Unpopular Opnion: Dawntrail MSQ one of the best yet! [Spoilers]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MatthiusAbysswalker

Can't wait to compete against our fellow Scions! Oh boy! -_-

---

I like the MSQ it did grabed me and i was invested. But yeah the "Compete against your Fellow Scions" Part wasnt really there.
Maybe it was planned to be bigger originaly but it certainly wasnt at the end.

I don't even really care they dropped the Scion vs. Scion rivalry they teased. I mean, they also teased ShB being a villain arc of some kind, if I recall correctly, and hoo-boy would it have been cringe if they had to force that just because they felt married to the idea. I can see why you sometimes have to drop ideas once you see how the story develops.

No, the problem is we got nothing else in its stead. In fact the Scions outside of G'raha and Krile have no real reason to be around. It's fine if they had utilized the characters differently than they first marketed. Just using them as props is not it however.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xil-Ventus

Up until now in the story, almost every single main antagonist wouldn't have existed, had they stepped back and taken the time to learn about the people they were subjugating, what those cultures wanted, and why they did the things they did. (Notwithstanding Zenos because he's just insane and we love him for it)

---

Uuuh...

"Look at me! I have lived a thousand thousand of your lives! I have broken bread with you, fought with you, grown ill, grown old! Sired children and yes, welcomed death's sweet embrace. For eons I have measured your worth and found you wanting! Too weak and feeble-minded to serve as the stewards of any star!"

Sadly, there are people who cannot comprehend that their opinions on the story are just that, opinions. They always look for validation that others think the same and that often lands them in a bubble where their opinion gets constantly reinforced. That, unfortunately leads to the silly notion, that their opinion is not just an opinion, but a fact instead. When they start believing that, the nitpicking begins, because suddenly, it's not that "I didn't like the story", or "the story is not for me" no, the story is garbage because it didn't make ME, the supreme arbiter of quality like it.

Same goes to the characters you don't like. It doesn't matter what the character does, whether it's good, bad or anything inbetween, you will always see it in the worst possible light. The ridiculous overreaction to Wuk Lamat reminded me of the american version of "the Office", where there is this one character named Toby who works in HR of the company, and no matter what he does, Michael hates it, just because he has this irrational, petulent hatred of him. Wuk Lamat is the Toby of FFXIV.

Now, I played this game since the start, and before that I have played every other Final Fantasy game, so I didn't come to this with an mmo background, but rather as a Final Fantasy fan, and as such, I can tell you that this approach and tendency to overreact, rage and nitpick flaws has been part of the Final Fantasy fandom for the past 25 years, and maybe even more. I still remember how much hatred FFXII got online after it came out, how nitpicky people got about FFVIII (because it wasn't like VII), how FFXIII was treated for being too linear, (when same people were praising FFX, which is even more linear) or how offended people got about FFXV, because they wanted VersusXIII instead. The uniqueness of this series is unfortunately very conducive to this behaviour, and very often, someone who calls themself a "Final Fantasy fan" is really only a fan of one or two of the games and hates most others. Final Fantasy series is not for everyone, and this game is the same.

People often complain about FFXIV community, that it's a cult and you can't complain about the game or you get attacked, but a lot of those "attacks" stem from the fact that people are complaining about problems that are not problems in the eyes of others. And that is especially true when it comes to the story elements and characters. Now in a game where the devs do listen to the fan feedback, that may result in them making changes based on opinions of a loud minority, that could potentially ruin the game for most. Not all feedback is valid, and filtering out to the whining, moaning and complaining from useful critique is, I'm sure pretty difficult for the devs.

tbc

part deux
As to my opinion of Dawntrail, I loved the story. I played it through without looking at anyone elses opinions, because why would that matter to my enjoyment, and I haven't witnessed any negativity in game as I was playing it. (Mind you, I wasn't looking for it) Sure, it's not as good as Heavensward or Shadowbringers, but it does not mean it's therefore the worst thing ever. Being not as good as the best means a hell of a lot more than just that. The usual complaints I see now about the game can be either summed up as personal opinions or preferences, nitpicking a character you didn't like or the ever present nowadays "pacing" complaint. "Pacing" has always seemed to me to be an equivalent of saying "Ew, there's reading in this? Where is my bing bing wahoo?". The story of the game also isn't "woke" as some people seem to indicate, it has some rather standard, neutral politics that Final Fantasy series had forever. As to Wuk Lamat, I have seen many people say she's a "Mary-Sue", and to those, I can only say one thing- go and learn what a Mary-Sue is before throwing that label around. She's insecure, aware of her limitations, aware that the others are better, aware she doesn't know all the answers, learns things and grows as a person, and most of all, asks others for help (complainers would know that if they didn't skip the story, or payed closer attention to it). Any one of those things prevent her from being a Mary Sue and she has the lot. It's okay to not like the character, but you don't have to make up reasons for it.

