Disappointed in one Endwalker Aspect [SPOILERS]

Venat being responsible for genocide isn't even up for debate for me. Knowing the future as she did, that the sundering would create the Ascians who would spend thousands of years trying to make the world whole again, she went into it knowing billions of people would die. I have thought from the beginning anyone who has a problem with rejoinings should have a problem with the sundering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vyrerus

What Venat could have done with all of the knowledge at her disposal was ask of her followers to be willingly Sundered individually in order to have the requisite low aetherial concentration in their form to receive of Dynamis, and then test through that to make a team of Meteion-killers who might even be able to manipulate Dynamis at will. The Ancients had far more knowledge of all things aetherial, and if she could build the moon ship, then I see no reason why she couldn't create something to build a ship equal or greater to the Ragnarok.

---

I mean we dont know what she tried before the Final Days happened. She at least managed to get some supporters. After the Final Days most of the planet was death. Only a few survived, so getting many people that would be willing to be sundered to face something at the edge of the universe would be hard. After all they need to be fighters (not every ancient is strong in that part) and withstand the utter despair of Meteions place. (And they would not be able to manipulate aether in their sundered forms anymore and its not like information about Dynamis was widespread) Even our group had a hard time. The only reason they were also able to beat her, was their experience with despair. I am not sure if any of the Ancients could truly answer any of the hard questions and doubts these death races posed.

And this of course is all only possible if they even get there.

If Venat had unlimited time then maybe they could have done it. But she had to work against the Zodiark supporters that planned another sacrifice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Venat being responsible for genocide isn't even up for debate for me. Knowing the future as she did, that the sundering would create the Ascians who would spend thousands of years trying to make the world whole again, she went into it knowing billions of people would die. I have thought from the beginning anyone who has a problem with rejoinings should have a problem with the sundering.

---

And if she had done nothing the Ascians would have sacrificed untold numbers of lifes to get their people back while the problem with Meteion remained and may have destroyed them later too (and nobody would even been able to be reborn because she bascially cages the souls inside her nest)

As long as we dont really know what exactly the sundering does we (imo) cant really compare it to the rejoining. After all it could simply be that they lost their creation magic and their long lifespan. Or they lost everything down to every single memory. We dont really know.

Rejoining next to that is pretty clear. The person dies.

So for me at least they are not the same. Does not meant that I think that the sundering is morally right but its not on the same step as rejoining, at least not with the missing information we have right now.

Honestly for me this story ending arc for Zodiark and Hydealyn was perfect. Both are bascially morally grey. Hydealyn had to do something bad, yet still loved her children deeply. Zodiark was created to stop the final days and saved the day but was then used by the Ascians as their god for their plan to regain what is gone by sacrifices. People wanted it to be more grey and yet of course Hydealyn must be evil now. If that is the case Zodiark is too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alleo

Honestly for me this story ending arc for Zodiark and Hydealyn was perfect. Both are bascially morally grey. Hydealyn had to do something bad, yet still loved her children deeply. Zodiark was created to stop the final days and saved the day but was then used by the Ascians as their god for their plan to regain what is gone by sacrifices. People wanted it to be more grey and yet of course Hydealyn must be evil now. If that is the case Zodiark is too.

---

If only they actually treated it this way and didn’t have venat/hydaelyn portrayed as a benevolent almighty divine goddess, with zodiark/elidibus barely regarded upon for their sacrifice and heroic acts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Venat being responsible for genocide isn't even up for debate for me. Knowing the future as she did, that the sundering would create the Ascians who would spend thousands of years trying to make the world whole again, she went into it knowing billions of people would die. I have thought from the beginning anyone who has a problem with rejoinings should have a problem with the sundering.

---

Honestly you guys projecting our moral values on the characters that do not work by them. Genocide in Ancient culture is no biggie. Maybe worth a little talk by watercooler in the office, no more.
We have been to Elpis the entire facility is there to decide whom Ancients allow to exist and whom they don't. Venat was no more or less moral or Ethical than Emet. They are both Ancients (wanton disregard for life) and Covocation members (god complex) and are more or less one another's equals.

The story choses based on characters who interact with them goals. Emets run counter so we ran HIM through. Venat was useful so we let her monologue longer before she croacked. Then we took her stuff and went to space.

The Bad Dynamis that infests this forum is cause the people refuse to accept stories messages. That is their right. What is not their right is pushing their views on the story. Thus the discussion of lore is then highjacked with Freedom vs survival, choice vs honor. or and personal value duel generating said Bad Dynamis. The question was Venat right to Sunder is not Lore question. its personal values one. Cause by lore it's Yes and case closed.

This is why Venat knowing the future is so problematic. Why make 13 reflections? Because the WoL said so? We know the WoL could interact with dynamis at 8x rejoined, so why the additional ones? Were they a buffer for the Ascians? Was the goal always to loop back to the WoL, in which case she knew 8 had to be condemned for that future to unfold?

I'm sure I've said before that Venat's actions turned out to be more antagonistic than I ever expected. She was in a better moral position for me in ShB than she ended up being in EW. The sundering being both intentional and done with full knowledge of future was too much to accept. The only thing that makes her morally grey is the narrative bending over backwards to justify it. I don't care how good a person she was, what she did was inexcusable and is more similar to the villains in the game than the heroes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

If only they actually treated it this way and didn’t have venat/hydaelyn portrayed as a benevolent almighty divine goddess, with zodiark/elidibus barely regarded upon for their sacrifice and heroic acts.

