The Ancients still deserved better, after everything

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rokke

You cant find anything because you're looking up the wrong Nier game. The phone game is called NieR Reincarnation, and its recent XIV collab was written by Ishikawa.

---

An actual reference, complete with Ishikawa's name would be appreciated. There is a Yui Ishikawa mentioned in relation to that particular game -- as a voice actress.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPZ2

An actual reference, complete with Ishikawa's name would be appreciated. There is a Yui Ishikawa mentioned in relation to that particular game -- as a voice actress.

---

You literally just need to do a search for "nier crossover Ishikawa".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPZ2

An actual reference, complete with Ishikawa's name would be appreciated. There is a Yui Ishikawa mentioned in relation to that particular game -- as a voice actress.

---

https://www.fanbyte.com/news/an-orig...a-coming-soon/

https://www.reddit.com/r/ffxiv/comme...m_source=share

https://www.siliconera.com/nier-rein...date-revealed/

https://www.siliconera.com/nier-rein...date-revealed/

https://media.discordapp.net/attachm.../unknown_1.png

Lemme just slide in another link for good measure.

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/ni.../1100-6503203/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BaconBits

https://www.fanbyte.com/news/an-orig...a-coming-soon/

https://www.reddit.com/r/ffxiv/comme...m_source=share

https://www.siliconera.com/nier-rein...date-revealed/

https://www.siliconera.com/nier-rein...date-revealed/

https://media.discordapp.net/attachm.../unknown_1.png

---

Thank you.

The first link I found was the voice actress, and most links do not actually Ishikawa listed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

You literally just need to do a search for "nier crossover Ishikawa".

---

Sure. Not. The first through third page links mention a voice actress, not a writer, if they mention Ishikawa at all. Then again, I don't use Google for searches, since the first two pages are typically ads.

You could have provided a single link, but no ... it appears that was too hard for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TaleraRistain

I think those in the other timeline gave in to despair, too. We got the impression their world was pretty bad off. But they looked to the past like the Ancients did. I thought it was rather poetic there that as Middy had come to Etheirys because it meant hope, he was able to become the hope for that timeline and allow them to look to the future again.

Have you ever seen a situation where every is losing it except that one person? They keep things together because they have to. That's our WoL. I think that's part of why the Scions told the world they had disbanded. Time to find their own solutions for once.

As far as the Empty, I don't believe there was any indication in the story there that we were going to harm anything with summoning. We were attempting to kickstart the elements again since they had stagnated due to overexposure to Light. If you're approaching it from the idea of looking into the past, it's not really that. That land can't support life anymore. We weren't restoring it entirely to what it was before. We were making it viable to whatever life grew there from that point onward.

---

another big difference between the ancients and the ironworks was, the ironworks worked for a "past" they woudl never experience, a world they knew they would NOT profit off, they knew it couldpotentialy lead ot their own end, to being reduced to never haivng existed in the first place

The people who finished the timemachinethingy(not necesserly the people who started it), where, 100% selfless in the regard in that they worked for a world, a future, and a past, they know they could never experience themself.


They doomed potentially millions of not billions of people, but they also doomed themself, they knew it, and they accepted it.


The ancients on the other hand, where willing to doom others(the "new life" whatever that may be) to create benefit for themself
yes they "sacrificed half their numbers" but what, pray tell, was their intention later? to get those souls back, nothing would have been "sacrificed" in the end outside of unwilling, third party "new life"
The ancients acted solely for their own benefit(and as much as that extended to the "star" in their arrogance of being "the shephards of the star")completly intending to reap a reward from their work.
thats the big difference between the ironworks in the eighty umbral, and the Ancients, the end intend of "profit"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZeraSkiratea

another big difference between the ancients and the ironworks was, the ironworks worked for a "past" they woudl never experience, a world they knew they would NOT profit off, they knew it couldpotentialy lead ot their own end, to being reduced to never haivng existed in the first place

The people who finished the timemachinethingy(not necesserly the people who started it), where, 100% selfless in the regard in that they worked for a world, a future, and a past, they know they could never experience themself.


They doomed potentially millions of not billions of people, but they also doomed themself, they knew it, and they accepted it.


The ancients on the other hand, where willing to doom others(the "new life" whatever that may be) to create benefit for themself
yes they "sacrificed half their numbers" but what, pray tell, was their intention later? to get those souls back, nothing would have been "sacrificed" in the end outside of unwilling, third party "new life"
The ancients acted solely for their own benefit(and as much as that extended to the "star" in their arrogance of being "the shephards of the star")completly intending to reap a reward from their work.
thats the big difference between the ironworks in the eighty umbral, and the Ancients, the end intend of "profit"

---

Yep I've made a similar point in other threads. The 8UC timeline was going to feel a personal consequence. They were creating an unknown future and they just had to hope it was better. And they knew it could have grave consequences not just for others but for themselves.

