd like to think there's some deeper meaning to it considering that it's only visible in the umbral winds weather coupled with the same weather being present on the moon itself, but with them seemingly wanting to move away from the Ancient-related stuff going forward, it could genuinely just be a weird oversight.

---

Wait what? Can you explain further? I'd love to know more about the exact conditions.

I am on mobile so can't edit my comments but I have seen the moon quite a lot when in Elpis and that's since finishing the MSQ. So I have no idea why it would be visible at all either during or after the story if it was specifically created to house Zodiark who hadn't been created yet, much less sundered.

Most likely theory is the Moon was destroyed in the Final Days (Amaurot dungeon shows giant fireballs falling from outerspace onto the planet. Entirely possible an Ancient accidentally fear-manifested a meteor large enough to completely destroy the moon). So the moon Hydaelin created both served to imprison Zodiark and replace the moon that got destroyed.

Also to touch on an earlier question about why Venat and co didn't just use the echo to learn the truth from you rather than make you explain it verbally. It was probably considered rude to just peer into people's memories. You know, privacy and all that. The only time the echo is even used is when Venat tells you to use it to learn what Hermes was up to since he wasn't going to explain himself leaving you forced to violate his privacy in so doing.

Maybe it's just me being overly pessimistic but I think that's way too much thought put into something that's probably just an oversight.
It just seems too subtle to be intentional to me.

I dunno I feel like them not realizing a planet with intelligent lifeforms not having a moon before they themselves created it is not really an oversight just unimaginably bad worldbuilding on a fundamental level that should not be possible. There is no way there isn't an already written explanation for whatever happened to Etheirys's original moon, or that they actually had one prior to the one Hydaelyn created. That would be so batshit insane that I refuse to believe they didnt think that through. Even Blizzard's writers aren't that stupid.

What's more likely to happen, worst case scenario, is they just never explain it because they simply forget to. But I'll mantain my headcannon that it was destroyed in the Final Days somehow, likely by those giant fireballs crashing down from outerspace onto the plaent established in the Amaurot dungeon.

Well, if y'all haven't seen this, it's enlightening.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQpBEB-bxn4

Text version here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Well, if y'all haven't seen this, it's enlightening.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQpBEB-bxn4

Text version here.

---

When a mobile gacha game does more justice for the Sundering than the game itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HollowedDoll

When a mobile gacha game does more justice for the Sundering than the game itself.

---

Guess the writing team didn't want to bring about the AU in your sig, after all. :D Hence shoving this info in some obscure place, where it wouldn't spell out quite so clearly in XIV what 'mommy' did.

Honestly the biggest issue is that I cant tell whats incompetence vs deliberate misleading at this point. Thats not a good thing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

Guess the writing team didn't want to bring about the AU in your sig, after all. :D Hence shoving this info in some obscure place, where it wouldn't spell out quite so clearly in XIV what 'mommy' did.

---

The fact that even in the Reincarnation story, they subtly try and hint that 'Hydaelyn good Zodiark bad' leaves such a horrible taste in my mouth. Can't even escape it in another universe's retelling.

Especially egregious when this story is supposed to be from Emet-Selch's point of view! Like what the heck!

Welcome to the club. :cool:

Needless to say the recent happenings on NieR are ... interesting. For the most part it's stuff we already knew, and the state of mankind could be sort of deduced from the Encyclopedia description of the First Era, but it's nice to finally have confirmation that the Sundering was horrifying. Thanks, Mom! Keep glossing over it! Turned out ShB Emet-Selch was, of course, right. He's not the Angel of Truth for nothing after all. Most people playing the game however will continue believing her version of things as presented in EW; after all, hers had the better special effects and the very significant song in the background. She is also Certifiably Good, and right in the end, because Dynamis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaoru_Nagisa

The fact that even in the Reincarnation story, they subtly try and hint that 'Hydaelyn good Zodiark bad' leaves such a horrible taste in my mouth. Can't even escape it in another universe's retelling.

Especially egregious when this story is supposed to be from Emet-Selch's point of view! Like what the heck!

