/r/ffxivdiscussion: Has FFXIV had any major retcons or plot holes in the story?

I don't think its meant to be anything more than just the personification and the equivalent of: The present day we live in is built on the bones, the death, and the suffering of the past.

As the scions and other npcs seem very fond of the phrase: “For those we have lost. For those we can yet save.” Which would be acknowledging trying to make a change for the better in spite of what has happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

I have already addressed this misconception and misdirection many times in previous posts, such as here:

---

In my very first post ITT I made it clear I'm aware of how XIV utilizes time travel differently across various instances, but there's literally no indication that the Elpis visit either is an alternate timeline, or results in an alternate timeline.

Also I'm sorry, how did Venat sabotage Zodiark unfairly exactly? Can you explain this? The sundering is just an attack. If Zodiark was strong, he theoretically would have offset it. What prevented him from doing that? Did she sneak up behind him?

And I'm not policing-- you're wording just doesn't describe the scene. Who exactly is gushing? Can you cite some dialogue? The Scions question her and then kill her. That's what happens. She gushes over them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

You did not answer my earlier question relating to Pandaemonium. Have you completed that raid series yet? It is, in turn, another example of the player character going back in time and altering things which dispels the belief that venturing to Elpis would be a one time only affair or that the presence of the player character would not result in meaningful change.

---

I did the raid and the only thing I can think of that you may be referring to is the appearance of the dungeon in the present time? Otherwise I am not sure. I wouldn't say that's meaningful change. That's just change. By definition it's a side story, not a major plot point of the game. Also on the subject of Athena, she's basically just a crazy ahole, a shock figure. There's nothing tragic or complicated about her at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lady_Silvermoon

This right here is my issue. "What's wrong with survival of the fittest."

The morals of Endwalker corrupts the morals of its playerbase. If you don't understand why it's wrong to wipe out a people and replace it with a "superior" people, then maybe FF14 should stop trying to teach morality as they are doing a terrible job at it.
.

---

But as I've already pointed out, that if you subscribe to the theory that she not only has foreknowledge (because of WoL) and agency (because Elidibus is a liar), this means that despite just meeting the WoL and being relayed the state of existence today, that it's somehow more right to doom the future. This, sadly, makes your claims to being an empath deader than a door nail. You are not empathetic, you are just someone who wanted Zodiark to win, for some unknown reason.

Which, btw, I'm fine with people wanting Zodiark to win. But it's like, just be honest. I also wonder-- let's say in reality Venat is our creator and you meet her and you have to contend with this situation. I don't understand your position. You're averse to the fittest surviving, so is the answer for humanity to elect to self terminate? You want to literally destroy the timeline of all human history, because ancient peoples had a rough time and an unfair ending*?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chasingstars

I don't think its meant to be anything more than just the personification and the equivalent of: The present day we live in is built on the bones, the death, and the suffering of the past.

As the scions and other npcs seem very fond of the phrase: “For those we have lost. For those we can yet save.” Which would be acknowledging trying to make a change for the better in spite of what has happened.

---

If only that death and suffering hadn't been inflicted on us ON PURPOSE to toughen us up and if only that "can yet" didn't become fuzzy as hell with the regular use of time travel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turtledeluxe

But as I've already pointed out, that if you subscribe to the theory that she not only has foreknowledge (because of WoL) and agency (because Elidibus is a liar), this means that despite just meeting the WoL and being relayed the state of existence today, that it's somehow more right to doom the future. This, sadly, makes your claims to being an empath deader than a door nail. You are not empathetic, you are just someone who wanted Zodiark to win, for some unknown reason.

---

I've already explained I don't think Elidibus is a liar, but he didn't even know we'd be able to interact with the past and it was our interaction with the past that causes the Sundering. And also, there is a difference between doing everything in your power and failing and doing everything in your power to wipe out your people. Venat did the latter, so that makes her a bad person even if she thought she was doing good. But since you're ignoring everything I'm saying and just deciding I want Zodiark to win. I'm gonna give up now. Have a nice life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lady_Silvermoon

I've already explained I don't think Elidibus is a liar, but he didn't even know we'd be able to interact with the past and it was our interaction with the past that causes the Sundering. And also, there is a difference between doing everything in your power and failing and doing everything in your power to wipe out your people. Venat did the latter, so that makes her a bad person even if she thought she was doing good. But since you're ignoring everything I'm saying and just deciding I want Zodiark to win. I'm gonna give up now. Have a nice life.