For the Ancients who wanted to bring back those lost, what was their personal consequence?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPZ2

Sure. Not. The first through third page links mention a voice actress, not a writer, if they mention Ishikawa at all. Then again, I don't use Google for searches, since the first two pages are typically ads.

You could have provided a single link, but no ... it appears that was too hard for you.

---

What's the point of claiming something that is so easily disproven? I don't even have to click these links (found by copying and pasting "nier crossover Ishikawa" into Google and looking at the first few entries) to see that Natsuko Ishikawa, writer of Shadowbringers, wrote a crossover event for Nier: Reincarnation.

https://i.imgur.com/z3q9Hwh.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZeraSkiratea

another big difference between the ancients and the ironworks was, the ironworks worked for a "past" they woudl never experience, a world they knew they would NOT profit off, they knew it couldpotentialy lead ot their own end, to being reduced to never haivng existed in the first place

The people who finished the timemachinethingy(not necesserly the people who started it), where, 100% selfless in the regard in that they worked for a world, a future, and a past, they know they could never experience themself.


They doomed potentially millions of not billions of people, but they also doomed themself, they knew it, and they accepted it.


The ancients on the other hand, where willing to doom others(the "new life" whatever that may be) to create benefit for themself
yes they "sacrificed half their numbers" but what, pray tell, was their intention later? to get those souls back, nothing would have been "sacrificed" in the end outside of unwilling, third party "new life"
The ancients acted solely for their own benefit(and as much as that extended to the "star" in their arrogance of being "the shephards of the star")completly intending to reap a reward from their work.
thats the big difference between the ironworks in the eighty umbral, and the Ancients, the end intend of "profit"

---

The new life could be plants and animals for all we know. Youre going to say the ancients were wrong for sacrificing them for actual people? Because in that case i guess the WoL is wrong for summoning primals in eden just to kill them and restore the empty. Or Yshtola is wrong for summoning nixies just to send them into the void and let them be killed etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPZ2

Sure. Not. The first through third page links mention a voice actress, not a writer, if they mention Ishikawa at all. Then again, I don't use Google for searches, since the first two pages are typically ads.

You could have provided a single link, but no ... it appears that was too hard for you.

---

Would you like to further demonstrate how this task proved to be too difficult for you that you required the assistance of others and then try to make them seem like the inept ones?

https://i.imgur.com/5dOpnPL.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/4As2jMp.jpg

Thanks for confirming I should block you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZeraSkiratea

The ancients acted solely for their own benefit(and as much as that extended to the "star" in their arrogance of being "the shephards of the star")completly intending to reap a reward from their work.

---

To be clear - are you claiming that the ancients who were sacrificed did so under the understanding that they'd later be returned? Because if you're claiming that, specifically, I am going to need a source for it.

Quote:

---

The ancients acted solely for their own benefit(and as much as that extended to the "star" in their arrogance of being "the shephards of the star")completly intending to reap a reward from their work.

---

What's the "arrogance" here? Keep seeing this term just being thrown around, but you're going to have to explain to me how seeing themselves as responsible for the star's well-being is "arrogant", and relative to what it is "arrogant". I don't take this term particularly seriously, if I am honest. It's just one of those buzzwords this community likes thoughtlessly throwing around, but maybe you can persuade me otherwise.

Whether or not the Ironworks did so with their own benefit in mind, or that of another future timeline, they still arrogated to themselves the power to make a decision that could impact an entire timeline's existence. We can spin these things all day long, if you like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

The new life could be plants and animals for all we know. Youre going to say the ancients were wrong for sacrificing them for actual people? Because in that case i guess the WoL is wrong for summoning primals in eden just to kill them and restore the empty. Or Yshtola is wrong for summoning nixies just to send them into the void and let them be killed etc.

