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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nayukhuut

I liked that too. They didn't agree with either plan, and went off to do whatever they wanted to do. Logically I know it is because the writing staff is leaving it vague on purpose, but I appreciate that I can at least pretend Azem was out there trying to save their people until the last second. It's what I would have done in that situation. Heck, it is what I wanted to do at the end of Elpis.

---

Same here. My character frankly is pretty angry with Venat's decisions (although MSQ obviously wouldn't allow to show that, but who cares, it's my character, I know what he'd think, say and do in such a situation).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Halivel

Same here. My character frankly is pretty angry with Venat's decisions (although MSQ obviously wouldn't allow to show that, but who cares, it's my character, I know what he'd think, say and do in such a situation).

---

Blink twice if you are forced to aggree with Venat by the shadow Sharlayan government

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BRVV

Blink twice if you are forced to aggree with Venat by the shadow Sharlayan government

---

*blinks aggressively*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Halivel

Same here. My character frankly is pretty angry with Venat's decisions (although MSQ obviously wouldn't allow to show that, but who cares, it's my character, I know what he'd think, say and do in such a situation).

---

Agreed. I have basically just internalised that my character is playing nice for appearances sake, but inwardly is set in stone with his resolve to make it so another Venat never comes to pass.

That or I just go with a personal headcannon of us having been Tempered by Venat, since it is the only thing that really makes our outward actions make sense. Game likes to shut that one down, but it would absolutely explain why us and the Scions are okay with Venat doing things we would be horrified to see any other character do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BRVV

Blink twice if you are forced to aggree with Venat by the shadow Sharlayan government

---

Sadly the mask I wear obscures it, but I am indeed blinking twice. :P :)

Really sad part is that we are basically the shadow government at this point. Way more story beats than I would like have ended with our group saying we can never tell the world because of their own good and this has to be kept a secret.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Absimiliard

Good being good and evil being evil are by and far the norms in modern storytelling. Rarely do we see stories acknowledge the hero could just as easily have been a villain were it not for the story being told from their perspective/side.

---

We...must be watching very different media.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

We...must be watching very different media.

---

He's not wrong tho. We can occasionally get morally grey villains or supporting characters, but a morally grey protagonist is a rarity. How many times WoL was directly called out for all the atrocities they've commited over the course of the story? Once, by Varis during negotiations in Werlyt. Twice if you count "In the Cold" and the conversation we have with Fandaniel afterwards.

Emet-Selch was scrutinized for being ready to sacrifice the Source and its reflections in order to save his own world (not without reason), and then Venat was praised for doing the exact same thing because she was "a goodie" (she's not. She's just as morally grey if not worse in some aspects, the difference is that she happens to be on our side of the conflict, and the narrative excuses her actions as result of that. While the intention was obviously to make her a 100% positive character, she absolutely isn't when you actually stop for a second to think about just what she did).

Point being: it's not uncommon to see morally grey characters, that is true. The thing is, the vast majority of them are portrayed as villains. And when the same actions are commited by protagonists, more often than not you'll see them being presented as a necessarily sacrifice that they will be praised for. I've no idea what's currently going on in the sector of heroic movies since I don't like neither DC nor Marvel and don't watch them, but when it comes to games and manga - the main character and his company being directly called out of the horrors they commit is not as commonplace as you might think it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Halivel

He's not wrong tho. We can occasionally get morally grey villains or supporting characters, but a morally grey protagonist is a rarity. How many times WoL was directly called out for all the atrocities they've commited over the course of the story? Once, by Varis during negotiations in Werlyt. Twice if you count "In the Cold" and the conversation we have with Fandaniel afterwards.

Emet-Selch was scrutinized for being ready to sacrifice the Source and its reflections in order to save his own world (not without reason), and then Venat was praised for doing the exact same thing because she was "a goodie" (she's not. She's just as morally grey if not worse in some aspects, the difference is that she happens to be on our side of the conflict, and the narrative excuses her actions as result of that. While the intention was obviously to make her a 100% positive character, she absolutely isn't when you actually stop for a second to think about just what she did).

Point being: it's not uncommon to see morally grey characters, that is true. The thing is, the vast majority of them are portrayed as villains. And when the same actions are commited by protagonists, more often than not you'll see them being presented as a necessarily sacrifice that they will be praised for. I've no idea what's currently going on in the sector of heroic movies since I don't like neither DC nor Marvel and don't watch them, but when it comes to games and manga - the main character and his company being directly called out of the horrors they commit is not as commonplace as you might think it is.

---

Thanos is from Marvel and his movie motivation, which is vastly different to his original marvel comic motivation, is written morally grey. And that's the antagonist for the climax villain of the entire good era of the MCU. In that same era there was also a whole movie about an internal struggle with the heroes because one of them refused to antagonize his brainwashed close friend even at the cost of having to cause collateral damage. So IDK what Renathras watches either. Maybe he only knows 90s era Disney villains.