Now lastly, the situation with the reviews is pretty annoying to say the least, the game is definitely being review-bombed for whatever reason, opinion about the story, character preference or the trans va stuff. I honestly don't know what grinds people's gears today and I'm too old to give a crap. Now, with many negative reviews, that are perceived to be intentional review-bombing being deleted, something review-aggregate websites have done for a while, it makes players who are unhappy with this expansion believe they're being supressed and pushes them even further into rage. And to make matters even worse, with many complaints having to do with Wuk Lamat's english VA being trans, it provides the pretentious brigade of woke gaming bloggers with easy ammunition to shout "transphobes!", so congratulations, you made it easier for them.

So tl-dr, learn what's the difference between facts and opinions, and stop whining, it's annoying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaecilius

Uuuh...

"Look at me! I have lived a thousand thousand of your lives! I have broken bread with you, fought with you, grown ill, grown old! Sired children and yes, welcomed death's sweet embrace. For eons I have measured your worth and found you wanting! Too weak and feeble-minded to serve as the stewards of any star!"

---

Not to mention:
"As the bearer of Azem's crystal, you may consider your duty to see at least that much. I certainly did."

The twins, especially Alphinaud, are constantly trying to learn about the culture of others. And wasn't understanding to bring about peace a major Alisaie trait up until EW?

I get liking dawntrail, what I don't get is thinking it's the best expansion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamisapsycho

Sadly, there are people who cannot comprehend that their opinions on the story are just that, opinions. They always look for validation that others think the same and that often lands them in a bubble where their opinion gets constantly reinforced. That, unfortunately leads to the silly notion, that their opinion is not just an opinion, but a fact instead. When they start believing that, the nitpicking begins, because suddenly, it's not that "I didn't like the story", or "the story is not for me" no, the story is garbage because it didn't make ME, the supreme arbiter of quality like it.

Same goes to the characters you don't like. It doesn't matter what the character does, whether it's good, bad or anything inbetween, you will always see it in the worst possible light. The ridiculous overreaction to Wuk Lamat reminded me of the american version of "the Office", where there is this one character named Toby who works in HR of the company, and no matter what he does, Michael hates it, just because he has this irrational, petulent hatred of him. Wuk Lamat is the Toby of FFXIV.

---

The story is objectively poorly written from a creative writing standpoint, that's not just opinion, it fails across the board. I've said this before elsewhere, feel free to look up the post where I list examples of the issues created by the writing, that not only make Wuk unlikable but destroy the rest of the cast too.

Ultimately the pacing is terrible, they will spend numerous long cutscenes where all the character are just statically standing there, describing things trying to tell the audience about a tiny bit of a culture that could have been shown, and the audience will likely never see or interact with in any meaningful way again. In fact I would be interested to see if anyone wants to count how many cutscenes/minutes of cutscenes are just everyone standing there while wuk has a dialogue with a different NPC. At the same time, the writers will gloss over any of the moments in the plot that could lead to actual character development of the main cast, blitzing through them in a matter of 1 very very short cutscene. Then they never explore or really touch on these points again. This is the pacing issue people are referring to, it's what kills the characters dead in the water, it's what makes Wuk unlikable because she never gets to develop so anything she get feels unearned, it makes her an obnoxious spoiled narcist.

Also yes Wuk lamat is a mary-sue, in fact she fits the definition so well it's like they used the definition when story boarding her character. "A Mary Sue is a character archetype in fiction, usually a young woman, who is often portrayed as inexplicably competent across all domains, gifted with unique talents or powers, liked or respected by most other characters, unrealistically free of weaknesses, extremely attractive, innately virtuous, and generally lacking meaningful character flaws" No being sea sick is not a character flaw. No she doesn't go through being weak, it's stated her older brother thinks she's weak. In about 1-2 cutscenes she very very briefly mentions feeling insignificant compared to her brothers, and then they just ignore any development of those feelings. She continues on just yells loudly and everyone showers her with praises and she constantly gets powerups from no where, making all her achievements feel unearned.

Speak to Wuk Lamat yet again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malthir

Also yes Wuk lamat is a mary-sue, in fact she fits the definition so well it's like they used the definition when story boarding her character. "A Mary Sue is a character archetype in fiction, usually a young woman, who is often portrayed as inexplicably competent across all domains, gifted with unique talents or powers, liked or respected by most other characters, unrealistically free of weaknesses, extremely attractive, innately virtuous, and generally lacking meaningful character flaws" No being sea sick is not a character flaw. No she doesn't go through being weak, it's stated her older brother thinks she's weak. In about 1-2 cutscenes she very very briefly mentions feeling insignificant compared to her brothers, and then they just ignore any development of those feelings. She continues on just yells loudly and everyone showers her with praises and she constantly gets powerups from no where, making all her achievements feel unearned.

---

Ok, this is some puddle-deep understanding of this story, and yes, IT IS just an opinion. Judging stories by "creative writing" standards is like judging paintings by "paint-by-numbers" standard.