---

the problem with the "animal and plant" idea is that there where people within the Ancient society who disagreed with sacrifcing the "new life", so it had to at least have some degree of "status" i doubt even the most hardcore people in the ancient society would consider plants to be worthy to "hand over the star"(or whatever similiar phrase was used) to, it had to be either sentient, or potential sentient in the future fo rthe idea of people disagreeing with the sacrifice on that scale ot make sense

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

SNIP

---

Arrogance in that they themself assumed that they alone have the authority to deem what "life" was worthy of existing on the Planet(venat is no exception here)
to the point that instead of trying to fix and imrpove beings that show problems, they rather just unmake it, write it down as a failure, and start over.(this Arrogance is something even we in our society irl have to some degree imo)
There is a BIG difference in seeing themself responsible for the well being, and functioning, of the Star, and Deciding they have the right to deem what is worthy to live, and that something is only worthy to live if its a "net positive" for the star. (I could draw paralels to humans and how that would look if we apply the whole "only worthy to live if its a net positive for society" to that, but that WOULD be disingenous as i personaly do not believe such a comparision could really work to a satisfying degree without abstraction upon abstraction.)
I admit tho, arogance is the wrong word, i just cant think of a better one as a non native speaker
Dont get me wrong, Venta is also Arogant in that regard, her actions certainly are questionable, even if they ultimatly lead to the best outcome we are currently aware of was possible(emet selch admiting the ancients would not have gotten that far as evidence here)



Also, i should have been clearer, i "seperate" in booth ironworks case, and the Ancients case, the "first generation" and "second generation and later" people
the People who lived trough the 8UC and started the time machine, are very similiar to the Ancients second gen who wanted more sacrifices to be made to return to status que.
There are some differences in intent, in scale, and in other things, but thats that.
In the end booth acted in a fashion they expected, hoped, or wanted to benefit them in some capacity, even if its just an alternate universe self



first gen Ancients(aka the "sacrificed people") are more akin to the Second gen Ironworks, aka They did what they did without the intent of a reward themself, for a brighter morrow even if they can not themself ever see it.
NOW we dont know enough about the whole ordeal, the Sacrificed people could potentialy have known about the possibility of a return(i doubt it but possibility exists) but that be ignored here.


If we want to abstract it IMMENSLY and break it down into paralels
one is the story of a Selfess sacrifice where no reward would ever reach them, turned into the want of personal benefit by those after.
And the other is a story of want of personal benefit, turned into selfless sacrifice where no reward could ever reach them by those after


i PERSONALLY and this is PERSONAL AS IT GOES, am of the opinion that the endresult, in booth cases far outweights their original intention by sheer scale.

More people(far more) worked on the Machine without the intend or possibility to profit from it, then that did intend or could profit from it
While a sizable chunk of ancients(roughly half) didnt want or expect(as far as we know) any profit from it personally, while a good other half EXPECTED some benefit from it and thats why they worked on it

My question then would be, who else has this authority? There's no god above them. The star is happily sticking souls in creations that comply with its peculiar requirements. They're not simply using their power - which is innate and natural to them - for personal gain so much as what they see as the communal goal of improving their star by enriching the life that populates it. This is why I fail to understand where arrogance comes into this - if anything, it tilts in the opposite direction. I can't even say this is misguided, because they see both themselves and their creations as sharing a beneficial co-existence with the star, each serving their purpose in enriching it - they even saw their own return to it as part of its lifeblood. I see it as a rather beautiful and harmonious relationship. Moreover, we see from the Elpis sidequests that as a people they had a rich tapestry of personalities and viewpoints, and many of them would readily consider new viewpoints, and were not some hivemind.

I must admit, I genuinely struggle to see the issue with what they were doing. We, too, as a species shape other (lesser) species to service our ends, which can include very whimsical, trivial ones, and will even resort to genetic engineering for this. Now you can perhaps label this "arrogant" in the sense that we're not omniscient and that it comes with risks, but the specific argument of "what gives us that authority?" is meaningless to me. Absent a higher power or some natural moral order woven into the fabric of the universe, to which such decisions are properly reserved, at least. They could simply unmake the beings and revise the concept, or they could try other methods before doing so. They're still going to judge if it's a good fit for their star's ecosystem, or otherwise natural selection will very brutally make that decision on their behalf, which was their concern with the lykaones. And I am not even going to compare to the sundered or us as RL humans as you concede the same criticisms could be levelled - and I would say even harsher ones if we were to pick apart the sundered and put them under a microscope; not that I propose to do so.

As for those sacrificed to Zodiark (amounting to 75% of their remaining population), they did not know. It's clear from this source (JP version here... sources for other stuff here), because the Convocation amended its original plan to restore them. I am going to make a point here: the ancients caught in Zodiark were in a limbo, where they could not enjoy return to the star, which they cherished culturally. The ancients, as per sources in SHB (namely, Elidibus's short story), were also divided over this final stage, including the Convocation (FR SOS text confirms this), so much so that Elidibus emerged to mediate the debate. We don't know what the cause of the division was in broader ancient society (Venat's group is more concerned with the Plenty as an outcome but she did not share this with her people), but a very plausible reason here is how those sacrificed originally would feel about being returned - something Elidibus, as core of the primal, could speak to. To me it looks less like this act was purely selfish, and more that they had a complex situation of whether to leave their sacrificed brethren in this limbo. Even if I were to grant that some were being 'selfish' and simply wanted the return of their people, the existing division on this matter could have allowed for them to change course if they had been given the full truth of the risks Venat believed this carried.