---

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD! Ancients were notoriously known for this propensity, after all.


Re: the moon, maybe it's just me being overall pessimistic on the state of things but I sincerely believe it's just someone at SE being sloppy with the skybox and somehow not fixing it in 6.1. For those unaware, you can see the moon from 8 pm to 12 am during Umbral Winds weather looking east and it gradually goes up in the sky until midnight – it's particularly tricky to see during a new moon but it's there:

https://i.imgur.com/MkOV9sw.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawPaw

Yeah. Noticed that one day while I was hanging out there and wondered for a moment how that was possible before I remembered that this was Endwalker where nothing really matters or makes logical sense anyway. Best not to look too deeply.

---

^

I forget if they ever said she made the moon in particular or if they just said she put zodiark in the moon?

As i could see them try and use wiggle room even if they ignore the previous implications

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucida3b

I forget if they ever said she made the moon in particular or if they just said she put zodiark in the moon?

As i could see them try and use wiggle room even if they ignore the previous implications

---

iirc she said she made the moon to hold him.

Yes, she confirms it in the Word of the Mother scene. It's even clearer in the French version. Now whether it is another tall tale from her or not? Who can say...

Ahhh... that NieR crossover. A return to more ShB-style storytelling with actual pathos, even if it's nothing truly new, aside from confirming some things about the Sundering. Aside from a couple of nitpicks, anyway. What's next though, actual vital lore being locked behind some kind of limited edition JP-only breakfast cereal run?

It almost makes one forget the dreck in EW with time loops and memory wipes...

On today's episode of "Things I personally found bad or lazy in Endwalker": What the heck happened to Venat's group of followers?

We're told back in Shadowbringers that - just as the Convocation pushed for the creation of Zodiark, so they may rewrite the laws of the Star in order to protect them from the Final Days, and thereafter restore life to the scorched earth - there was supposedly an 'anti-Convocation' of sorts. People who disagreed with their desire to sacrifice new life on the Star for the sake of the lives that freely gave of themselves to Zodiark as fuel for his miracles. This group was headed by Venat, who would go on to become the heart of Hydaelyn, as Elidibus became the heart of Zodiark.

It was the efforts of the group which summoned Hydaelyn into being, so that she might fight against Zodiark and Sunder the world. That is what we learn - not even through Emet-Selch, who could be considered a biased party, but through records left in Anamnesis Anyder by (we can only assume) that very 'anti-Convocation' group.

Why, then, does Endwalker display to us Venat singlehandedly Sundering the world and becoming Hydaelyn? Why were we given information regarding this group of her and her fellows, and then those other people end up as only a brief, passing mention by Venat in Elpis, right before we leave back to our time?

An argument could be made that "they just condensed the events down for the sake of wrapping up the procession of the timeline", but that rings very hollow when it was made such a huge deal back in Shadowbringers. And also just comes across as incredibly lazy, badly-paced writing - to effectively ignore the group efforts towards summoning Hydaelyn, to ignore Hydaelyn doing battle with Zodiark for the fate of the Star and ultimately landing a blow which rends he and the very world asunder.

Visually, yes - that segment of her Sundering the world was stunning and emotional. But, like so much else in Endwalker, when it's viewed afterwards through the lens of everything that has come before it - all of the information we have access to thus far regarding the old world and the Sundering - it becomes all flair with no substance. Retcons for the sake of visual spectacle. Condensing for the sake of empty emotion, and desperately trying to tie it all together with ARR's beloved theme 'Answers'.

We would have benefitted so much more from getting to see more glimpses of those other people, those who opposed Zodiark's creation and the sacrifices that continued to be made in his name. Just as so much else in Elpis (which is where the story genuinely seems to begin falling apart at the seams, I think), such as Meteion and Hermes, this 'anti-Convocation' group suffers from poor pacing and a lack of narrative focus or care given to that portion of the story. The desire to condense down and wrap up a 10 year story arc in one expansion ruined so many plot points and pieces of information left to us in Shadowbringers - ones which seemed to be set up for being further expounded upon later.

We lost so much potential because of Yoshida's desire to speedrun through the capstone to this story, and I'll die mad about it.