And the examples from Mary-sue definition basically prove that you didn't pay attention to the story. "Inexplicably competent across all domains"- no, "gifted with unique talents and powers"- no, the only unique thing about her is really that she likes peace and wants to learn about Turali cultures, "liked or respected by most other characters"- not from beginning, which means the respect she gets is earned through her actions, not just given by default. "unrealistically free of weaknesses"- she acknowledges that she's dumb and is a hothead, "extremely attractive"- in what universe? "and generally lacking meaningful character flaws"- come on now, naivety, impulsivity and gullibility are with her from the first.

You're not making the point you think you're making here.

Would you prefer "writer's pet"? It's a wholly semantic point.

The issues of the character exist no matter how you want to classify it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamisapsycho

Ok, this is some puddle-deep understanding of this story, and yes, IT IS just an opinion. Judging stories by "creative writing" standards is like judging paintings by "paint-by-numbers" standard.

And the examples from Mary-sue definition basically prove that you didn't pay attention to the story. "Inexplicably competent across all domains"- no, "gifted with unique talents and powers"- no, the only unique thing about her is really that she likes peace and wants to learn about Turali cultures, "liked or respected by most other characters"- not from beginning, which means the respect she gets is earned through her actions, not just given by default. "unrealistically free of weaknesses"- she acknowledges that she's dumb and is a hothead, "extremely attractive"- in what universe? "and generally lacking meaningful character flaws"- come on now, naivety, impulsivity and gullibility are with her from the first.

You're not making the point you think you're making here.

---

This is why people call people like you shill and zealots. The critical feedback of this expac has been great for the most part, people have been very concise with the issues and gave examples. The die hard stan response is literally, nuh uh you just didn't read it/didn't get the genius, no examples refuting the points brought up.

Also There are literally 2 NPC's that have a negative dialogue on Wuk in the entire expac, even though she is incredibly childish and behaves irrationally and impulsive everything just works out for her. The Scions have known her for maybe a month at this point and you get a constant stream of dialogue stating, "wow Wuk was so impressive." "I'm so impressed with how Wuk handled that." "Wuk is doing so well." She is instantly loved in the dialogue by almost every major character for no reason. She's given the highest position of authority in the land without actually doing anything to earn it, no plans for how to run a country nothing just, here you deserve it because you are amazing. She fights her childhood bully and immediately kicks his ass, from no where just huge power spike and smashes his and his troops faces in.

Final point, all things have standards. Art is no different, that's why you can have judges, and while to a small degree the judgements are personal, a judge of a piece of art is looking at the technical aspect of what was done. Critique of art is not just opinion, you can like something and understand while understanding that at a technical level it's not a well done piece.

Quote:

---

The story treats us like children

Dawntrail stands out as the most emotionally resonant expansion in a long time, skillfully crafted for a mature audience.

Excessive exposition would have felt heavy-handed, insulting our intelligence. Conversely, too little exposition would have hindered our empathy for the characters.

Dawntrail rewards attentive players with emotional intelligence, offering a refreshing experience that respects its audience's maturity.

---

That's a lot of words to reply to a point with what is essentially "NUH-UH!" while giving no examples. WHY do you think it's emotionally resonant? What parts? What parts were skillfully crafted in your mind? Which parts felt like they were for a mature audience and why? When did you, as a player, feel rewarded for your emotional intelligence? What part did you feel was a fresh experience? When did you feel respected by the narrative? You say a bunch of words that sound on the surface like a review, but then fail to substantiate anything here. Most of the post is like this, but this one is the most egregious. Seriously sounds like Chat GPT wrote a good deal of this post. Too bad this is a forum and not a social media page where you get paid for clicks with ad revenue. Is this purely just to bait engagement on a forum? Well, I guess it worked on me. I'd recommend becoming a blue check on Xitter or making some incomprehensible TikToks defending the game if you want to pursue this more professionally in the future, however.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CuteBucket

That's a lot of words to reply to a point with what is essentially "NUH-UH!" while giving no examples. WHY do you think it's emotionally resonant? What parts? What parts were skillfully crafted in your mind? Which parts felt like they were for a mature audience and why? When did you, as a player, feel rewarded for your emotional intelligence? What part did you feel was a fresh experience? When did you feel respected by the narrative? You say a bunch of words that sound on the surface like a review, but then fail to substantiate anything here. Most of the post is like this, but this one is the most egregious. Seriously sounds like Chat GPT wrote a good deal of this post. Too bad this is a forum and not a social media page where you get paid for clicks with ad revenue. Is this purely just to bait engagement on a forum? Well, I guess it worked on me. I'd recommend becoming a blue check on Xitter or making some incomprehensible TikToks defending the game if you want to pursue this more professionally in the future, however.