Quote:

---

Dont get me wrong, Venta is also Arogant in that regard, her actions certainly are questionable, even if they ultimatly lead to the best outcome we are currently aware of was possible(emet selch admiting the ancients would not have gotten that far as evidence here)

---

This really isn't going to cut it for me. :p He simply says "our methods" - as ancients or Ascians? Venat is an ancient at the end of the day. She's using ancient methods. So the "our" in this case vague, as is what he's specifically referring to. In the FR version, it is clearer he is referring to her gift as a matchmaker as the overall context behind those lines. Either way, I'm afraid I don't consider what he's saying there to equate to the claim that the ancients, given the full knowledge of what happened, had no possible way of resolving this on their own terms. It's too vague and he goes on to say his principles are invincible, so it's a weird meaning to extract from it, IMO, plus even if I granted it, he's not omniscient.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

They're still going to judge if it's a good fit for their star's ecosystem, or otherwise natural selection will very brutally make that decision on their behalf, which was their concern with the lykaones.

---

That's the question, though. What makes them think they have the right to decide that? The star isn't their creation. It's their home. And it's not a dishonorable thing to want to improve it. But it is a problem to decide that something doesn't have worth to the star just because of their own views. Like you said, natural selection may have made that decision but there also could be benefit in that it would lead to prey creatures that are sharper and more aware so they don't fall victim to those predators. You don't ever see them considering that viewpoint. But it's like the difference between a carefully cultivated garden of flowers and a field of wildflowers. The field of wildflowers isn't any less beautiful just because it developed naturally. Hermes was not perfect, but he was one person at least who was willing to let something natural be natural and see how it would evolve. Maybe others happily cut that growth off at the knees. And all because they had established themselves as the beings who were there to make that decision.

The Occuria in XII were the same way. They had decided they were the arbiters of peace on their planet. They felt it was their place to pull the strings of mankind because they were preventing war. They refused to allow mankind to develop as they would, to maybe fight but also maybe learn and grow and find a way to their own peace.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TaleraRistain

That's the question, though. What makes them think they have the right to decide that? The star isn't their creation. It's their home. And it's not a dishonorable thing to want to improve it. But it is a problem to decide that something doesn't have worth to the star just because of their own views. Like you said, natural selection may have made that decision but there also could be benefit in that it would lead to prey creatures that are sharper and more aware so they don't fall victim to those predators. You don't ever see them considering that viewpoint. But it's like the difference between a carefully cultivated garden of flowers and a field of wildflowers. The field of wildflowers isn't any less beautiful just because it developed naturally. Hermes was not perfect, but he was one person at least who was willing to let something natural be natural and see how it would evolve. Maybe others happily cut that growth off at the knees. And all because they had established themselves as the beings who were there to make that decision.

---

What makes us humans think we have the right to build houses and not live in caves? To eat meat out of a supermarket packet and not obtain it through hunting? To obtain light through electricity and not through fire, or indeed, whenever the sun deigns to show itself? I don't really understand the basis of the question. Concepts of right and wrong at the end of the day are societal constructs that we base our moral systems off for the purposes of peaceful co-existence and prosperity, and there tends to be debate within these confines (although there's some other frameworks one can refer to, but they still refer to mutually agreed upon social ends.) They're not free-floating concepts in the aether to which actions must align in order to be right or wrong. That's how I see it, particularly when there's no divinely ordained order in the setting. So it's not clear to me who, if not they, would simply arrive at this decision or grant them such a right. It's a decision they came to, over time, to exercise their powers in a particular way that they saw as harmonious for the entire star. Does it need more of a justification than that at the end of the day?