Not to mention the first two Avengers movies had the heroes needing to learn to set aside their differences to fight the antagonist. Which at the time was getting old, but it certainly beats how Scions act.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Halivel

He's not wrong tho. We can occasionally get morally grey villains or supporting characters, but a morally grey protagonist is a rarity.

---

Off the top of my head:

Deadpool
Punisher
Venom (in some incarnations)
Ben Solo (we all knew it was coming)
Emet-Selch (and arguably all the Ascians other than maybe Fandaniel) - and he WAS treated as morally gray and not outright condemned (the climax of the story we make peace with him; then do again an expansion later)
Batman (yes, he doesn't kill, but part of his character is that he doesn't stand on the light side of the law)
A good chunk of the Marvel cast after The Snap, and half of them after Winter Soldier
Vegeta
Terminator (in T2 and T3)
Benjamin Sisko (DS9) - honestly, most of the Star Trek captains other than Picard.
Thanos himself was portrayed as "maybe he's right, but we don't like it", just like Emet.

That's just off the top of my head without actually thinking. I can easily expand this list.

Morally gray characters are more commonplace now than "true good" characters are. I can't really think of any true good main characters these days. Most are faulty in various ways, even if they're overall benevolent, and many of them come from older stories before the "subverting expectations" cliche became common, like the LotR characters (though even many of those outside of the core cast were not "true good", such as Boramir) which are from a book series written 60-80 years ago.

I do agree that a lot are anti-heroes, but quite a few are not and are the main characters and not portrayed as villains. Batman is often treated as more good than Superman, even, despite being on the shady side of things, and the moral heart of the Justice League. And many of the villains, like Emet, have their motivations explored to kind of give them a "maybe they're wrong, but they're wrong for the right reasons/circumstance and things that happened to them shaped them into what they were."

Honestly, Venat is in the Emet boat of "imperfect being trying to do what's right and choose the best of all bad options".

.

I think it's more common than you think. But it's common enough it's become the expectation rather than subverting it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

Off the top of my head:

Deadpool
Punisher
Venom (in some incarnations)
Ben Solo (we all knew it was coming)
Emet-Selch (and arguably all the Ascians other than maybe Fandaniel) - and he WAS treated as morally gray and not outright condemned (the climax of the story we make peace with him; then do again an expansion later)
Batman (yes, he doesn't kill, but part of his character is that he doesn't stand on the light side of the law)
A good chunk of the Marvel cast after The Snap, and half of them after Winter Soldier
Vegeta
Terminator (in T2 and T3)
Benjamin Sisko (DS9) - honestly, most of the Star Trek captains other than Picard.
Thanos himself was portrayed as "maybe he's right, but we don't like it", just like Emet.

---

- Deadpool is nine times out of ten shown doing the right thing, and he'll probably get a pass when he doesn't if it's in one of his own comics.
- The Punisher is very much on the dark side of that scale in most stories, and his actions are addressed as such despite all the good they do. He's just a psychopath that preys on its own.
- Venom has fluctuated between anti-hero and villain for his entire existence, but his actions are nearly always portrayed as evil regardless of the potential benefits they may have.
- Ben Solo was well aware what he was doing was wrong but chose to keep doing it anyway. He butchered loads of innocent people. He then proceeded to get a pass after his five-minute redemption arc.
- Emet-Selch is condemned repeatedly in-universe for his actions. I do tend agree with the assessment of him falling under the umbrella of people who tried to make the best of a crap situation even if the story doesn't really try to paint him in that light.
- Batman is treated in-universe as a force of good nine times out of ten. Additionally, I would note lawful and good are not the same thing. One need not operate within the law to be a force for good.
- Most of Marvel's heroic cast were left broken after failing to prevent the snap, but they very much stuck to their roots. Only two of them really went off the rails, and both wound up getting back in line by the end.
- Vegeta is a genuinely good person, husband, and father by the time of Super. He is everything a fair portion of the fandom mistakenly believes Goku's selfish ass to be. His journey from one side of the spectrum to the other was fantastic.
- T2's T-800's complete lack of morality is called out infrequently, and we see it gradually become more human through its interactions with John. None the less, within the context of that franchise it is considered a purely heroic figure. I would also note the T-800 is not in fact the protagonist of Terminator 2; John Connor is.
- T3's T-850 never really overcomes its programming. Everything it does, from avoiding civilian casualties to protecting John and Katherine, is a result of its defined mission parameters. It would have been perfectly willing to mass slaughter random bystanders if that had somehow been required for the mission. The story treats it as a heroic figure. As with the prior example, the terminator was not the movie's protagonist. That role was again John Connor's.
- Thanos only received the benefit of the "maybe he's got a point" half this equation. Both versions of him were treated purely as villainous by the story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Millybonk