---

Both Emet and Elidibus got their time to shine (the first more than the latter) in Shadowbringers. It was after that Expansion more people started to post that they wanted to join the Ascians and that Hydealyn must be bad. Even Yoshida had to comment in an interview that the players should wait with their judgement until they have heard the other side. On this very forum alone someone like me, that still was on the side that Hydealyn was good and did not plan to betray us, was called tempered. Heck there was this very argument that our WoL itself must have been tempered, regardless that arguments against that claim existed.

So yes for me this was a very good outcome. We got to fight her, she is gone now, she had to make some horrible choices and yet at the end she did it out of love and not some evil masterplan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

This is why Venat knowing the future is so problematic. Why make 13 reflections? Because the WoL said so? We know the WoL could interact with dynamis at 8x rejoined, so why the additional ones? Were they a buffer for the Ascians? Was the goal always to loop back to the WoL, in which case she knew 8 had to be condemned for that future to unfold?

---

We might never know. Maybe its just because the numbers means something in the Ancient world or its about the elements themselves, maybe its because of the WoL. Maybe even the writers never thought what Venat would have thought and only used the 14 because it fits because we play FF14.

In the end the time between Elpis and the Final Days are mostly speculation. We now some small points thanks to Shadowbringers and a bit thanks to that scene after we go back into our time but the rest is up for interpretation. Which is why I find it very hard to say that she should have done it different and things like that. We simply dont know if she didnt try it. Maybe 100 years passed between Elpis and the end and she used every second to find a different solution, after all she herself says that they cant know if the future will come to pass until its here. Maybe she only walked the path towards our future and barely tried anything at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alleo

Both Emet and Elidibus got their time to shine (the first more than the latter) in Shadowbringers. It was after that Expansion more people started to post that they wanted to join the Ascians and that Hydealyn must be bad. Even Yoshida had to comment in an interview that the players should wait with their judgement until they have heard the other side. On this very forum alone someone like me, that still was on the side that Hydealyn was good and did not plan to betray us, was called tempered. Heck there was this very argument that our WoL itself must have been tempered, regardless that arguments against that claim existed.

So yes for me this was a very good outcome. We got to fight her, she is gone now, she had to make some horrible choices and yet at the end she did it out of love and not some evil masterplan.

---

It’s not about time to shine though, it’s about how it’s portrayed. Elidibus hardly got his time to shine anyhow if we compare to Venat who got an entire arc and then some with her trial. Disregarding that though, there’s a very clear bias in regards to her vs Zodiark and Elidibus. She is treated as a benevolent deity in game, regarded as a hero etc, whereas Zodiark and Elidibus are hardly mentioned for what they did, aka if it wasn’t for either of them we literally would be dead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

I hate that I've had to pull this out multiple times: The actual definition of genocide is not 'killing an entire population'. That is a common misconception.

If you really want to argue her to be guilty of genocide, here's the definition of genocide, as per the United Nations:

---

I struggle to understand how every part of that definition doesn't apply to what Venat did to the Ancients. She intended to destroy their society and did so knowing that their race would die out by her actions - She intentionally destroyed them nationally, ethnically, racially, and definitely religiously. She killed members of them, caused them great bodily and mental harm, specifically instituted conditions of life to destroy their ideals through suffering, and literally split them up into a bunch of new separate races leading their old race to become extinct. Now, the UN definition is something of a wide net, but she certainly meets every single point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

It’s not about time to shine though, it’s about how it’s portrayed. Elidibus hardly got his time to shine anyhow if we compare to Venat who got an entire arc and then some with her trial. Disregarding that though, there’s a very clear bias in regards to her vs Zodiark and Elidibus. She is treated as a benevolent deity in game, regarded as a hero etc, whereas Zodiark and Elidibus are hardly mentioned for what they did, aka if it wasn’t for either of them we literally would be dead.

---

Because in the end the Ascians would still be the enemies (since they basically want to destroy the shards) and Hydealyn would still be the one that is on our side to stop that. But SE could have easily let the Ascians still be the ones they were in ARR. They all could have been Lahabreas. Instead they used their time to make them, especially Emet, sympathetic in a way.

SE could have also easily made Hydealyn a purely good character, yet they even have her tell us that her actions were not kind. They could have said that the sundering was not her intention but intead they showed her conviction to do that in that one scene.

And about Elidibus and Zodiark: Well it would be the Ancients that would be dead without their actions. The one that fights for us is Hydealyn, so of course she would be seen in a more benevolent light than the ones that dont even see us as living beings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alleo

Because in the end the Ascians would still be the enemies (since they basically want to destroy the shards) and Hydealyn would still be the one that is on our side to stop that. But SE could have easily let the Ascians still be the ones they were in ARR. They all could have been Lahabreas. Instead they used their time to make them, especially Emet, sympathetic in a way.

SE could have also easily made Hydealyn a purely good character, yet they even have her tell us that her actions were not kind. They could have said that the sundering was not her intention but intead they showed her conviction to do that in that one scene.

And about Elidibus and Zodiark: Well it would be the Ancients that would be dead without their actions. The one that fights for us is Hydealyn, so of course she would be seen in a more benevolent light than the ones that dont even see us as living beings.

---

No, we would be dead were it not for Elidibus sacrificing himself to help us time travel. We would be dead were it not for Zodiark shielding us from Meteion. The fact is they constantly talk about how the story isn’t black and white and both sides are morally grey yet they paint one side far better than the other and don’t give the opposing side the credit it’s due.