They do explicitly consider methods besides creation magicks when it comes to planting stuff, touched upon in the sidequests. The problem with the lykaones was, even using a variety of methods as requested by Hermes to modify behaviour, these beings were still so dangerous that they would decimate any eco-systems they were released into, and it's shown further by how they're able to handily lay waste to another species in Elpis, remarked upon as being formidable prey. Natural selection will take its course with what they release regardless - they just didn't want to put anything that dangerous out there, and Elpis is there to provide a preliminary testing ground for this. That is its entire purpose. To me this is less a case of arrogance, more one of taking an abundance of caution with what they released - and that is another reason I fail to see how "arrogant" as a descriptor makes much sense. Their entire society is orchestrated to ensure responsible use of their powers and it is ultimately a violation of one of these tenets that resulted in an untested Meteion in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TaleraRistain

That's the question, though. What makes them think they have the right to decide that? The star isn't their creation. It's their home. And it's not a dishonorable thing to want to improve it. But it is a problem to decide that something doesn't have worth to the star just because of their own views. Like you said, natural selection may have made that decision but there also could be benefit in that it would lead to prey creatures that are sharper and more aware so they don't fall victim to those predators. You don't ever see them considering that viewpoint. But it's like the difference between a carefully cultivated garden of flowers and a field of wildflowers. The field of wildflowers isn't any less beautiful just because it developed naturally. Hermes was not perfect, but he was one person at least who was willing to let something natural be natural and see how it would evolve. Maybe others happily cut that growth off at the knees. And all because they had established themselves as the beings who were there to make that decision.

The Occuria in XII were the same way. They had decided they were the arbiters of peace on their planet. They felt it was their place to pull the strings of mankind because they were preventing war. They refused to allow mankind to develop as they would, to maybe fight but also maybe learn and grow and find a way to their own peace.

---

The Occuria only truly interfered when mankind were on the way to extinction. Venat made that a sure thing though by erasing magic from the world...

Can you people please stop bringing up Emet talking about "our methods wouldn't have worked" or whatever? Of COURSE the writers are going to have the fan favorite say something like that in order to validate the party they're trying to push as objectively right. There's no other reason they would've made him say that if not to scream at us how right she was. That doesn't mean any of us have to accept it. And I'm ESPECIALLY not accepting it after YoshiP admitted that his whole laundry list of places to visit was him acting as the devs' mouthpiece there; his whole purpose in the final zone was being the devs' mouthpiece.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

What makes us humans think we have the right to build houses and not live in caves? To eat meat out of a supermarket packet and not obtain it through hunting? To obtain light through electricity and not through fire, or indeed, whenever the sun deigns to show itself? I don't really understand the basis of the question. Concepts of right and wrong at the end of the day are societal constructs that we base our moral systems off for the purposes of peaceful co-existence and prosperity, and there tends to be debate within these confines (although there's some other frameworks one can refer to, but they still refer to mutually agreed upon social ends.)

---

I agree. Whenever I see anyone asking this question "What makes them think they have the right to decide (something)...?" I just think that's rich coming from humans in general, considering all the self-proclaimed roles we give ourselves. And within the story too, the sundered have no moral high ground considering how they treat what they consider "lesser" life forms as well.

For example: in regards to the issue of factory farming and culling invasive species - for some, they may think it's wrong but may consider it a necessary evil, others may not care about it at all and think it's just normal, but if a situation occurred where we were visited by aliens or something and suddenly we became the prey, there would be an issue. "What right do these beings have to dictate to us what we can and can't do?" Meanwhile, it wasn't a major issue when we were the only apex predators.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anhaato

Can you people please stop bringing up Emet talking about "our methods wouldn't have worked" or whatever? Of COURSE the writers are going to have the fan favorite say something like that in order to validate the party they're trying to push as objectively right. There's no other reason they would've made him say that if not to scream at us how right she was. That doesn't mean any of us have to accept it. And I'm ESPECIALLY not accepting it after YoshiP admitted that his whole laundry list of places to visit was him acting as the devs' mouthpiece there; his whole purpose in the final zone was being the devs' mouthpiece.

---

mate, slow it down with your head canon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hagare

mate, slow it down with your head canon

---

https://www.theverge.com/2022/4/29/2...source=twitter

“With how cleanly Endwalker reaches its conclusion, there may be people out there who feel uncertain about future adventures,” he said. “That’s precisely why I had Emet-Selch take on the role of chiding like, ‘What’s with that lonely look, as though you know and have adventured through everything there is to see in the world? That’s nonsense, there are so many views you’ve yet to see. I’ve seen them; now you go see them, too.’”

I dare you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

This isn't random violence. This is someone we know is going to be opposed to Zodiark if he's created and who we know would've been unable to defeat him without the sundering. "Hydaelyn was created with the power to enervate Her foe", which the WoL is responsible for telling her to do. Specificity is important here..

---

Except the WoL doesn't have the power or influence to tell any Ancient what they must do. Sharing information about a timeline's history isn't telling someone what to do, especially when it's already acknowledged that multiple timelines exist.