[LIST][*]The mighty Zodiark

---

Were you even paying attention? His summoning wasn't complete. I've never heard a single person complain about going to the moon or the trial. Not sure what you mean by filler trash aside from your post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Millybonk

of the Final Days is a pet-project from an ancient which goes mad after observing countless dead world and possibly causing the death of several world by projecting negative emotions unto them, and is thus dead-set on bringing despair to every world, upon which said ancient goes mad and is now letting her run her course to test humanity if they can withstand/fight despair

---

Umm there's no projecting but everything else you said is right. And?? Is this account your main?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Millybonk

[*]Venat, who hasn't had her memory wiped + still remembers you from being in Elpis, quite apparently doesn't lift a finger to learn about Dynamis herself or to mobilize the other ancients to end Meteion then and there, and instead chooses to turn herself into Hydaelyn, sunder the world and the inhabitants, thereby forcing them to live with and face despair and gambling that their resilience against despair might be enough to face Meteion one day

---

Why would anyone believe Venat's story with zero evidence...? You're saying she would have successfully convinced everyone and also found a solution in time? That's incredibly doubtful and unbelievable. Secondly she had no choice but to sunder the world, that was the whole point. Did you fall asleep during the sequence where she explains (as though she did not anticipate) the world she created contained mire and plague? It wasn't some kind of test. She told Zodiark's followers off but that doesn't make it some grand scheme or test. Venat couldn't even imagine what was going to happen...that was the entire point.

How is this thread still ongoing?

Also there are reasons to dislike the story but nothing in this post makes a credible argument other than "I wasn't paying attention" or 'It was filler".

Venat isn't really making the best of a bad situation, she's the reason the situation escalated in the first place. Hermes may be responsible for Meteion, yet Venat was the one who deliberately stood by with knowledge of the problem and refused to speak up and then when her people sought a credible solution she wiped them out through a deliberate act of genocide, eugenics and racial replacement. Furthermore, she deliberately spared Emet-Selch due to the Ascians playing into her plans - essentially putting all of their actions upon her shoulders as well.

If it were the Sundered who were set to be the target of Venat's actions then she would would be considered an outright villain with an insane, flawed plan. Both the game and many Venat enthusiasts (when they're not resorting to insults or calling for anyone critical of her to be banned, sexually assaulted or killed...) insist that her way was the only way despite there being absolutely no evidence of that being the case. It's a ridiculously convoluted plan that only worked due her eventually opening her mouth and telling the Warrior of Light and the Scions what the root of the problem actually was - something she very easily could have done back in the Unsundered world by not acting as a saboteur.

More than anything, though, the game insisted for over a decade that acts of genocide were never acceptable no matter how complex or sympathetic the reasoning behind them happened to be. For it to suddenly be something worthy of praise on the basis of it indirectly benefiting the 'good guys' simply shows that the game's protagonists don't actually have consistent morals.

At the very least, I think that we should have witnessed something like this from some of the Scions:

https://i.imgur.com/24fbmRp.jpg

We're supposedly going to see the Scions be divided over something tied to Tural during Dawntrail though I doubt it'll be anything nearly as heavy as the Sundering so it'll likely just be performative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

snip

---

Its most likely because Venat realized the hope and potential of the future of mankind through the experiences the WoL shared with her that pushed her decision to sunder the world.

This is how I saw it at least. Also the sundering was the reason for why the current world exists and Hydaelyn wasnt trying to actively destroy it so of course naturally people would be on her side against the Ascians whom are trying to destroy our world (although Ardbert and his friends were being incredibly stupid for some reason for trusting the Ascians even though it was because of them that almost caused the destruction of their world)

This conflict was also part of the theme in Shadowbringers too with Emet and the Scions fighting for which of them had the right to live.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

Venat isn't really making the best of a bad situation, she's the reason the situation escalated in the first place. Hermes may be responsible for Meteion, yet Venat was the one who deliberately stood by with knowledge of the problem and refused to speak up and then when her people sought a credible solution she wiped them out through a deliberate act of genocide, eugenics and racial replacement. Furthermore, she deliberately spared Emet-Selch due to the Ascians playing into her plans - essentially putting all of their actions upon her shoulders as well.

---

I'm going to second on this.

And to clarify, I don't even dislike Venat. I think she's an interesting character. But in no way she was in a position where she had no choice.

If I were to tell what course of action would've led to there being no other choice while making her closer to that "100% good" person that she was intended to be: she should've presented Ancients the key information they lacked, they should've tried all their possible options while knowing what they're dealing with and only then, if they still failed to fight off Endsinger, they should've used sundering as a temporary solution. The Convocation knowing why it was needed to be done also would've entirely prevented any need for rejoinings, avoiding billions of unneccessary deaths and probably sparing Ascians' crumbling mental health as well.