---

That's a whole lotta words for "I am right you are wrong".
Whenever someone does reply, it's ignored or you try to convince them their experioence is wrong in some way. At this point you've just been parroting each other for the past few weeks.
And no one has to justify why they enjoyed what they enjoyed. You're like internet atheists on Reddit dogpiling on anyone who used the word "god" in any context at all. And probably future bans for nuisance behavior, trolling or harassment as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TBerry

That's a whole lotta words for "I am right you are wrong".
Whenever someone does reply, it's ignored. At this point you've just been parroting each other for the past few weeks.
And no one has to justify why they enjoyed what they enjoyed. At this point you're like internet atheists on Reddit dogpiling on anyone who used the word "god" in any context at all. And probably futre bans for nuisance behavior, trolling or harassment.

---

Would you care to point to anyone who has given any kind of actual examples as to why the criticism aimed at the writing is wrong. Also no one says you can't enjoy something. If you enjoy it cool, but it's outlandish to say it's well written when it's not. Your enjoyment and the technical skill of what is delivered do not go hand in hand.

Soap operas are loved by many, would anyone truthfully hand on heart say that 90% including some of the most popular aren't terribly written. That's the point the critiques been about, we expect better writing from the product we pay for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malthir

Would you care to point to anyone who has given any kind of actual examples as to why the criticism aimed at the writing is wrong. Also no one says you can't enjoy something. If you enjoy it cool, but it's outlandish to say it's well written when it's not. Your enjoyment and the technical skill of what is delivered do not go hand in hand.

Soap operas are loved by many, would anyone truthfully hand on heart say that 90% including some of the most popular aren't terribly written. That's the point the critiques been about, we expect better writing from the product we pay for.

---

Have you ever heard of the term "Sealioning"?

Genuinely speaking, the whole DT story didn't leave a mark on me. I can't even recall the story beats. I remember that I didn't like the focus on Wuk Lamat, the 1st trial, the 2nd trial because the music is fantastic on that one, and Sphene somewhat.
Idk if this is a good or a bad thing. I enjoyed everything from ARR to ShB, EW made me feel disappointed and frustrated that I viewed at it quite negatively.
DT on the other hand? Nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TBerry

Have you ever heard of the term "Sealioning"?

---

Never heard it before so google to the rescue, it's a internet slang term for someone demanding evidence even once evidence is provided to try and weaken the other persons point of view. But that's not what's happening here as one person is claiming it's great writing, they are being asked for an example of great writing in the game and then aren't giving any. From it's definition, sealioning would be me asking the person to give and example of why the writing of the MSQ is one of the best yet, and then when they give examples, I shift the goalpost slightly and ask for further examples otherwise they are wrong. So again that's not really what's happening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malthir

Never heard it before so google to the rescue, it's a internet slang term for someone demanding evidence even once evidence is provided to try and weaken the other persons point of view. But that's not what's happening here as one person is claiming it's great writing, they are being asked for an example of great writing in the game and then aren't giving any. From it's definition, sealioning would be me asking the person to give and example of why the writing of the MSQ is one of the best yet, and then when they give examples, I shift the goalpost slightly and ask for further examples otherwise they are wrong. So again that's not really what's happening.

---

Which you do as OP gave examples why they think it's good writing, and let's not forget this thread OP linked. Of course, best expansion is subjectiv, and trhere are some weak points.
Think Naruto. That is nothing new.

Also, 100th reply.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamisapsycho

Ok, this is some puddle-deep understanding of this story, and yes, IT IS just an opinion. Judging stories by "creative writing" standards is like judging paintings by "paint-by-numbers" standard.

And the examples from Mary-sue definition basically prove that you didn't pay attention to the story. "Inexplicably competent across all domains"- no, "gifted with unique talents and powers"- no, the only unique thing about her is really that she likes peace and wants to learn about Turali cultures, "liked or respected by most other characters"- not from beginning, which means the respect she gets is earned through her actions, not just given by default. "unrealistically free of weaknesses"- she acknowledges that she's dumb and is a hothead, "extremely attractive"- in what universe? "and generally lacking meaningful character flaws"- come on now, naivety, impulsivity and gullibility are with her from the first.

You're not making the point you think you're making here.

---

Wuk Lamat is kidnapped by NORMAL BANDITS then just a few levels later defeats not only a rare breed of a race known SPECIFICALLY for being extremely powerful but half an army of the bandits who kidnapped her earlier and four experienced fighters. There is zero explanation for why. No training arc, no mystical explanation, she just can.

Later, she BREAKS THROUGH A BARRIER THAT WAS STRONG ENOUGH TO HOLD THE CRYSTAL EXARCH AND PUNCHES THE FINAL BOSS IN THE FACE. Once again, no explanation given, no reason why she should be able to do this when even Graham couldn't, she just does it.

It's never stated or even hinted that she has any special aptitude for magic or that she should be that much stronger than anyone else. She never actually loses or is responsible for anything in the story going wrong. She never develops, she approaches every situation at the end of the story the same way she does at the end. Everyone loves her for absolutely no reason and praises her constantly and all of her ideas just work out.

