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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

I hope they'll tap into the Populares strain of thinking somewhat for how Garlemald progresses in the future. Maxima is still around, after all.

---

Yep. They've got a lot of Garlean characters to bring to the table and get involved in the recovery efforts. They can also showcase the might of magitek next time there's a big threat to be dealt with. FFVII had Scarlet indirectly involved in saving the planet, after all, due to designing the cannon that penetrated Sephiroth's barrier and allowed Cloud and his companions to reach him.

Garlemald could also become quite the trade powerhouse through creating and selling civilian focused magitek devices to slowly increase the quality of life across the board. If they play their cards right it could take the form of something similar to IX's steampunk style rather than futuristic/militaristic to better fit the aesthetics of the other nations.

When you realize Yoshida is Zodiark everything makes sense. Always thought his team was incompetant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

If we're getting diversity than I'd rather it take the form of diversity of thought, opinions and allegiance. FFVII and FFXII are great in that regard since at times you're opposed to Shinra/Archades and at other points you're working alongside them for the sake of mutual benefit. FFXIV could easily do as much and it'd interest me far more than the constant whining about 'oppression' in the MSQ's that is often taken out of context.

For starters, Doma, Bozja and Ala Mhigo were treated more harshly than other provinces as a consequence of sparking uprisings.

---

I had a feeling that using the word "diversity" would spark a new round of Garlemald apologism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FawkesWyznfarr

When you realize Yoshida is Zodiark everything makes sense. Always thought his team was incompetant.

---

I don't get it. Zodiark is what revives the world and shields it for 12k years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus

I had a feeling that using the word "diversity" would spark a new round of Garlemald apologism.

---

I'm not sure I follow. It's a fictional nation in a fantasy game, so there's nothing to apologise for and not everybody operates in such a way as to drag their real world belief systems into absolutely everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

I'm not sure I follow. It's a fictional nation in a fantasy game, so there's nothing to apologise for and not everybody operates in such a way as to drag their real world belief systems into absolutely everything.

---

Right. Whatever you say.

But, just to be clear, the term "diversity" in the context I was using it is about not making a cast too homogenous in any specific context. "Sure, they can throw in a Raen or a Roegadyn or whatever as part of the main cast for 'diversity'" is not really relevant. The problem is more related to the idea that if you create a vast world/setting where it's possible to see or find anything, making characters that all have identical factors greatly narrows that setting. To paraphrase "Plague of Gripes", if you introduce a group of lizardfolk and then make it clear that they all have the exact same religion or favorite foods, you remove any potential conflicts or discovery from your setting.

That's the problem with most of the Scions being from Sharlayan. They all come from similar backgrounds, with similar aesthetics and likes and dislikes. The fact that there's catgirls, humans, Elezen, and Lalafell in their party doesn't really matter.

To be honest, I'm basically actively disinterested in the general pining for more Garlemald content and don't think the direction it sometimes takes is the most relevant thing if we've settled on the idea of this being a place to "discuss EW's flaws" rather than an overall negativity thread. So sometimes I wish it had its own topic, but at this point in time, four months after the expansion's release, the boat's sailed, so it is what it is. Unless/until we get slapped with some hot new content that will give me an excuse to bring out a fresh new tidal wave of Hydaelyn Discourse. Little do the people know that the drive-by cracks about beating a dead horse actually give me power.

Each to their but the lack of a fully fleshed out Garlemald expansion is very much one of the reasons why I dislike Endwalker. I really dislike how Venat was handled but that's hardly my only complaint where the game's story is concerned and to me - and some others, it would seem - the way in which Garlemald was handled counts as a flaw.

I mean, Shadowbringers is the reason, and the blatant narrative place, where the Garlemald expansion got cut. The writing was on the wall very, very early in its patch cycle. Of course there's room to talk about Garlemald in EW - it had a dedicated zone - but "I wish Garlemald got more stuff" isn't something you can pin down to 6.0 specifically.

Like I said, I recognize the boat has sailed, of course. I'll just be over here with my horse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brinne

I mean, Shadowbringers is the reason, and the blatant narrative place, where the Garlemald expansion got cut. The writing was on the wall very, very early in its patch cycle. Of course there's room to talk about Garlemald in EW - it had a dedicated zone - but "I wish Garlemald got more stuff" isn't something you can pin down to 6.0 specifically.

Like I said, I recognize the boat has sailed, of course. I'll just be over here with my horse.

---

Eh, tbf this thread has gotten off topic many a time. No one really said anything those times when it was pertaining to gripes with ShB, or bringing up older expansions etc. Now it does seem like there’s some bias against garlemald :p don’t listen to ondore’s lies equivalent i guess.