Instead Venat decided to play the role of a New World's Mommy. How very noble of her. And then Scions and WoL fall into the trap of Sharlayans' Forum tendency to hide things after promising Emet-Selch to remember them on top of that. If I were to be Emet, I would've punched the entire group in the face once more. I wish my WoL could've done just that narratively, but alas, we aren't given the luxury of free will in the canon.

Narratively we understand that they wouldn't want to change the timeline since we have the entire 13th, 1st and 8 times rejoined Source thing, but from character portrayal perspective this is what could fully redeem Venat as a positive figure in the story. Alas, what done is done.



As for Scions being separated in 7.0, I'm fairly sure it's for some kind of test or contest, so probably no real conflict among them intended.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

As for Yoshi-P's answers during various Q&A sessions, I do think it's unfortunate that he's telling people to go with their headcanon since the game is so far removed from the idea of giving the player any real agency. I would have loved for the Warrior of Light to want to learn more about the Ancient world and even be saddened and nostalgic towards Amaurot. Instead our character never once really pushes back against Venat to point out how messed up it is to deliberately inflict genocide upon one's own species and then replace them with something altogether different.

It's why I simply laugh whenever the game tries to insist that Venat is a 'good person'. She really isn't. Our character saw Emet-Selch's recreation of the Final Days and then later went back in time - repeatedly - to directly interact with numerous Ancients. All of which proved to be very friendly and even showed kindness towards what they saw as 'Azem's Familiar'. It's pretty weird that the game expects me to be fine with the player character doubling down on the abandonment of the Ancients to a grisly fate knowing that they'll be holding the broken remains of their loved ones."[/I]

---

That's really the problem.

Because they Retconned the story so bad, they had to change it so far outside of it's intended path it's not even recognizable. You can see it when you go back and play "NEW GAME+".

The Ascians were supposed to be the Voidsent, the ancient ones of the dark world. Kinda like Zero. They were the bad guys you were fighting the whole time and they were seeking to bring the Darkness to the Source. And... as much as I really did like the Shadowbringers story, with the way they wrote Emet-Selk you just couldn't bring yourself to see them as the bad guys anymore, more like people... you and them were just fighting to save your own worlds, which brought you into a collision. No real right or wrong just that one had to win, and one had to lose. Which caused them a little problem...

So they had to invent the Venat storyline to separate the Ascians from being the bad guys, and were s00per secretly a peace loving people who were "misunderstood".

If you look closely... the Endwalker original story is the invented arc... while the post Endwalker story with Golbas is what was the original intended ending with the Ascians and Zodiark.

It's why its almost 2 of the Identical story in both End Walker and Post Endwalker.

The second one is the original it was supposed to be with the Ascians... until they changed course radically.

So yeah Yoshi probably knows that too. And anyone who was here in the beginning of FFXIV can see it plain as day, this was not the original story they were telling.. they Retconned it really bad. So of course it is disappointing to a lot of people.

I don't recall Ascians having supposed to have been Voidsent. When I played through ARR I just got the impression they were from between the worlds, and that they followed their god. Even in Heavensward you hear that Elidibus saved Unukalhai when the 13th was going under, and that implies that they were there before said Shard was overcome.

I could be wrong though, it's been a while since I played through ARR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

We're supposedly going to see the Scions be divided over something tied to Tural during Dawntrail though I doubt it'll be anything nearly as heavy as the Sundering so it'll likely just be performative.

---

Thancred: G'raha Tia you are sorely mistaken. Hard shell tacos are superior.
Urianger: Verily, for one who was a city-state leader in his other life, thy knowledge of delectables is a shallow, misshapen inkwell.

G'raha Tia: Well, the Warrior of Light is on the way to back me up in my belief about soft shell being better! *takes a big sloppy bite out of his burrito that's falling apart* Besides, you two are absolutely knackered on the spirits of Tural, so you aren't thinking clearly!

Y'shtola: Oh, please. Have you all forgotten the real reason we're here? Would you really go this far for food? Allying yourselves with the Mamool Ja over tacos!

Alisaie: Oh, if only Alphinaud were here. He'd be the diplomat we need.

*Dawntrail starts for the player*

*warning prompt appears*

Warning Prompt: Choose between soft shell or hard shell tacos. CAUTION: Your choice will decide which group of Scions you adventure with, and this will greatly impact the narrative of Dawntrail!

People acting like Venat knew definitively what the sundering would result in are either trolling or didn't understand the scene. Yes she knew she was sundering the world and it would result in the loss of their perfect forms and paradise but it's not like she had a full view of the next 1000 years+ and how every reflection would develop on am anthropolical or political level. She also had no real choice because a. No one would have believed her story and b. Summoning Zodiark is itself purposeful and deliberate genocide. Case closed.

People hand waving it away as some diabolical plan are just mad that EW is the most critically acclaimed expansion of the entire XIV msq AND had the most concurrent players the game will likely ever see.