I typically love Shonen style characters. Black Clover, Naruto, Bleach, Fire Force, the list goes on. But those characters usually have humble beginnings, experience hardships and failure, and you can track their growth as their series continues. They get called out for their failures and often have to admit they were wrong or try a different approach.

Wuk Lamat suffers one attack that killed a grand total of fifty people and had a town forcibly annexed by a well meaning ruler who treated them fairly. None of that ever bites her or was even her fault at all. She gets kidnapped in the most ridiculously forced way possible but fixed that a little later with only positive consequences.

I could go on but you're not listening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cerbolt

I get liking dawntrail, what I don't get is thinking it's the best expansion.

---

fair enough, but some people still think 1.x is the best version of ffxiv. Sometimes you just gotta say "well my favorite is y"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malthir

This is why people call people like you shill and zealots. The critical feedback of this expac has been great for the most part, people have been very concise with the issues and gave examples. The die hard stan response is literally, nuh uh you just didn't read it/didn't get the genius, no examples refuting the points brought up.

Also There are literally 2 NPC's that have a negative dialogue on Wuk in the entire expac, even though she is incredibly childish and behaves irrationally and impulsive everything just works out for her. The Scions have known her for maybe a month at this point and you get a constant stream of dialogue stating, "wow Wuk was so impressive." "I'm so impressed with how Wuk handled that." "Wuk is doing so well." She is instantly loved in the dialogue by almost every major character for no reason. She's given the highest position of authority in the land without actually doing anything to earn it, no plans for how to run a country nothing just, here you deserve it because you are amazing. She fights her childhood bully and immediately kicks his ass, from no where just huge power spike and smashes his and his troops faces in.

Final point, all things have standards. Art is no different, that's why you can have judges, and while to a small degree the judgements are personal, a judge of a piece of art is looking at the technical aspect of what was done. Critique of art is not just opinion, you can like something and understand while understanding that at a technical level it's not a well done piece.

---

I think you're just blinded by hate and can't seem to comprehend that someone is disagreeing with your assessments. It's basically like saying "How dare you like things that I don't like". Grow up, and google the word "opinion" next.

1. Learning cultures

The problem with the story isn't so much we don't learn cultures, it's that when we learn them they are derivative of stories already in the game, or sometimes don't even make sense. The quest involving fixing the float is one example, where the NPC explains to you willingly that they simply didn't bother to fix it despite knowing it was necessary for their survival. Being successful at learning cultures does not automatically make the story good, that's where your logic here fails. Also, your accusation that every character tends to handwave away cultures and histories is unfounded. It's just not true, at all. I am not sure why you even said it. I'd also note that being open to learning cultures like Wuk Lamat is, loses all of its flavor when it's so widely open and permissive in nature, even to the detriment of Wuk Lamat herself. It's certainly a unique personality, but it's bad for storytelling.

2. The right of succession

All of the claimants are pretty one dimensional for a significant portion of the story. I don't think anyone would say Koana never changes, it just that his change is so slow and understated. He goes from talking about Sharlayan ever other minute (one dimensional) to be a Wuk Lamat simp (also one dimensional). It's not engaging or satisfying just because a transition occurs. As far as Zoraal Ja, that's a problem of telling vs showing and pacing. You seem overly focused on lore, but how that lore is delivered in a GAME is paramount. I've already covered Wuk Lamat's total openness and how bland it feels. Bakool ja ja is the best of the claimants in character development but it's so cliche and hamfisted, it's hard to care.

The right of succession doesn't mean anything beyond the prize. It's just 4 poorly written characters wandering around at random, then intermingling when the writers needed to generate some kind of movement in the plot.

3. Wuk Lamat

Wuk Lamat is totally an open book from beginning to end, so the real problem is that if she's fit to lead due to her nature by the end, she was always fit to lead anyway. That's bad storytelling. What makes Wuk Lamat "fit to lead" ultimately according to this narrative is simply going outside. She finally went outside and traveled and applied her pre existing personality. Wuk Lamat gets from point A to be point B by literally walking there, and nothing else about her changes. And I like Wuk Lamat btw.

4. Story is a retread

Yes, this is silly, but I don't think many people actually feel this way. It's a thoughtless and superficial reaction. The idea that Sphene is superior to Ascians because it was all out of her control is very weak to me. I'm pretty sure Ascians weren't exactly in control when Hermes did what he did to them and subsequently when they ended up being defeated by Venat.

5. Bakool Ja ja

It is quite abrupt since he has already been involved in pretty bad behavior including unleashing a deadly beast onto innocent people. Let's be honest-- the writers could not think of a good way to start up that trial so they USED Bakool for it and then hoped you forgot. Why? Because short while later you will need to be forgiving him/ feeling sorry for him. Your excuse for it being abrupt is basically that he had a rough time growing up. That doesn't make any sense, to be honest. It could be true, but it doesn't excuse the bad storytelling.

