A game for 4 year olds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

That's a good attitude to have up to a point, and I held onto it for an incredibly long time. I do think it's important to listen to everyone in a discussion, and even people I disagree with deeply on some subjects have interesting things to say on others.

So if I'm not going to reply, and the posts are pure negativity, then for my own sake it is much better to block them out. It has taken me a long time to reach this point with any one poster, and I wish I didn't reach it at all, but I did. And the forum is immediately more calm and pleasant without certain voices.

---

I tried this idea and it worked wonders. I've put up with a lot of nonsensical screeching from various posters on the forums, believing that there might be some value in refraining from blocking them out, but last night I grew tired of this never-ending farce and put the worst offenders on the ignore list. I've always wondered why Aveyond doesn't bother with a good chunk of the posters over in general and now I guess I know why.

I don't care what content you like or dislike as long as you're not trying to shove it in people's faces and calling them words because they don't agree. This goes for all sides of this circus because Lord knows it'll never be said enough. Honestly it should just be common sense but that seems to have died somewhere in the last two decades. If you're the type of person who loses sleep over this, get some damn help. If you want to ruin somebody's life because they're not agreeing with you on content in a video game, see above but not before taking an axe to your modem, but unplug it first so you don't shock yourself. As for this questline: meh, I've seen worse. I was in it for the lore of the Grebuloffs, that's pretty much it.

It’s always a great idea to write or rewrite characters when you know jack potato about psychology or simply people processing emotions in different ways, you know that way you’ll definitely get a story with varied individuals, Id honestly call up Square and tell them to hire me if I was you.

As for the rest on a serious note, I am sorry so many of you experienced loss recently, I wish I could hug you all (if you wanted to of course).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SassyAssassin

It’s always a great idea to write or rewrite characters when you know jack potato about psychology or simply people processing emotions in different ways, you know that way you’ll definitely get a story with varied individuals, Id honestly call up Square and tell them to hire me if I was you.

As for the rest on a serious note, I am sorry so many of you experienced loss recently, I wish I could hug you all (if you wanted to of course).

---

Thank you for your words about loss. Grief never goes away when losing a loved one. You just learn to manage it as time goes on.

As for this thread, I think we should all stop posting here since it's a cesspool of negativity right down to the title itself. Anything with insulting titles in the threads I think should just promptly be ignored. If anyone wants to have a discussion about the Beast Tribes, please make a proper thread so we can discuss the stories there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SassyAssassin

It’s always a great idea to write or rewrite characters when you know jack potato about psychology or simply people processing emotions in different ways, you know that way you’ll definitely get a story with varied individuals, Id honestly call up Square and tell them to hire me if I was you.

---

You mean like when lore forum insist that not "forging ahead" after losing someone is not the "right" way to live? That if someone disagree with the game message and venat then they're "wrong"? That if we "don't get" hermes means we don't have depression? That if we disagree with his tantrum means we "unsympathetic and lack morals".

Hilarious how *now* people here take the "people grieve in different ways" when they've been saying people who don't support the game message are wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KariTheFox

The idea that anyone is actually better off as colonial subjects has some pretty troubling real life implications

---

You mean real life implications that sometimes, the colonized nations were worse than the colonizer? Because that happened. And frankly, rather than plain "oh all the provinces rebelling", I prefer if there are some provinces who want to stay under the empire for all those reasons you listed. They don't have to be unambiguously good even, let them have conditions (for example regarding the second class citizens thing).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikkoAkure

snip

---

Eorzean's crime is definitely the same as garlean's crime. Their number is lower than garlemalds? Perhaps. But killing 100 people or 1000 people, the sin is still the same.

Your example Eorzea's second chance only happened because of WoL, and even then it was very recent. In arr we still have limsa in war with the sahagin because they broke the treaty.

If you don't remember, their crimes don't/didn't stop there either. Gridania still haven't addressed their racism against duskwight (and moon at iirc?), their wood wailers are r*ping poachers. Limsa used to be a pirate nation that attacks everyone. Ul'dah still corrupt as hell, and let's not forget the whole sildih business too. Not to mention when they ask us to stop the giants from seeking revenge after being slaves and buried alive. Then there's ishgard who was on war with the dragons for a thousand year. They make peace with dragons? Cool. Doesn't change the fact that they still kill loads of dragons and they're the one who started it in the first place. Ala mhigo had their famous autumn war.