Also this isn't a Bethesda game. There no chance letting the player decide the narrative beyond your little word bubbles would have ever had the same impact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turtledeluxe

People hand waving it away as some diabolical plan are just mad that EW is the most critically acclaimed expansion of the entire XIV msq AND had the most concurrent players the game will likely ever see.

---

That's quite the leap.

I love 6.0, it's one of the best stories in the games I've seen along with Shadowbringers. I also don't dislike Venat, as I've stated. But just because I love the story and characters overall doesn't mean I (or anyone else for that matter) won't have questions for some of them.

Venat was one of the most influential and respected members of her society. The idea that if she were to present the information it would've been immediately dissmissed sounds, honestly, utterly ridiculous. If she was as untrustable as some of you claim with the "no one would've believed" argument, how was she even allowed to claim the seat of Azem to begin with?? People holding the seat Azem could've had the reputation of peculiar individuals, but they weren't percieved as idiots or liers.

Also just because WoL wasn't shown talking for 20 hours about history of Etheirys doesn't mean they didn't provide the key information on what the modern world was like and what events led to the problem at hand. Venat wouldn't have known every single detail sure, but portraying her as a poor lamb with no power and with zero options when she practically held the most important cards in her hands... you do you, but to me it sounds like some kind of a poor joke.



And as for the section about main characters having a choice - I don't think there's anyone seriously expecting that SE will suddenly change the way they present narrative. Some of us just wish WoL could've been portrayed to be at least a little bit displeased with the way the events have unfold, that's it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Halivel

That's quite the leap.

I love 6.0, it's one of the best stories in the games I've seen along with Shadowbringers. I also don't dislike Venat, as I've stated. But just because I love the story and characters overall doesn't mean I (or anyone else for that matter) won't have questions for some of them.

Venat was one of the most influential and respected members of her society. The idea that if she were to present the information it would've been immediately dissmissed sounds, honestly, utterly ridiculous. If she was as untrustable as some of you claim with the "no one would've believed" argument, how was she even allowed to claim the seat of Azem to begin with?? People holding the seat Azem could've had the reputation of peculiar individuals, but they weren't percieved as idiots or liers.

Also just because WoL wasn't shown talking for 20 hours about history of Etheirys doesn't mean they didn't provide the key information on what the modern world was like and what events led to the problem at hand. Venat wouldn't have known every single detail sure, but portraying her as a poor lamb with no power and with zero options when she practically held the most important cards in her hands... you do you, but to me it sounds like some kind of a poor joke.



And as for the section about main characters having a choice - I don't think there's anyone seriously expecting that SE will suddenly change the way they present narrative. Some of us just wish WoL could've been portrayed to be at least a little bit displeased with the way the events have unfold, that's it.

---

I disagree. What sounds ridiculous is thinking that anyone would have taken her seriously with zero evidence. She doesn't know Meteion's location. She doesn't even know what the final days are. She can't prove Hermes has done anything wrong. Esteemed members of society never just use their word, they back it up with evidence. That's what makes you esteemed in the first place.


As far solving problems on a scale across the reflections...over time Venat can barely seem help us solve our problems in the time our main cast exists or around that time. Every time she does (the flood, Ultima, whatever) it takes a piece of her. Now multiply that over however many years. Regarding the sundering devs have commented on it and besides that it's in her vocal delivery-- venat clearly did not plan the state of humanity, it is what happened. The sundering wasn't a plan it was a gamble.

Lil bro yapping about no evidence when the Ancients can just casually peer into the past with the echo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vyrerus

Thancred: G'raha Tia you are sorely mistaken. Hard shell tacos are superior.
Urianger: Verily, for one who was a city-state leader in his other life, thy knowledge of delectables is a shallow, misshapen inkwell.

G'raha Tia: Well, the Warrior of Light is on the way to back me up in my belief about soft shell being better! *takes a big sloppy bite out of his burrito that's falling apart* Besides, you two are absolutely knackered on the spirits of Tural, so you aren't thinking clearly!

Y'shtola: Oh, please. Have you all forgotten the real reason we're here? Would you really go this far for food? Allying yourselves with the Mamool Ja over tacos!

Alisaie: Oh, if only Alphinaud were here. He'd be the diplomat we need.

*Dawntrail starts for the player*

*warning prompt appears*

Warning Prompt: Choose between soft shell or hard shell tacos. CAUTION: Your choice will decide which group of Scions you adventure with, and this will greatly impact the narrative of Dawntrail!

---

https://media.giphy.com/media/GpyS1lJXJYupG/giphy.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BaconBits

Lil bro yapping about no evidence when the Ancients can just casually peer into the past with the echo.

