(MAJOR SPOILERS) Just beat Endwalker MSQ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atelier-Bagur

The genocide remarks people like to throw are seriously some of the most childish twitter-like comments I've seen come out of this community. Grow up people.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aniya_Estlihn

Gotta agree, its virtue signaling of the highest degree and shows how few people have the actual ability to separate reality from fiction.

---

Am I the only one that doesn't see Venat as inherently genocidal? She did what she thought/was informed would have been the best way to stop Zodiark's self-sacrificial loop. They're both genocidal by the same standards. But unlike Zodiark whose souls actually got lost and/or still remain in the moon as mindless echoes, Hydaelyn's actions preserved the lives that existed, even if it meant splintering them. Sure, they lost their people as a result, but that was going to happen either way, and it's not like anyone was handling the apocalypse well at all.

>.> also that isn't about me mentioning "conqueror wants to genocide a whole people" thing I said before, is it? Because I just used that as an example. The beast tribes, Werylt and Bozja have that, for example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nav_Fae

In my opinion, if we're comparing exclusively 3.0 to 6.0 and none of the patches are included; than yes EW is better than HW to me. I think weighting 3.1+ into HW to an expansion that is still ongoing is a little unfair.

---

I think the comparison is still valid since it was their choice to end it in 6.0 and Endwalker's story certainly could've used more time, it's basically 2 expansion stories crammed into a X.0 patch.


But even if we only compare 3.0 to 6.0 it will depend on the player. Do you prefer a more grounded story (atleast by Final Fantasy standards) that is internally consistent or do you want the big emotional payoff and themes?

I think you people need to look up the meaning of genocide. Because lack of literal killing doesn't make it less of one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Midareyukki

Am I the only one that doesn't see Venat as inherently genocidal? She did what she thought/was informed would have been the best way to stop Zodiark's self-sacrificial loop. They're both genocidal by the same standards. But unlike Zodiark whose souls actually got lost and/or still remain in the moon as mindless echoes, Hydaelyn's actions preserved the lives that existed, even if it meant splintering them. Sure, they lost their people as a result, but that was going to happen either way, and it's not like anyone was handling the apocalypse well at all.

>.> also that isn't about me mentioning "conqueror wants to genocide a whole people" thing I said before, is it? Because I just used that as an example. The beast tribes, Werylt and Bozja have that, for example.

---

The annihilation of culture is still genocide and Venat murdered the people alive at the time and at best remade them into something new inhabiting weaker failures bodies and inhabiting a crueller more brutal world and Venat had a fetish for sufffering and everyone had to suffer to justify her evil ideology

Also the sacrifice falls apart in EW, it made sense in ShB that the races we see in the game may have been created during the second sacrifice when the world was set to right. But now all the player races are ancients souls reworking there bodies to deal with the effects of being sundered so there's no people to sacrifice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jameseoakes

The annihilation of culture is still genocide and Venat murdered the people alive at the time and at best remade them into something new inhabiting weaker failures bodies and inhabiting a crueller more brutal world and Venat had a fetish for sufffering and everyone had to suffer to justify her evil ideology

Also the sacrifice falls apart in EW, it made sense in ShB that the races we see in the game may have been created during the second sacrifice when the world was set to right. But now all the player races are ancients souls reworking there bodies to deal with the effects of being sundered so there's no people to sacrifice

---

That's the thing. I'd argue that she was no different than Meteion and Zodiark. Eventually both of them would lead to the destruction of their people and culture. Even if Zodiark promised to preserve it, you'd basically be killing off people who didn't partake in the mega suicide project at the risk of tempering. She just saw the writing on the wall and went for the path that saved the most life. And I mean "life" in the sense that it apparently is a quantifiable substance what with the Lifestream and souls being a thing, rather than "life in general". Meteion wanted "life in general" to be gone, so she's the most off-kilter of the three. It's cultural genocide, yes, but the others are full-on genocide.

...which now that I write that I realize "yeah, that doesn't make it better" so nevermind |D

Not that it excuses Venat, mind you. She basically took it upon herself to make sure present and future life would go on in a mangled state. Preserved, yes, but she still imposed her own vision on the world and cleaned the slate a little too hard.

As for the player races being ancients' souls, they said before that only some of us are, including some of the Beast Tribes (Sahagin priest with the Echo). The rest is just new life that sprouted from the Lifestream in an already sundered state.

I would've been infinitely more satisfied by the Sundering being either accidental or the product of some manner of deception or misunderstanding rather then it being completely intentional and fueled by logic that given what little context there is behind it felt poorly grounded to me.