The general impression is that the writers had the whole "The deaths of the Ancients was an acceptable, natural consequence of the rules of suffering and existence" moral in their heads and everything in Endwalker was shoehorned into that lesson, even if it contradicted past information. I think it was Paw Paw who said it here first, but it seems like the writers were afraid of having some Ancients oppose the third sacrifice because it would demonstrate that there were, indeed, Ancients who weren't "deserving" of being Sundered. It would leave questions of why Venat didn't spare them.

We can't even go with a "The Sundering was indiscriminate and her allies were simply unfortunate" because the devs went on record and said Venat specifically spared Emet-Selch.

The whole thing comes across to me like writing yourself into a corner, and then making a dozen MORE mistakes trying to write yourself out of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaoru_Nagisa

The fact that even in the Reincarnation story, they subtly try and hint that 'Hydaelyn good Zodiark bad' leaves such a horrible taste in my mouth. Can't even escape it in another universe's retelling.

Especially egregious when this story is supposed to be from Emet-Selch's point of view! Like what the heck!

---

It's particularly odd given that the game has repeatedly established that Light and Dark do not equal 'good' and 'evil'.

The game in general would do well to stop portraying most attempts to preserve or restore something as a bad thing. Especially in cases when some nutter comes along, kills a bunch of people only for the survivors to be told to stop...trying to prevent their own extinction and elimination of all memory of their loved ones?

You know what I just realized? There is zero mystery after Elpis. The entire mystery of the plot is revealed in that zone. Halfway through the story we already have our big final reveal, so there is absolutely no mystery to carry the rest of the story. So not only is it an arguably underwhelming reveal, it happens halfway through the plot leaving us with absolute nothing to carry the remainder of the story. It's just "alright well I guess we just go and kill Meteion now". But first lemme go show these rabbits around on a tour for an hour because that's important. Riveting, truly.

Imagine if, for example, there was another big bad and it somehow hijacked Meteion from outerspace after the Meteia encountered it, that was actually behind all the extinction of all those worlds, who still wasn't revealed even in Elpis. So then we're left to wonder "what did Meteion really see? Who or what did she encounter that's now manipulating her? What's it's motive?". Even more, say Meteion leaves at the end of the dungeon to go join her new mysterious master, what happened to her? What happened to her sisters? Are they still alive? Can you just imagine. Something to you know carry the remaining 30 hours of plot. Something wasn't taking fucking bunnies on a tour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

The game in general would do well to stop portraying most attempts to preserve or restore something as a bad thing.

---

It doesn't. Not consistently.

There's plenty of plot points/sidestories that present trying to preserve or save something with standing tradition as unambiguously good or positive. Such as preserving the peace of Hingashi even after establishing that its government is corrupt as hell. Or maintaining the traditions of the Viis and the Ronka in the Greatwood.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YukikoKurosawa

Imagine if, for example, there was another big bad and it somehow hijacked Meteion from outerspace after the Meteia encountered it, that was actually behind all the extinction of all those worlds, who still wasn't revealed even in Elpis.

---

I would honestly find this even WORSE than what we got. If "Aliens were the real bad guys" was the reveal all along, then just make it aliens and cut Elpis and Meteion out entirely. That's exactly what my #1 suggestion would be for fixing the story.

Meteion herself was already a hijacking of Zodiark. We don't need another hijack for the hijack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus

It doesn't. Not consistently.

There's plenty of plot points/sidestories that present trying to preserve or save something with standing tradition as unambiguously good or positive. Such as preserving the peace of Hingashi even after establishing that its government is corrupt as hell. Or maintaining the traditions of the Viis and the Ronka in the Greatwood.

---

But wasn't the SAM storyline panned by the playerbase for that happening with Hingashi? I distinctly remember a LOT of players showing dislike of the 60-70 questline for doing that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaoru_Nagisa

...