---

Except they can't, and it's never been shown nor hinted they could. For one thing, the entire Elpis story never would've happened if Emet-Selch could've just read our past as soon as we arrived, and he's grouchy and suspicious enough that he would've done it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheMightyMollusk

Except they can't, and it's never been shown nor hinted they could. For one thing, the entire Elpis story never would've happened if Emet-Selch could've just read our past as soon as we arrived, and he's grouchy and suspicious enough that he would've done it.

---

Except they can. It is not something they did often because I assume they valued privacy, but it was Venat herself that taught us to channel our Echo ability in Elpis. Our abilities are all things that different Ancients could do naturally. We have them because we are broken versions of that race made into something new.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nayukhuut

Except they can. It is not something they did often because I assume they valued privacy, but it was Venat herself that taught us to channel our Echo ability in Elpis. Our abilities are all things that different Ancients could do naturally. We have them because we are broken versions of that race made into something new.

---

Even then, this doesnt matter since we wind up explaining everything to the trio anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atelier-Bagur

Even then, this doesnt matter since we wind up explaining everything to the trio anyway.

---

Aye, I know, but it would have been helpful if Venat had been kind enough to actually share the danger that was coming with her own race. Sadly she seemed pretty dead set on "my way is the only way." :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nayukhuut

but it was Venat herself that taught us to channel our Echo ability in Elpis.

---

When did this happen? I'm looking through the journal, but as often happens lately it's rather unhelpful, and watching through all the cut scenes again will take time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nayukhuut

Aye, I know, but it would have been helpful if Venat had been kind enough to actually share the danger that was coming with her own race. Sadly she seemed pretty dead set on "my way is the only way." :(

---

They gave some acknowledgment to it after escaping Ktsis, she says this

"we cannot allow the report that set this calamity in motion to become common knowledge. Were the masses to learn the fates of the other stars, I fear the situation would spiral out of control"

And considering how the Ancients act and behave, it probably wouldnt have ended well. Whether this is a good reason or not is up to the player but then we wouldnt have a story if everything was just resolved lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atelier-Bagur

They gave some acknowledgment to it after escaping Ktsis, she says this

"we cannot allow the report that set this calamity in motion to become common knowledge. Were the masses to learn the fates of the other stars, I fear the situation would spiral out of control"

And considering how the Ancients act and behave, it probably wouldnt have ended well. Whether this is a good reason or not is up to the player but then we wouldnt have a story if everything was just resolved lol

---

She could have at least told the world's leaders. She knew as much about what was happening about the situation as Hermes did at the end, and Hermes wasn't the only person who knew about Dynamis. Instead she basically just decided to go with her plan and then got annoyed when people didn't take her on blind faith.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheMightyMollusk

When did this happen? I'm looking through the journal, but as often happens lately it's rather unhelpful, and watching through all the cut scenes again will take time.

---

When you are looking into the past to see what happened with Hermes and Meteion. When he sends them off to go see the universe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheMightyMollusk

When did this happen? I'm looking through the journal, but as often happens lately it's rather unhelpful, and watching through all the cut scenes again will take time.

---

https://youtu.be/KG__QxV76GU?si=zss7ElNs74WLr8Zs

Here, it's in like the first 4 or so minutes where Venat instructs the WoL on the two methods of looking into the past with the Echo, one being looking into someone's soul as they're recalling a memory and the other utilizing ambient aether.

As for why grumpy old man Emet-Selch didn't immediately just read our soul the second he saw us or after we yapped exposition at him, I couldn't tell you. Maybe he thinks that would be rude, or maybe the writers didn't think about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nayukhuut

She could have at least told the world's leaders. She knew as much about what was happening about the situation as Hermes did at the end, and Hermes wasn't the only person who knew about Dynamis. Instead she basically just decided to go with her plan and then got annoyed when people didn't take her on blind faith.

---

Hypothetically isnt her telling them immediately after Ktsis also on blind faith?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheMightyMollusk

When did this happen? I'm looking through the journal, but as often happens lately it's rather unhelpful, and watching through all the cut scenes again will take time.

---

When we fly with her to the little floating island where Hermes taught Meteion how to fly. We went for the specific purpose of spying take a peek at their past. The quest is called "A Flower upon Your Return"

On a sidenote, I'm slightly annoyed we now literally know how the Echo works thanks to both Venat and Cyella, yet we still get the uncontrollable random exposition plot device sequences. It'd be nice to see our characters intentionally channeling the ability for once /shrug

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atelier-Bagur

Hypothetically isnt her telling them immediately after Ktsis also on blind faith?

---

No, that would be giving your race a fighting chance. They could have looked into her story and actually verified the facts. What Venat did was basically go around and expect everyone to follow her because she was convinced her way was correct, and she gave no one the truth of what was happening. She just expected them to agree with her.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Allegor

On a sidenote, I'm slightly annoyed we now literally know how the Echo works thanks to both Venat and Cyella, yet we still get the uncontrollable random exposition plot device sequences. It'd be nice to see our characters intentionally channeling the ability for once /shrug

---

The WoL seems to be the only person completely unable to control their echo at this point. Bit odd considering how prodigiously talented in every other area their status as Azem's reincarnation makes them.