Up until the end of Ktisis, none of them really believed the WoL's story. Hythlodaeus was humoring the WoL (one of Azem's crazy pranks, utilizing a familiar). Venat was treating the WoL like some sort of puzzle to solve. Emet was trying to ignore the WoL and still did not believe the story even as Kairos was finishing its countdown.

Venat was setting out to find her own answers when she parted with the WoL. She tells the WoL that their timelines may not converge depending on what choices she ends up making. That she ended up choosing the path she did was none of the WoL's doing. It was her doing.

Most important, you need to remember that you are not the WoL. The WoL is a fictitious character written for the purpose of telling a story. We may be experiencing the story through the eyes of that character but we are not them. We do not control the choices that the character makes nor are we responsible for them. That's on the storywriter.

Stop trying to make yourselves out as victims of some dastardly scheme to turn you into a bad guy. It's just a story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

Stop trying to make yourselves out as victims of some dastardly scheme to turn you into a bad guy. It's just a story.

---

Nobody is suggesting that is anything more than a story, though...?

As it happens, it's a story that people have invested in for up to a decade and the finale left a decent amount of people left wanting.

I think it's telling that World of Warcraft gave Horde players the choice to either side with or oppose a character as controversial as Sylvanas when she decided to engage in an act of genocide. That FFXIV did not show the player the same respect and simply assumed that we'd be perfectly fine going along with Venat's plan to genocide the Ancients is, quite honestly, pretty bizarre.

I just want consistency, personally. Genocide was established as a red line in the sand that absolutely could not be crossed and was to be opposed. Except, of course, that one time it was a 'good' genocide because it directly benefitted the protagonists.

Chiming in late, and only read the OP.

I've tried to relate to the ancients multiple times. It's like trying to plug in your laptop at a hotel in another country without an adapter. There are some reasons for this:

- Collectively, they decided to sacrifice half of their entire population
- twice
- were going to do it a third time
- Venat said, "Nay. All y'all."
- Unsundered caused 7 mass extinction events. Killing billions.
- Just one created a collective conscious aka Psychotron 9000, and sent them into space where they proceeded to end several civilizations.

These guys have a serious genocide complex, and I can see why we (Azem) turned against essentially all of them. Even Venat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

Except the WoL doesn't have the power or influence to tell any Ancient what they must do. Sharing information about a timeline's history isn't telling someone what to do, especially when it's already acknowledged that multiple timelines exist.

---

This doesn't matter in the context of a time loop. It created a paradox wherein the WoL telling Venat about the sundering leads to it happening. Most of us would've loved for Elpis to have ended in a positive outcome AU and probably wouldn't be here complaining had that happened.

Quote:

---

Up until the end of Ktisis, none of them really believed the WoL's story. Hythlodaeus was humoring the WoL (one of Azem's crazy pranks, utilizing a familiar). Venat was treating the WoL like some sort of puzzle to solve. Emet was trying to ignore the WoL and still did not believe the story even as Kairos was finishing its countdown.

---

Well, I can't argue this cause it's your subjective interpretation at best and headcanon at worst.

Quote:

---

Venat was setting out to find her own answers when she parted with the WoL. She tells the WoL that their timelines may not converge depending on what choices she ends up making. That she ended up choosing the path she did was none of the WoL's doing. It was her doing.

---

This argument only works until she commits herself to becoming Hydaelyn and enacting the sundering. Even then it's questionable because her dialog at the end of Ktsis would suggest she has already decided not to do anything differently.

Quote:

---

Most important, you need to remember that you are not the WoL. The WoL is a fictitious character written for the purpose of telling a story. We may be experiencing the story through the eyes of that character but we are not them. We do not control the choices that the character makes nor are we responsible for them. That's on the storywriter.

Stop trying to make yourselves out as victims of some dastardly scheme to turn you into a bad guy. It's just a story.

---

Well, for "just a story" you certainly seem invested in telling people how they should have thought and felt throughout it. Are you one of the writers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

Chiming in late, and only read the OP.

I've tried to relate to the ancients multiple times. It's like trying to plug in your laptop at a hotel in another country without an adapter. There are some reasons for this:

- Collectively, they decided to sacrifice half of their entire population
- twice
- were going to do it a third time
- Venat said, "Nay. All y'all."
- Unsundered caused 7 mass extinction events. Killing billions.
- Just one created a collective conscious aka Psychotron 9000, and sent them into space where they proceeded to end several civilizations.

These guys have a serious genocide complex, and I can see why we (Azem) turned against essentially all of them. Even Venat.

---

Except we didnt even turn against Venat, we call her a hero lmao, and go along with her entire plan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

Nobody is suggesting that is anything more than a story, though...?