---

If Elidibus didn't know that, I see no reason why it was written into this key moment of the story. To be deliberately misleading? Then the writing really is as bad as you say. What is the point of establishing a major, story determining rule of causality if characters could just be wrong within exactly 5 minutes of them establishing it? If you dismiss what he says, for any reason, you are correct that you have to make up the reasons for yourself why the timeline went exactly the same, and that includes Venat being utterly bizarrely obsessed with playing her exact role as described. I think what you're giving up on, is defending that, and I understand.

Because, to be clear, why would anyone ever write a story about that? What are we supposed to be taking from a story about someone who was told the future, and then didn't heed the warning whatsoever? The writers wanted to create an all time incompetent, negligent, and selfish character? I'd be frustrated as well because I don't understand what purpose that sort of story serves. Unless we are saying the writers unintentionally wrote the character this way, in which case is the problem Venat or is it the writers being ineffective? Because how can writers write the story admonishing her if they don't understand what they wrote in the first place? That's contradictory.

And I'm fully expecting someone to say the writers could have done more, after all they wrote the random omega line where he asks who was justified. Aside from killing her off yourself, I'm unsure you're going to get any more than that. How much time and narrative are they supposed to spend correcting this alleged corrupted Venat they inadvertently wrote?

We have come full circle to my very first post that everyone argued with me over. The writing created problems that do not need to exist, and make the Ancient story even less worth moralizing over than it already is as a story about perfect god like humans. You have to point to other areas of the story like with Graha when it isn't clear that time travel is working the same way here. Even if you do connect some dots, there's no consistent and definitive interpretation of the EW story as too much of it is left ambiguous . This is literally what my post says (other than the moralizing) so why is this 14 pages.

Reminder this game story is pure fiction and should at no point be taken seriously ever!! It is also not in anyway shape or form a educational program. If you believe this game is trying to teach right from wrong then ya got more issues then the story does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NanaWiloh

Reminder this game story is pure fiction and should at no point be taken seriously ever!! It is also not in anyway shape or form a educational program. If you believe this game is trying to teach right from wrong then ya got more issues then the story does.

---

It's just a game. Stories don't teach morals. But if they did, Venat was right to kill the babies because had she not killed them, then they would have never existed to live short lives and die horribly. And also, you just want a being you met once when you killed him in a trial to win, who by the way, ate babies and that's why Venat had to kill them first, so Zodiark wouldn't eat them.

At this point I can't help but wonder if I'm arguing with the people who wrote this mess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lady_Silvermoon

If only that death and suffering hadn't been inflicted on us ON PURPOSE to toughen us up and if only that "can yet" didn't become fuzzy as hell with the regular use of time travel.

---

Its not fuzzy. Its: "Stop thinking about what happened in the equivalent of ancient egypt and its atrocities. Go and help that person trapped in a building that is currently burning right now."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lady_Silvermoon

It's just a game. Stories don't teach morals. But if they did, Venat was right to kill the babies because had she not killed them, then they would have never existed to live short lives and die horribly. And also, you just want a being you met once when you killed him in a trial to win, who by the way, ate babies and that's why Venat had to kill them first, so Zodiark wouldn't eat them.

At this point I can't help but wonder if I'm arguing with the people who wrote this mess.

---

Did not write it nor do I work for SE. But moral conflict exists in stories just has it does in life.

Praetorium probably biggest retcon to fit current story, Hydaelyn does more in new version than did in original & the WoL actually gets killed or near death state by Laha & revived by Hydaelyn which leads to my WoL havign a different canon to new WoLs as my WoL never got killed/near-killed by Laha & whooped him so hard he didn't even realise he was dead as he stayed at 0.1% for his speech to play out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord_Umbra

Hydaelyn does more in new version than did in original

---

Not really true. That stuff did happen, it was just ignored or skipped. They made is so the fight actually takes a long time and brought the mechanics in line with modern dungeon design, but the mechanics did actually happen. In the original version, she had 4 interventions in the first fight and then speaks again at the end while it's doing the ultima cast. She still speaks those lines during the ultima cast.

Quote:

---

my WoL never got killed/near-killed by Laha & whooped him so hard he didn't even realise he was dead as he stayed at 0.1% for his speech to play out.

---

Obviously a big part of that was gear and battle system changes. You can see old videos where these fights actually do significant damage to the party.

But I know the fights feel different due to how badly our gear skipped them before.