Venat successfully tagged Meteion and had the coordinates of her nest. She was also a well respected member of her society so the idea that the Convocation wouldn't listen to her is highly flawed - particularly if she came to them before the Final Days occurred. In addition, she had access to the Echo and we even see her using it to show the Warrior of Light what Hermes did with Meteion. Then, of course, there's the simple fact that many researchers throughout Elpis would have seen Azem's familiar travelling with Emet, Hyth and Venat. So Kairos ridding Hyth and Emet of their memories is largely irrelevant.

Zodiark was an essential part of her plan, so her opposition to summoning him was always feigned and exploited as a convenient excuse to misdirect her own followers (who she never revealed the truth to, either...)

Furthermore, the first two sacrifices were entirely willing and born of a plan painstakingly forged after other alternatives were pursued. A necessity to return Etheirys to a state of habitation.

Ultimately the game established that the protagonists belief genocide, eugenics and racial replacement are lines in the sand never to be crossed no matter how sympathetic the motives behind them.

She dithered on how the ancients would react to the report, in Ktisis saying most would simply be content to continue as they were with this knowledge, other than Hermes of course, then resorting to the convenient nonsense about the masses panicking later on. Even if that were a possibility, there is nothing stopping her from just telling the Convocation and handling the matter discretely with their aid. Besides, I'm not sure what this is about the ancients' attitude; we see from some of the Convocation crystals, e.g. Emmerololth, Mitron, Lahabrea and Elidibus, how resolved they were to save their star.

Venat gave her people no opportunity to succeed and actively sabotaged them - which makes her no different to Thordan or Ilberd who are both called out for doing as much even in the name of a greater goal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nayukhuut

No, that would be giving your race a fighting chance. They could have looked into her story and actually verified the facts. What Venat did was basically go around and expect everyone to follow her because she was convinced her way was correct, and she gave no one the truth of what was happening. She just expected them to agree with her.

---

True, but I think its more so that she realizes as well as the audience that the Ancients's way of life and civilization of eternal paradise would eventually be its downfall, because of Meteion's report confirming that many other civilizations strived for the same paradise as they did but wound up destroyed. The game shows to us the flaws in their system through both the MSQ and quests in Elpis and Dream Amaraout. There's also the factor that the WoL being there and the events and experiences he/she shared to Venat privately convinced her there was some worth and hope for the star's future due to mankind having to learn to adapt and grow from what we consider the everyday struggles of life. Most of these stories in jrpgs are always written in criticism of the concept of a "utopia" so its most likely the reason why the writers wanted to make Venat come off that way as a Prometheus like figure; which goes with both her character in this game and in FFXII where the Venat the Occurria rebelled against her own kind to give mankind true freedom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

Venat successfully tagged Meteion and had the coordinates of her nest. She was also a well respected member of her society so the idea that the Convocation wouldn't listen to her is highly flawed - particularly if she came to them before the Final Days occurred. In addition, she had access to the Echo and we even see her using it to show the Warrior of Light what Hermes did with Meteion. Then, of course, there's the simple fact that many researchers throughout Elpis would have seen Azem's familiar travelling with Emet, Hyth and Venat. So Kairos ridding Hyth and Emet of their memories is largely irrelevant.

Zodiark was an essential part of her plan, so her opposition to summoning him was always feigned and exploited as a convenient excuse to misdirect her own followers (who she never revealed the truth to, either...)

Furthermore, the first two sacrifices were entirely willing and born of a plan painstakingly forged after other alternatives were pursued. A necessity to return Etheirys to a state of habitation.

Ultimately the game established that the protagonists belief genocide, eugenics and racial replacement are lines in the sand never to be crossed no matter how sympathetic the motives behind them.

She dithered on how the ancients would react to the report, in Ktisis saying most would simply be content to continue as they were with this knowledge, other than Hermes of course, then resorting to the convenient nonsense about the masses panicking later on. Even if that were a possibility, there is nothing stopping her from just telling the Convocation and handling the matter discretely with their aid. Besides, I'm not sure what this is about the ancients' attitude; we see from some of the Convocation crystals, e.g. Emmerololth, Mitron, Lahabrea and Elidibus, how resolved they were to save their star.

Venat gave her people no opportunity to succeed and actively sabotaged them - which makes her no different to Thordan or Ilberd who are both called out for doing as much even in the name of a greater goal.

---

I think the reason why it doesnt get called out because it would acknowledge the paradoxical ethics of mankind. In which villians actively trying to destroy your life is considered wrong but if the Scions criticized Venat/Hydaelyn for her actions then they would have to deny their own existence. Ilberd, Thordan, Emet-Selch etc where all active antagonists wanting to kill us so of course they are the villians but to them we arent worth as living beings because they value something greater (which was the theme behind Shadowbringers and Emet-Selch). And the event of the Sundering happened millenia ago by the time of the game so there was no point to judge Hydaeleyn for her actions because its the whole crux for why we exist in the first place.