---

Except the OP absolutely was and it was my response to what the OP said that started the discussion about how "we" are responsible for what Venat did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SentioftheHoukai

Tldr; the Ancients are my true people, not the Sundered and Endwalker was one big nightmare for me that forced me to commit virtual genocide, be okay with it, offend my moral values, wank the other person responsible the whole ride, and generally commit numerous crimes on my person at the hands of Square Enix.

---

That is not someone treating it just like a story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

This doesn't matter in the context of a time loop. It created a paradox wherein the WoL telling Venat about the sundering leads to it happening. Most of us would've loved for Elpis to have ended in a positive outcome AU and probably wouldn't be here complaining had that happened.

---

Yet there is still an initial event triggering the time loop when we know choices can lead to alternate timelines (which SE established as canon for the FFXIV universe with the 8th Umbral Calamity timeline story). What happened first?

The WoL wouldn't have told Venat that she caused the Sundering if that hadn't happened in the WoL's timeline. Venat, on the other hand, still could have made the choice to cause the Sundering even if the WoL hadn't appeared.

Venat is responsible for her actions. Not the WoL.

You might want Elpis to have a positive outcome. Ishikawa didn't and this is the story that she wanted to tell. You're always free to right your own story about a positive outcome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Well, for "just a story" you certainly seem invested in telling people how they should have thought and felt throughout it. Are you one of the writers?

---

No, I'm not one of the writers.

It's fine to approve or disapprove of choices the writer made throughout a story. "I wish the writer had given this story a different outcome" is fine.

But from an emotional health perspective it's dangerous to allow yourself to get so drawn into a story that you start confusing yourself as being the character and feeling that you're responsible for what a character does. What the OP said is someone who has tipped dangerously over the edge over taking the events happening in the story far too personally.

catch me fortnite dancing in amourot because the ancients are finally dead

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

Chiming in late, and only read the OP.

I've tried to relate to the ancients multiple times. It's like trying to plug in your laptop at a hotel in another country without an adapter. There are some reasons for this:

- Collectively, they decided to sacrifice half of their entire population
- twice
- were going to do it a third time
- Venat said, "Nay. All y'all."
- Unsundered caused 7 mass extinction events. Killing billions.
- Just one created a collective conscious aka Psychotron 9000, and sent them into space where they proceeded to end several civilizations.

These guys have a serious genocide complex, and I can see why we (Azem) turned against essentially all of them. Even Venat.

---

Desperate times call for desperate measures. I also only recently remembered that according to Hythlodeus in Mare Lamentorum, the potential revival of the Ancients who gave themselves to Zodiark was always a consideration from the very beginning, which likely played into their willingness to go through with it.

The first sacrifice was very definitely needed as the world and mankind were both on the brink of total annihilation.

The second might not have been needed, but it's implied that the environment had been damaged so badly that more lives would've been lost by the time things corrected themselves naturally and/or with the aid of the Ancients doing in a more mundane (By their standards, at least) fashion.

The third was definitely not needed, but would've been the last according to the Convocation's plans. There surely would've been some Ancients who still wouldn't have been satisfied, perhaps those who lost loved ones to "natural" causes and were claimed by the Lifestream, but sparing those souls from being trapped in Zodiark would've been a certain kindness at a cost we were really not given enough context behind.

Just the fact that troubled people like Hermes and Erichtonios still existed stood as proof that their world really was only perfect in a relative sense, and I don't think they were at much risk of a "death by paradise" with how calculated every decision the Convocation made was.

Although I agree with your points, which are well made, there's one thing I'd differ on - Hythlodaeus is referring to an awareness of the plans for their revival, but the timing is unclear. I'm aware that he phrases this as "the events leading to our purgatory", but he also frames Hydaelyn's intervention and the star's fate in that context, which would've came after, and suggests they were along for the entire ride as an audience; I suspect what he's referring to is their state within Zodiark on the moon all those thousands of years, later culminating in a dream of kinds, as "purgatory". I am speculating a little here, but given that Elidibus stated in SoS that he could hear the debate on this raging amongst his people, and thus emerged to reconcile their differences, to me it seems more like a case that those inside him became aware of this through something like that. The most compelling reason for the third round of sacrifices in my eyes is the fact that by all appearances, being left in Zodiark deprived them of something they valued as a people, which is return to the star. There may have been a case to delay this until Meteion is driven back, but that'd require them being informed of this.

The screen I posted earlier with the Hythlodaeus dialogue describes how badly damaged their star was by the incident.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

Except we didnt even turn against Venat, we call her a hero lmao, and go along with her entire plan.

