Erozea too much?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WyrahFhurrst

You're both wrong, actually. Eorzea is not a continent or subcontinent. It's a nation, like France or Germany, on the continent Aldenard.

---

If by nation you mean classical nation (from the root "to be born"), referring to a common identity ... kind of, yeah. Many attempts have been made to stitch Eorzean cultures together with the few things that unite them - faith in Twelve, a shared history, and (after the Autumn War), a currency. But I wouldn't say the city-states are so integrated as to call them a nation (especially in the "it's a a country" sense).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cilia

It's like the Greek polis setup with less infighting.

---

This is actually how the team described it pre-launch.

Eorzea is heavily based on Ancient Greece (from the city-states to the twelve gods). They actually have a long history of infighting, as well, but Eorzea is based more on the time leading up to the Persian invasion (except here it's the Garleans, who are based on Romans); there's an uneasy peace and sense of cooperation, but they don't necessarily get along all that well left to their own devices, even today.

The cities themselves aren't really based on Greece, though. If I remember right, the trio was supposed to be "something like Venice (marine capital; Limsa), something like Palmyra (trade oasis; Ul'dah), something Mayan (forest nation; Gridania)", sans the cultures themselves. Gridania eventually became something more like a Japanese polis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atoli

...anyone else thought this thread was gonna be about how there is too much oversexualization in EROzea? :x

---

E-R-P-D! GET ON THE GR-... G-GET OFF THE GR-... GET OUTTA MY HOUSE!

Eorzea is an "idea". It refers to the cultural region that, as observed by others here, comprises most parts of the continent of Aldenard and its outlying islands.

It's like how Europe is also an "idea", one that refers to a particular corner of the Eurasian landmass.

The borders of "Europe" have never been properly defined. The name itself came from a figure in Greek mythology, a Phoenician princess who later became the mother of King Minos of Crete. And, in the earliest days, "Europe" used to refer to just a tiny corner of the Balkans.

Long after the Romans conquered all the lands west of the Rhine, "Europe" came to define the Christian half of the western empire. Yet, despite their shared Christian identity, the peoples of "Europe" never remained united for long. Through the centuries, they were divided along ethnic, language and religious lines.

But despite all these divisions, the idea of a united "Europe" has always persisted. Today, it finds expression through the European Union project. In that endeavour, "Europe" has become something more than a historical memory of a long-gone Christian empire: It's supposed to be a bulwark of western democracies united against countries outside Europe that supposedly aren't as democratic?

Now, if you'd replace the instances of "Europe" in this spiel with Eorzea, the Roman Empire with the Allagan Empire, and Christianity with the worship of The Twelve.

Would that help give you a better grasp of the concept of "Eorzea"?

No? Well, don't worry. Real-life Europeans, in modern times and antiquity, can't quite seem to agree, even today, what "Europe" actually is, either. :p

"Divine seeds were ever wont to quicken in Eorzea's fertile soil."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

No? Well, don't worry. Real-life Europeans, in modern times and antiquity, can't quite seem to agree, even today, what "Europe" actually is, either. :p

---

On that note, I'd actually say that Eozrea is partially based on the 18th Century-19th Century political/diplomatic conception of Europe that considered the Ottoman Empire as part of it, hence Ul'Dah (though I suppose you can hit even further back to the High Middle Ages and Muslim Iberia, but Ul'Dah just looks more Turkish than Moorish to me).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FJerome

On that note, I'd actually say that Eozrea is partially based on the 18th Century-19th Century political/diplomatic conception of Europe that considered the Ottoman Empire as part of it, hence Ul'Dah.

---

I was in the middle of going into more details about how the European nation-states of that era are fundamentally different from the city-states of Eorzea when I stopped myself.

The simpler answer, really, is that Eorzea — as it's presented to us — is flexible enough of a concept to compared to any number of analogous points in real-world history.

I've mentioned before that, back in version 1.0, Eorzea seemed much more like an open frontier of endless possibilties. The city-states represented different ideologies, and drew in adventurers and settlers from all other parts of the world, eager to exploit the aether-rich resources of the land.

The gameplay back in version 1.0 seemed to imply this. Before Yoshida and crew stepped in, you, the player-adventuer, was just one out of many other new immigrants to Eorzea (albeit with the unique gift of the Echo). And the story back then allowed you to be the "main hero", regardless of your chosen profession.

You could be a master culinarian, and still expect to "win" an encounter against a primal (you'd talk your way to victory). There seemed to be the expectation that Disciples of the Land and Hand would work together with Disciples of War and Magic to delve into new lands, extract the resources, and build a player economy around them.

In other words, something like EVE Online, but based on a Final Fantasy mythos.

Back then, it seemed to me that the city-states resembled European colonial powers carving out new territories, while leaving the native beastmen tribes with the raw end of the deal (just like how real-world Africa was subjugated by imperial powers).

And in Eorzea, just like in the real world, the native peoples began to push back against the injustice. The beastmen tribes turned to summoning, while in the real world, threatened natives fought hopeless wars that led to the near extinction or real extinction of their tribes.

And amid this all, you had Minfilia's Path of the Twelve, a quasi-religious organisation that heavily reminded me of the real-world Freemasons.

Eorzea, post-Calamity, is not just physically and mechanically a very different world, but also a different world, metaphorically. To me, it no longer has that theme of frontier exploration and development. The possible issues are no longer as nebulous and wide open, and are more focused on Ascian/Allagan/Garlean shenanigans, while the city-states try to rebuild and regroup.

So, to go back to the OP's original question — about whether the main storylines from ARR and Heavensward are a bit too ethnocentric — at the expense of exploring events in other parts of Hydaelyn, I think he's got a good point.

Under the new team, we finally got to see Ishgard and, pretty soon, Xelphatol and beyond. We also see far more of the Garlean Empire, and we now know a bit more about the lands beyond Eorzea. In a way, we know more. But, at the same time, because of the way the storylines are structured — along a more linear path — I can't help but feel the world is also smaller as a result.

Eh. Not sure if I made sense. Anyway, I ended up typing way too much again. I'll chalk it up to things I do while waiting for a new patch to land. :p