Because seriously how would you even respond to this?

"How dare you do this thing to your people which created our existence!" Should we just accept that the Ascians are in the right all along and that we dont mean anything?

I don't believe they would need to deny their own existence to acknowledge a past wrongdoing. Many of us are descended from murderers and worse. Many countries were built upon foundations of blood and sorrow. Does acknowledging the wrongdoings of our forebears mean we must deny the value in our own lives?

Sometimes it isn't even a case of looking to call someone out. Sometimes one simply needs to acknowledge wrong was done and go on with their lives afterward. What's done is done, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth a moment of reflection. This is especially true in the case of past atrocities, whether or not they in any way impact people of the modern age. To disregard them is to risk repeating them one day.

There's a world of options between sycophancy and "you repulse me". And yes, being appalled that the purportedly good god of the planet has the blood of millions of innocents on her hands would be an appropriate response, with the possibility of character development and scions being anything other than 7 yes men. I think it would be entirely acceptable to ask if the reason everyone is as they are is that, like the allagans and ixal, venat was breeding a weapon. Ironically fractal continuum deals with this in a more nuanced manner than the main story, but that's not a high bar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

Venat successfully tagged Meteion and had the coordinates of her nest. She was also a well respected member of her society so the idea that the Convocation wouldn't listen to her is highly flawed - particularly if she came to them before the Final Days occurred.

---

Yeah. The worst they really said about Venat was basically "Yeah, she's a little weird, but we respect her." Literally everyone viewed her in a favorable light. If they only knew what she kept from them...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atelier-Bagur

I think the reason why it doesnt get called out because it would acknowledge the paradoxical ethics of mankind. In which villians actively trying to destroy your life is considered wrong but if the Scions criticized Venat/Hydaelyn for her actions then they would have to deny their own existence. Ilberd, Thordan, Emet-Selch etc where all active antagonists wanting to kill us so of course they are the villians but to them we arent worth as living beings because they value something greater (which was the theme behind Shadowbringers and Emet-Selch). And the event of the Sundering happened millenia ago by the time of the game so there was no point to judge Hydaeleyn for her actions because its the whole crux for why we exist in the first place.

Because seriously how would you even respond to this?

"How dare you do this thing to your people which created our existence!" Should we just accept that the Ascians are in the right all along and that we dont mean anything?

---

It doesn't matter if it happened "millennia" ago, we're visiting the past in the here and now and interacting with the people she slaughtered even after Endsinger was dealt with by going back in time once again to interact with them for the benefit of the present day Sundered.

Venat's plan is to force the Scions to defeat her in battle or force them off the Star. Her plan entails the Shards will perish and is futile because Endsinger won't stop. All of that is ample reason for them to criticise her either in her presence, or to reflect on her actions later.

There is not even criticism in reflection of any of this as there was with Thordan and the Scions certainly won't stop existing if they ask why she didn't try other methods or view her with contempt. A serial killer can save someone's life though that individual can still be horrified by the fact that their saviour is a mass murderer. Furthermore, we've seen the Scions call out their own allies many times before. The entirety of the game is full of preaching on that front, no matter how mysteriously bereft it is when one of the greatest atrocities present in the setting is revealed.

There's this, for example:

https://i.imgur.com/HwdMB50.png

Much as they're willing to criticise their own father they could easily aim similar comments at Venat...

I think you're simply being disingenuous and attempting to build up a straw-man to deflect away from the idea of Venat ever being held accountable in any meaningful way for her actions. It's perfectly possible to acknowledge the crime that is the Sundering without wanting to be unmade or considering the act of unmaking a good thing.

Ishgard faced same issue with Thordan and the church, who both acted as they did to preserve it from the dragons and seeded a noble lie on that basis. Nonetheless, they are still called out for it - by Ishgardians, no less.

The Nibirun situation is judging them for a pre-crime and she never addresses the situation to her people to allow them to confront it. The Nibirun themselves are shown to have hope rekindled in the Omicron tribe quests. They are but one Dead End of many, and one equally open to the sundered, since the Nibirun themselves were once mortal.

The Sundered have many flaws, shown throughout game and expansions isn't considered sufficient for them not to have a right to fight for their existence. The same areas you mention also showcase many of the virtues of ancient society, especially if you do the side quests. It may not be a perfect utopia but it is still a world that has achieved many, many good things.. Whatever JRPG themes the story might think it is aping here, it is ultimately trying to sell a genocide as necessary and there is no two ways about it. Meanwhile the Scions will still aim at the same lofty goals that would presumably result - if we take the story at face value - in the third dead end without a hint of irony