---

It's just strange how the """"unbiased"""" (according to the playerbase) Unending Codex just straight up erases the twelve people who wanted to stop the sacrifice, in line with the solo Venat-wank cutscene post-Elpis. Do the developers know that people have a memory and know that 5.2 happened? It was just puzzling since I wanted to see the perspective of these individuals... maybe have them be actually named. I suppose there is still a slight chance for this in the 24man story as it is meant to be an "epilogue" but I just don't know... they couldn't even really give us info about the full Convocation, and left 5 or so of them in the dust.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus

The general impression is that the writers had the whole "The deaths of the Ancients was an acceptable, natural consequence of the rules of suffering and existence" moral in their heads and everything in Endwalker was shoehorned into that lesson, even if it contradicted past information. I think it was Paw Paw who said it here first, but it seems like the writers were afraid of having some Ancients oppose the third sacrifice because it would demonstrate that there were, indeed, Ancients who weren't "deserving" of being Sundered. It would leave questions of why Venat didn't spare them.

---

Even more strange since the Watcher, who was based off of a friend of Venat, says that there were Ancients who wanted to find the root cause of the Final Days, but it is left as one sentence. It's just annoying how we kept getting hints and snippets and fleeting fragments of a more complete story that isn't complete simpery, but is never delved into. Hey, maybe we can look forward to the next collab in some other game... or a side story tucked away somewhere. Somewhere next to the AU where our god-queen actually does the right thing and our friends can revel until dawn in peace and happiness again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RyuDragnier

But wasn't the SAM storyline panned by the playerbase for that happening with Hingashi? I distinctly remember a LOT of players showing dislike of the 60-70 questline for doing that.

---

I was just stating what the story does and doesn't do. If we're trying to pick out which ones were good or bad, we'll be here all day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyborne

Even more strange since the Watcher, who was based off of a friend of Venat, says that there were Ancients who wanted to find the root cause of the Final Days, but it is left as one sentence. It's just annoying how we kept getting hints and snippets and fleeting fragments of a more complete story that isn't complete simpery, but is never delved into. Hey, maybe we can look forward to the next collab in some other game... or a side story tucked away somewhere. Somewhere next to the AU where our god-queen actually does the right thing and our friends can revel until dawn in peace and happiness again.

---

Yeah, this is what frustrates me to no end about Venat.

She watched her own friends and allies sit their and tear their hair out trying to find the root cause of the FD and said nothing.

If the game had shown us that she had done everything she could to warn people, but they didn't believe her, or something else made their preparations moot, then I don't think so many people would have a problem with the story. But again, everything has to serve that "it's actually natural and just that the Ancients crumbled" viewpoint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus

It doesn't. Not consistently.

There's plenty of plot points/sidestories that present trying to preserve or save something with standing tradition as unambiguously good or positive. Such as preserving the peace of Hingashi even after establishing that its government is corrupt as hell. Or maintaining the traditions of the Viis and the Ronka in the Greatwood.

---

Hence 'most'. :p

It conveniently almost always portray it as wrong or bad when the antagonists set out to preserve something. Whilst issue can be taken with the methods employed in such a venture, taking issue with the methods is more than enough justification for the protagonists to oppose it. Instead we get weird lectures about how the very same entities who suffered the most from a situation need to 'move on' or basically just roll over and die so that the entities who stand to benefit the most from the same circumstances can continue to prosper.

By portraying the struggle between the Unsundered and Sundered as a clash of like wills and two heroes shouldering the burden and future of their respective civilisations a healthy balance was struck back in Shadowbringers.

Most people would have been happy with the same stance continuing into Endwalker, I believe. Rather than everything being rewritten or obscured in a deceptive attempt to reframe opposition to genocide as 'not forging ahead'.

It's why I'm wary of the next storyline being a 'conflict of values'. I can't imagine how many arguments will break out if the game tries to portray everything the Scions desire as correct only to insist that we need to kill everyone who thinks differently to them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RyuDragnier

But wasn't the SAM storyline panned by the playerbase for that happening with Hingashi? I distinctly remember a LOT of players showing dislike of the 60-70 questline for doing that.