What I want to say is, they're not perfect right? The same as garlemald as of now. But if the game can gave them second chance, why not doing the same for garlean empire?

"In what world would it then make sense for the Garleans after everything they’ve done to suddenly make everything OK and keep their empire just because they have a new leader?"
Because they don't need permission from anybody to rebuild their empire? As alphinaud said, the alliance won't force them to abandon their way of life.

I'm not asking for everything to be perfect. Heck even asking garlemald to be empire again can be good for potential conflict in ilsabard. People won't trust them easily? that's okay too. I just want them to have their dignity, rebuild their empire, and not to have all that happened off-screen.

Hypothetical question; if in the future the game actually gave us garlemald expansion where they're to rebuild their empire and for some provinces agree to still be under them (let's say for example, because of their technological advantage and economic reason), in a well written and logical story, will you still against it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kozh

Hypothetical question; if in the future the game actually gave us garlemald expansion where they're to rebuild their empire and for some provinces agree to still be under them (let's say for example, because of their technological advantage and economic reason), in a well written and logical story, will you still against it?

---

First, 'rebuild their [60 year old] empire' is probably never going to happen.

The Garleans I've encountered along the way could do just as well in a Republic (as was the case before Empire), or anything less threatening. Empires are built on the backs of conquered nations. I can't see the advantage for a now freed state to allow the Garleans to exert the same level of control as before.

So, no Empire building ... that way leads to one of the freed states deciding to take advantage of the desolation of Garlemald to become their next conqueror.

I can see no 'logical story' coming out of such a situtation -- only doom, disaster and despair for Garlemald and its peoples.

It is no longer the story of the Warrior of Light at that point. It will be hidden off screen, as was Ala Mhigo for the most part.

A proper conclusion for the Garleans being handled off-screen is probably one of the biggest things I don't want them to do with the story going forward.

We've sowed the seeds of change and peace for them, so taking further measures to ensure that they are neither oppressed nor continuing to oppress others would feel irresponsible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPZ2

So, no Empire building ... that way leads to one of the freed states deciding to take advantage of the desolation of Garlemald to become their next conqueror.

---

I should point out that this sort of story has been approached around Garlemald a couple times. Bozja definitely paints Gabranth as essentially trying this, and both the Doma and Ala Mhigo parts of the Stormblood patch content have 'let's not leave ourselves open to tyrannical rule again' as a significant element. So it's clear where the general mindset is around the problem, as well as it being clear that we've gone through this song and dance before. (And for people who think the game is 'too pro-democracy' or whatever, I should point out that Doma grapples with that question while remaining a feudal lordship because Doma's relationship to the problem is different to everyone else's.)

Also, I should point out: a lot of the people who tend to be fairly pro-imperialism or the like are usually picturing themselves as the empire in the equation, rather than the conquered. This game tends not to.


Concluding the Garleans' story more than it has been so far is kinda weird, because yes it should be done, but it's hard to figure out where or how. It's not a story that suits the broad, often grand and combat-heavy approach of the MSQ, because honestly, most of the playerbase isn't super interested in that sort of dense politics with very little action (same reason why we won't get a war tribunal to determine guilt for people like Fordola). But at the same time you don't necessarily want it to be too far out of the way, so the all-roles capstone probably won't be where it's best explored. The tone is DEFINITELY not light or comedic, so Hildibrand's out, as is most likely a tribe quest even if I think that'd nail it (while tribe quests can deal with heavier subjects, they fly better being light-hearted).

Ideally they'd be best off with a slightly more extended wrapup that we just happen to be present for, similar to the EW role quests (the capstone was indeed Garlean, but was way too brief and focused on the Blasphemy). It's kinda hard to imagine where exactly that sort of approach might fit though, especially in a patch cycle where all the major content tentpoles are already accounted for.

We're quite likely to help the Garleans rebuild their country, which is not the same thing as helping them rebuild the entire empire.