6. No combat

Dawntrail spends too much time telling and not showing, resulting in long periods of feeling like there's no dungeon/trials, even though there's just as many as EW. In EW you didn't notice really, because so much of the narrative was SHOWING YOU character interactions and flashbacks. Or, in the case of Elpis, had you literally play history.

7. Last zone padding

Despite the story creating a logical reason why we would take our time, it still doesn't feel good. Stories don't always have to be urgent, but players typically desire that for at least the final encounter. Basically we're told "hold on the villain needs to do some math homework before executing their problematic plan". Then we literally undermine her efforts, to no effect whatsoever, but that's another topic.

The last zone feels like padding because all of that lore and those character experiences (aside from the deaths) could and should have been presented earlier in the story or in entirely other areas. Unfortunately because the team feels they *need* to show us the final map at a certain time, we couldn't access Living Memory earlier in the story. I personally think Sphene should've brought us there sometime around when we met her, but again the team felt the need to tell tell tell. By the time players are an inch away from the final boss, they're so exhausted by all the telling that the showing loses some to all of its impact. This is a pacing issue.

8. skipping, meh

9. Story treats us like children

I wouldn't say that. It does treat you like you're stupid sometimes though, by asking you to suspend sense of disbelief. I already cited one for you with the float quest.

10. Conclusion

Don't confuse effort with results.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palladiamors

Wuk Lamat is kidnapped by NORMAL BANDITS then just a few levels later defeats not only a rare breed of a race known SPECIFICALLY for being extremely powerful but half an army of the bandits who kidnapped her earlier and four experienced fighters. There is zero explanation for why. No training arc, no mystical explanation, she just can.

---

This isn't Bleach, there are no power levels here, and power of emotions letting you transcend your limits have been established last expansion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamisapsycho

This isn't Bleach, there are no power levels here, and power of emotions letting you transcend your limits have been established last expansion.

---

That's vapid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palladiamors

Wuk Lamat is kidnapped by NORMAL BANDITS.

---

Correction, she's kidnapped by normal bandits in plain sight of everyone, because for some reason every single person who was waiting on her turned and looked the other way for her entire walk to the town

https://i.imgur.com/1DUXrti.jpeg

You can literally see the entire road with no obstructions, and if Wuk Lamat tried to fight the bandits off she would also have CLEARLY been spotted doing so

You know, if they wanted Wuk Lamat to be unusually skilled in, say, using Dynamis, that force of emotions we learned all about in Endwalker, they could have done that anywhere at any point in the story. But they don't. I don't even recall a single character saying the word "dynamis," it's like the writers forgot it exists. It wouldn't even be a good explanation for how Wuk Lamat does some stuff, but it at least it would be an explanation at all, instead of the zero explanation we got.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CuteBucket

You know, if they wanted Wuk Lamat to be unusually skilled in, say, using Dynamis, that force of emotions we learned all about in Endwalker, they could have done that anywhere at any point in the story. But they don't. I don't even recall a single character saying the word "dynamis," it's like the writers forgot it exists. It wouldn't even be a good explanation for how Wuk Lamat does some stuff, but it at least it would be an explanation at all, instead of the zero explanation we got.

---

Perhaps writers assumed that their audience are not morons who need to have every single thing directly explained to them, and who payed attention to that bit in Endwalker where it was revealed the entire point of sundering the world was to allow people in it to use dynamis, you know, the stuff limit breaks are made of, that every rando can use with enough of an emotional push.

Okay Mr. Thinker, why isn't Zoraal Ja dunking on us with dynamis too? Why isn't everyone? Why doesn't every fight between anyone just turn into dynamis super attack and block duels?

You literally said anyone can do it with enough emotion, and surely enough any life and death fight will be pretty emotional.

EDIT:
Okay, let's accept your premise for a moment, though personally I think it opens a can of worms writing wise. It's just pure emotion, nothing else matters: Why does it make sense it's Wuk Lamat of all the characters Limit Breaking there with dynamis?

In the scene there are:

1. WoL, someone we know who has an innate ability to use dynamis who is actually the one fighting desperately for their life and the world.

2. G'raha Tia, a man who traveled through time and space and lived a hundred years his only wish to have one adventure with WoL, who is now on brink of death about to be taken away from him.

3. Krile, who has the most connection to the entirety of the golden city chapter. Just met and said goodbye to the ghosts of her dead parents.

4. Wuk Lamat who is totally samesies with Sphene because they are like both queens and love their people (they met a few days ago), so she's pretty upset they can't be friends.

Why is it Wuk Lamat who feels the most strongly here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThorneDynasty

Okay Mr. Thinker, why isn't Zoraal Ja dunking on us with dynamis too? Why isn't everyone? Why doesn't every fight between anyone just turn into dynamis super attack and block duels?