---

I enjoyed it. I don't want to eradicate any and all grit or flaws in a specific fantasy nation. It just takes away from the 'fantasy' for me and makes it all dull and boring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyborne

Even more strange since the Watcher, who was based off of a friend of Venat, says that there were Ancients who wanted to find the root cause of the Final Days, but it is left as one sentence. It's just annoying how we kept getting hints and snippets and fleeting fragments of a more complete story that isn't complete simpery, but is never delved into.

---

Perhaps this is more of a hint as to what Azem was doing during that time frame.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

Hence 'most'. :p

It conveniently almost always portray it as wrong or bad when the antagonists set out to preserve something.

---

Yeah. Because that "something" is usually something like "oppression" or "genocide" or some other system of power built on lies.

Non-invasive and non-oppressive forms of tradition are almost universally treated as either "fine" or positive, though. Which is, again, another reason Hingashi stands out as contradictory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus

Yeah. Because that "something" is usually something like "oppression" or "genocide" or some other system of power built on lies.

---

*Awkwardly stares at the Venat genocide that was hand waved from the story*
*Awkwardly stares at Ala Mingo not getting flak after they failed at forcefully taking Gridana*
*Awkwardly stares at Sil'Dah*
The game picks and chooses what atrocities it wants you to feel bad about, don't think too much about it. lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyborne

It's just strange how the """"unbiased"""" (according to the playerbase) Unending Codex just straight up erases the twelve people who wanted to stop the sacrifice, in line with the solo Venat-wank cutscene post-Elpis. Do the developers know that people have a memory and know that 5.2 happened? It was just puzzling since I wanted to see the perspective of these individuals... maybe have them be actually named. I suppose there is still a slight chance for this in the 24man story as it is meant to be an "epilogue" but I just don't know... they couldn't even really give us info about the full Convocation, and left 5 or so of them in the dust.

---

Even that is something I dread, because it'd just become more word vomit about her "love". Still hope they tie it to man's memory of the Convocation in some capacity or other, and don't link it to her.

You know the WoL really shouldn't have brought their friends back. They died, don't try to undo that, forge ahead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raoabolic

*Awkwardly stares at the Venat genocide that was hand waved from the story*

---

Sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raoabolic

*Awkwardly stares at Ala Mingo not getting flak after they failed at forcefully taking Gridana*

---

Pretty sure they established that this was why nobody wanted to help Gyr Abania after they were invaded by Garlemald, and why people hated Ala Mhigan refugees.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raoabolic

*Awkwardly stares at Sil'Dah*

---

Huh? They specifically portray those people as antagonistic or villainous. Nanamo's entire storyarc is about reclaiming her power from those people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raoabolic

The game picks and chooses what atrocities it wants you to feel bad about, don't think too much about it. lol

---

Thus why I said "inconsistent" in my first post. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xirean

You know the WoL really shouldn't have brought their friends back. They died, don't try to undo that, forge ahead.

---

They gave their lives so that our character could live past the worst of it. Bringing them back would be an insult to their sacrifice, right? I'm pretty sure I've heard that argument before somewhere...

Good thing we had that Deus ex Machina to fix everything so that we wouldn't have to struggle to regain what we'd lost or make it difficult to "forge ahead" or anything crazy like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus

Huh? They specifically portray those people as antagonistic or villainous. Nanamo's entire storyarc is about reclaiming her power from those people.

---

You must be thinking of something different here. Sil'dih was the sister neighbor of Ul'dah. It created a way of flood control which resulted in a war between it and Ul'dah over water, which Ul'dah ultimately won due to their thaumaturges creating a powder that brought the dead back to life as zombies, which they used on Sil'dih via catapults tossing it into the city. They then lied to the populace of Ul'dah that Sil'dih had been bringing back the dead, and used it as a preface for war, and then sealed Sil'dih so everybody would die.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raoabolic

*Awkwardly stares at the Venat genocide that was hand waved from the story*
*Awkwardly stares at Ala Mingo not getting flak after they failed at forcefully taking Gridana*
*Awkwardly stares at Sil'Dah*
The game picks and chooses what atrocities it wants you to feel bad about, don't think too much about it. lol

---

Yeah, it's why I'm not a fan of this game's obsession with trying to moralise everything - because it isn't prepared to follow through with it when and where it makes the protagonists and their allies look bad.