Just because one race vaguely chasing perfection destroyed themselves does not mean your own will be subject to the same, and we're also just supposed to believe that a race as advanced as the Ancients who were capable of creating beings capable of wielding dynamis on a catastrophic scale were somehow wholly incapable of finding a solution to their own inability to utilize it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jameseoakes

Ah yes just the thing to come and do to people grieving, to telling them that they are wrong to grieve for the loved ones what a hateful thing to do. Hey everyone you loved is dead, well just get over it and move on. it's a hateful spiteful mindset.
Greif breaks people and I find the idea that if people don't react in an someone imposed way then they don't deserve to exterminated to be one of the most evil acts I've seen in Final Fantasy.

---

Grieving is one thing, trying to raise the dead which the best, brightest, and sharpest minds of the ancients; if I'm not mistaken, had never managed to accomplish is another. Also tell me wherein is the logic of sacrificing a number of people to bring back another number of people? What happens when the people brought back wish to sacrifice themselves to bring back those that sacrificed themselves for the sacrificed? All this would do is create a cyclical problem that could yield even worse unforeseen consequences further down the road. And that's assuming Zodiark even had the capability to truly bring people back as there's been no proof to concept that it even could.

My bother comes from the fact everything in this expansion was shoehorned, and felt extremely two dimensional. It decided it had a message it wanted to push above all else, and things like plot nuance all of a sudden disappeared to push this message. We went from "well, maybe the ancients had a point", part of the reason ShB was so well received was its delving into moral grey areas, and allowing us to see things from the perspective of the "villains", and then all of a sudden they decided to create a giant strawman of the whole thing and light it on fire while saying "look at it burning! Arent we great?" They even invented equivalences to Aether to push this message. It felt like they didnt want to write a great story, they wanted to push a very specific "feel good" agenda, for whatever reason. You can even see this in the scions, where Thancred should be fighting against Hydaelyns plan to abandon the star, he's just like "yeah sure cool". Huh??? Suddenly doesnt care about ryne anymore I guess. So much for prior characterisation. And all of that is to say nothing of the atrocious pacing, the lack of worthwhile content to do and the stale state of job design. That's a book for another day!

Gg because now the game is bereft of any interesting or compelling characters. No garlemald, no ancients/ascians, bozja storyline ditched and rushed in field notes. The scions have the same depth as a cardboard cutout, the WoL just does whatever they're told to do while being wrapped in 40 layers of plot armour.

I went from significant investment in the MSQ, to just not really caring at all. Because when the writers can just invent stuff out of thin air to make their agenda filled writing make sense, what's the point in paying attention?Which is a shame, but it is what it is. Endwalker was an insult to prior investment. Endwalker is to XIV what mgs5 is to MGS, or what KH3 is to KH, or what Cataclysm was to WoW. Billed as the next greatest thing ever, a swan song, ended up being a wet contentless fart. Hopefully 7.0 picks up cause rn I only play to spend time with FC friends and get my MMO itch scratched

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Midareyukki

That's the thing. I'd argue that she was no different than Meteion and Zodiark. Eventually both of them would lead to the destruction of their people and culture. Even if Zodiark promised to preserve it, you'd basically be killing off people who didn't partake in the mega suicide project at the risk of tempering. She just saw the writing on the wall and went for the path that saved the most life. And I mean "life" in the sense that it apparently is a quantifiable substance what with the Lifestream and souls being a thing, rather than "life in general". Meteion wanted "life in general" to be gone, so she's the most off-kilter of the three. It's cultural genocide, yes, but the others are full-on genocide.

...which now that I write that I realize "yeah, that doesn't make it better" so nevermind |D

Not that it excuses Venat, mind you. She basically took it upon herself to make sure present and future life would go on in a mangled state. Preserved, yes, but she still imposed her own vision on the world and cleaned the slate a little too hard.

As for the player races being ancients' souls, they said before that only some of us are, including some of the Beast Tribes (Sahagin priest with the Echo). The rest is just new life that sprouted from the Lifestream in an already sundered state.

---

What you don't seem to get, and neither do the white knights who think this is about Emet VS Venat, is that we don't think the treatment of Venat in the MSQ sucks because we're "team Emet-Selch". It's because she's just as 'bad' but doesn't get called out for it. The MSQ forces us to be sympathetic and treat her like 'mommy'. Both Venat and Emet are self righteous genocidal, only differed by the justification they gave to their actions. The treatment of Emet in ShB is better because we're allowed to choose how to respond, and even though the Scions eventually understand where he comes from, they ultimately disagree because, well, they don't want to die or have the people they care about die. It's the supposed "grey area" that Yoshida loved to talk about during the Endwalker preparation hype. Grey area which turned out to be absent in Endwalker's MSQ.

Sees the start of the what is or isn't genocide and who's is worse "debate" start again and just groans

I don't post gifs heck I think I've only posted one picture since this account was made. Anywho all you general discussion peeps have fun using necromancy on that poor horse so you can turn it into more bow strings and whatnot.