You literally said anyone can do it with enough emotion, and surely enough any life and death fight will be pretty emotional.

---

Why do you think we need seven other people to deal with bosses? We've seen quite a few npc's use limit breaks, like Sadu, Hien or Yugiri, your adventurer squadron can use one. Zenos used it in the final fight, Rhitahtyn used it, Heavensward knights used them, Omega figures out how to use it, Elidibus uses it. It's not that much of a stretch to think that maybe some bosses big attacks are using dynamis in a different form. Hell, we didn't even know about dynamis before Endwalker and still used it. Engage your imagination once in a while.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThorneDynasty

EDIT:
Okay, let's accept your premise for a moment, though personally I think it opens a can of worms writing wise. It's just pure emotion, nothing else matters: Why does it make sense it's Wuk Lamat of all the characters Limit Breaking there with dynamis?

In the scene there are:

1. WoL, someone we know who has an innate ability to use dynamis who is actually the one fighting desperately for their life and the world.

2. G'raha Tia, a man who traveled through time and space and lived a hundred years his only wish to have one adventure with WoL, who is now on brink of death about to be taken away from him.

3. Krile, who has the most connection to the entirety of the golden city chapter. Just met and said goodbye to the ghosts of her dead parents.

4. Wuk Lamat who is totally samesies with Sphene because they are like both queens and love their people (they met a few days ago), so she's pretty upset they can't be friends.

Why is it Wuk Lamat who feels the most strongly here?

---

Why is it Wuk? Oh, Idk, because she had the most interactions with Sphene out of the three? And Warrior of Light does use Limit break in the fight, it charges just like in any other fight.

It's just like I said in my first post here, you hate Wuk Lamat so much, that it doesn't matter what she does or says, it's bad. It's just petty nitpicking at this point.

And btw, if you listen for once during that fight you might notice that it wasn't Wuk Lamat who broke open the barrier, it was Sphene's attacks who started to brake apart the simulation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamisapsycho

Why is it Wuk? Oh, Idk, because she had the most interactions with Sphene out of the three? And Warrior of Light does use Limit break in the fight, it charges just like in any other fight.

It's just like I said in my first post here, you hate Wuk Lamat so much, that it doesn't matter what she does or says, it's bad. It's just petty nitpicking at this point.

And btw, if you listen for once during that fight you might notice that it wasn't Wuk Lamat who broke open the barrier, it was Sphene's attacks who started to brake apart the simulation.

---

you mean, beacause she decided to tagging along with us without shame and no one ask for so she has more scene with the queen while the queen herself looking at us like trying to talk with us without interruption but cannot do because certain someone always clinging around WoL?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bellybell

you mean, beacause she decided to tagging along with us without shame and no one ask for so she has more scene with the queen while the queen herself looking at us like trying to talk with us without interruption but cannot do because certain someone always clinging around WoL?

---

Yeah, definitely no reason at all for her to be there, like there was no reason for Aymeric to be there when we were asking for Hraesvelgr's aid in 3.3 or when Vrtra had no reason to go to the void with us they just decided to tag along and take the attention away from you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamisapsycho

Yeah, definitely no reason at all for her to be there, like there was no reason for Aymeric to be there when we were asking for Hraesvelgr's aid in 3.3 or when Vrtra had no reason to go to the void with us they just decided to tag along and take the attention away from you.

---

I don't remember Ayemeric but Vrtra has every reasons in his being to go there because his sister is more precious to him than anything else in his world.
Wuk tho? no? she was just begging to be around because of what? scared of new technology scenery she wasn't used to???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamisapsycho

And btw, if you listen for once during that fight you might notice that it wasn't Wuk Lamat who broke open the barrier, it was Sphene's attacks who started to brake apart the simulation.

---

it was WoL chipping her power but w/e idw to nitpick
Still no reason why is she THE ONLY ONE broke free, where is Graha who most definitely be more capable than her in every way shape and form?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bellybell

I don't remember Ayemeric but Vrtra has every reasons in his being to go there because his sister is more precious to him than anything else in his world.
Wuk tho? no? she was just begging to be around because of what? scared of new technology scenery she wasn't used to???


it was WoL chipping her power but w/e idw to nitpick
Still no reason why is she THE ONLY ONE broke free, where is Graha who most definitely be more capable than her in every way shape and form?

---

That's like asking why did Estinien save your ass from Elidibus in 4.55 when it could've been Aymeric, or Raubahn or anyone else who happenned to be in the area.

She is the leader of a neighbouring country, she identifies with Sphene trying to protect her people, she likes her as a person... Maybe the final push required more brute strength? Maybe Krile tried hitting the barrier with her brush and it didn't work? I mean, you can pick whatever reason, you can even make up a reason for yourself.