I really don't care about a lot of this stuff beyond the double standard. If I get a quest to go and kill some kobolds, I'll go and kill some kobolds. If you give me a quest to go and negotiate with some kobolds to try and form trade deals for ore, then I'll go and do that as well.

I just want a consistent approach. If the game presents something as 'unforgivable' and worthy of violent reform then I don't want it to then double down and say that the same thing is actually fine, so long as 'mommy' is the one partaking of it.

I also want variety in the sort of cultures and nations that we interact with. Just because some people dislike the idea of the monarchy as a concept, I'd rather we didn't do away with the concept of a monarchy everywhere just to push through some lazy copy and paste of real world modern day 'democracy'. Equally, I wouldn't want the likes of the Imperials to be removed from an Elder Scrolls game just because some people dislike the idea of an Empire.

I just want an interesting and complex game world to explore at the end of the day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RyuDragnier

You must be thinking of something different here. Sil'dih was the sister neighbor of Ul'dah. It created a way of flood control which resulted in a war between it and Ul'dah over water, which Ul'dah ultimately won due to their thaumaturges creating a powder that brought the dead back to life as zombies, which they used on Sil'dih via catapults tossing it into the city. They then lied to the populace of Ul'dah that Sil'dih had been bringing back the dead, and used it as a preface for war, and then sealed Sil'dih so everybody would die.

---

Ah, okay. I honestly forgot about Sil'dih.

Yeah, that seems to fit with FFXIV's history of "This was grossly unjust, but doing anything about it now would disturb the status quo. Sooooooo...."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

I just want a consistent approach. If the game presents something as 'unforgivable' and worthy of violent reform then I don't want it to then double down and say that the same thing is actually fine, so long as 'mommy' is the one partaking of it.

---

Then the game needs to start treating the WOL as a villain after taking certain actions. Even if we look at the case of the kobolds, a player character can go around and kill kobolds and then go on a diplomatic mission to make peace with the kobolds, and nobody is going to stop them.

If we want "consistency", then players need to be prepared to have the game stop coddling them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

I also want variety in the sort of cultures and nations that we interact with. Just because some people dislike the idea of the monarchy as a concept, I'd rather we didn't do away with the concept of a monarchy everywhere just to push through some lazy copy and paste of real world modern day 'democracy'. Equally, I wouldn't want the likes of the Imperials to be removed from an Elder Scrolls game just because some people dislike the idea of an Empire.

---

The game seems fairly neutral on concept of monarchy, to be honest. Nobody in-game is up in arms for Nanamo or Hien or Titania or the Moogle King to give up their thrones, and most countries that chose to forego monarchy did so for understandable reasons. Gyr Abania, Garlemald, and Eulmore all had literal tyrants that led their people to destruction. So it's not really surprising that they're not interested in putting another one on the throne.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

I also want variety in the sort of cultures and nations that we interact with. Just because some people dislike the idea of the monarchy as a concept, I'd rather we didn't do away with the concept of a monarchy everywhere just to push through some lazy copy and paste of real world modern day 'democracy'. Equally, I wouldn't want the likes of the Imperials to be removed from an Elder Scrolls game just because some people dislike the idea of an Empire.

I just want an interesting and complex game world to explore at the end of the day.

---

That's just a western problem. Personally, I wish we could have high fantasy stories that don't try to "teach a socially moral lesson" because all that does kneecap the writer from the get go. I guess at the end of the day the publishers will always call the shots over the devs so if the publishers want a bland story that caters to everyone over an engaging story that might not be for everyone then we will get the monetarily safe option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raoabolic

Personally, I wish we could have high fantasy stories that don't try to "teach a socially moral lesson" because all that does kneecap the writer from the get go.

---

I couldn't agree more.

Schrodinger's fans typically want it both ways. They want their stories to be deep and relevant so they can brag about how sophisticated they are for enjoying it. But at the same time, they want to be able to dismiss something as a game they can just kick back and enjoy with no brainpower when it makes a point they don't agree with.