Again, the only reason you think it's bad writing is because you don't like the character that does it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamisapsycho

I think you're just blinded by hate and can't seem to comprehend that someone is disagreeing with your assessments. It's basically like saying "How dare you like things that I don't like". Grow up, and google the word "opinion" next.

---

Cope harder, I don't care if you like the story that's opinion same as me not liking it is opinion. However I was pointing out it is poorly written, whether you like it or not, there are objectively numerous examples of bad story telling throughout the entire expac.

Again I draw back to my previous comparison. Lots of people love soap operas, they are also terribly written. Something can be enjoyed by some people while also being objectively poorly done by the standard of the field it's in.

Wuk is a bad character not because I hate the character. It's because she has no growth or journey. You'll find that most people would like the character if she grew over time or at least experienced an emotional journey (as in sometimes the things you go through don't change you or change you back to being how you used to be) What's important is the journey progressing through mental/emotional states. Personally I would still undoubtable dislike her, mainly because I find loud cheery characters obnoxious. Regardless, she at least then wouldn't be a badly written loud cheery character.

I don't like haurchefant, he wasn't badly written, I just didn't like the character. Are you seeing the point yet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamisapsycho

Why is it Wuk? Oh, Idk, because she had the most interactions with Sphene out of the three? .

---

My favorite part of Stormblood was when Lyse had the most interaction with that one random mecha boss in the last dungeon of the xpac so she LB3 it.

Seriously too Thorne is right. in the situation they builded up Wuk the less likely to use dyna.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamisapsycho

Maybe the final push required more brute strength? Maybe Krile tried hitting the barrier with her brush and it didn't work? I mean, you can pick whatever reason, you can even make up a reason for yourself.

---

If I need to make up a reason myself it is a pure exemple of bad writting. I shouldn't have to create headcanon to fill up plot hole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malthir

Cope harder, I don't care if you like the story that's opinion same as me not liking it is opinion. However I was pointing out it is poorly written, whether you like it or not, there are objectively numerous examples of bad story telling throughout the entire expac.

Again I draw back to my previous comparison. Lots of people love soap operas, they are also terribly written. Something can be enjoyed by some people while also being objectively poorly done by the standard of the field it's in.

Wuk is a bad character not because I hate the character. It's because she has no growth or journey. You'll find that most people would like the character if she grew over time or at least experienced an emotional journey (as in sometimes the things you go through don't change you or change you back to being how you used to be) What's important is the journey progressing through mental/emotional states. Personally I would still undoubtable dislike her, mainly because I find loud cheery characters obnoxious. Regardless, she at least then wouldn't be a badly written loud cheery character.

I don't like haurchefant, he wasn't badly written, I just didn't like the character. Are you seeing the point yet?

---

No such thing as objective opinion. Why can't you get to grip with somebody disagreeing with your analisys of this story? I don't think she was badly written, yes it's an opinion, but can you please, with a cherry on top, get over the idea that YOUR opinion is a fact, and others are wrong for liking something you don't? You know that "mixed" reviews mean some people like it and some don't, right? Tell me you are capable of at least understanding that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamisapsycho

That's like asking why did Estinien save your ass from Elidibus in 4.55 when it could've been Aymeric, or Raubahn or anyone else who happenned to be in the area.

---

Out of all the people you state, clearly you have no idea that Estinien was the most capable person there

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamisapsycho

She is the leader of a neighbouring country, she identifies with Sphene trying to protect her people, she likes her as a person... Maybe the final push required more brute strength? Maybe Krile tried hitting the barrier with her brush and it didn't work? I mean, you can pick whatever reason, you can even make up a reason for yourself.

Again, the only reason you think it's bad writing is because you don't like the character that does it.

---

That's her business, not mine. she can probe with the queen all she want without dragging WoL along the way as she and also 'you' might not know that Scions also has and did state there agency on this as their duty to save the world, and we DO considered things more than just HER PEOPLE

READ THE ROOM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamisapsycho

No such thing as objective opinion. Why can't you get to grip with somebody disagreeing with your analisys of this story? I don't think she was badly written, yes it's an opinion, but can you please, with a cherry on top, get over the idea that YOUR opinion is a fact, and others are wrong for liking something you don't? You know that "mixed" reviews mean some people like it and some don't, right? Tell me you are capable of at least understanding that.

---

You keep conflating two different things, people being mixed about liking something is not the same as something being objectively bad. Yes you can be objective in art critique, I've used this example in a similar argument. If you're judging a dancing contests, not liking the dance style they chose for this piece. Is somewhat subjective opinion. Saying they were late on the first turn is objective critique, the pirouette was poorly executed they didn't keep her knee at the right height their other leg was slightly bent, the parallels were off etc That's objective, it's a formal critique of the technical performance. That's what's being discussed. Now many people don't like is because the writing is bad, and some people like it despite the writing being bad, but it's inarguable that the writing standard in the MSQ is bad. With many many examples highlight the telling not showing, no character journey, heel turns with no build up or reasonable payoff etc etc.