---

What are you talking about? Her plan was exodus, and her contingency plan was a haymaker that completely relied on Azem. We said eff that, and we're going to eliminate the problem at the source. With or without you. Nullifying thousands of years of hard labor by her adorable Loporrits. Instead of fighting with us to give us an edge, she decides to test our might with what remains of her power and gets owned just like every other primal. Call it what you will. I will call it "Azem's day of payback."

Whether someone considers Venat a hero or not is beyond the point. She is still part of a race that loves to cause mass extinction events, and carries that trait as much as any of them. Her smug face in your signature is exactly how I see this woman.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KageTokage

Desperate times call for desperate measures. I also only recently remembered that according to Hythlodeus in Mare Lamentorum, the potential revival of the Ancients who gave themselves to Zodiark was always a consideration from the very beginning, which likely played into their willingness to go through with it.

The first sacrifice was very definitely needed as the world and mankind were both on the brink of total annihilation.

The second might not have been needed, but it's implied that the environment had been damaged so badly that more lives would've been lost by the time things corrected themselves naturally and/or with the aid of the Ancients doing in a more mundane (By their standards, at least) fashion.

The third was definitely not needed, but would've been the last according to the Convocation's plans. There surely would've been some Ancients who still wouldn't have been satisfied, perhaps those who lost loved ones to "natural" causes and were claimed by the Lifestream, but sparing those souls from being trapped in Zodiark would've been a certain kindness at a cost we were really not given enough context behind.

Just the fact that troubled people like Hermes and Erichtonios still existed stood as proof that their world really was only perfect in a relative sense, and I don't think they were at much risk of a "death by paradise" with how calculated every decision the Convocation made was.

---

The only pardon I grant the ancients is that they were ill-prepared for the initial final days (before any bootstrap parodoxes). They were indeed desperate. However, subsequent sacrifices only goes to show how easily and quickly they are to resort to these "desperate measures". It leaves the question, "Did they really have to sacrifice so many souls to halt the end of days?"

Venat's case is much different. As only half of the ancients were willing to sacrifice their lives. Everyone else were murdered by the sundering. She's no hero in my eyes. But she was saved by one.

The potential revival of the souls sacrificed is an interesting one coming from the perspective of one of those very ancients who sacrifice themselves. I believe Emet also said this, but that is coming from someone who justifies the rejoinings by considering sundered souls to not actually be living, so he's not actually killing anyone.

As I said before, this race of people have destruction written in their DNA. Every bit as much as their creation magicks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anhaato

https://www.theverge.com/2022/4/29/2...source=twitter

“With how cleanly Endwalker reaches its conclusion, there may be people out there who feel uncertain about future adventures,” he said. “That’s precisely why I had Emet-Selch take on the role of chiding like, ‘What’s with that lonely look, as though you know and have adventured through everything there is to see in the world? That’s nonsense, there are so many views you’ve yet to see. I’ve seen them; now you go see them, too.’”

I dare you.

---

the guy youre replying to is a notorious troll. i and many others just ignore him.

Yes except for Hermes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

What are you talking about? Her plan was exodus, and her contingency plan was a haymaker that completely relied on Azem. We said eff that, and we're going to eliminate the problem at the source. With or without you. Nullifying thousands of years of hard labor by her adorable Loporrits. Instead of fighting with us to give us an edge, she decides to test our might with what remains of her power and gets owned just like every other primal. Call it what you will. I will call it "Azem's day of payback."

Whether someone considers Venat a hero or not is beyond the point. She is still part of a race that loves to cause mass extinction events, and carries that trait as much as any of them. Her smug face in your signature is exactly how I see this woman.

---

you COMPLETLY misunderstood the entire thing....
to the very core
THE EXODUS WAS THE PLAN B!!!! The Exodus was her plan if humanity ended up not being capable of fighting the Final Days and Endsinger or if they just "gave up".
She specificaly said "[I] saved [...]my power for this very moment" testing us was the plan A, if we failed, she would send us away to never look back(specificaly she says in the trial herself "Follow your light, Or Fly my children and Never look back")


and what you mean "instead of fighting with us to give us an edge" SHE IS A PRIMAL!! A BEING SOLELY COMPRISED OF AETHER!!! She is the least usefull thing that could have "helped" us in the fight,

at best its a Stalemate where noone can do anything, at worst the dynamis would drown her out(she is CONSIDERABLY weaker then Zodiark).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZeraSkiratea

you COMPLETLY misunderstood the entire thing....
to the very core
THE EXODUS WAS THE PLAN B!!!! The Exodus was her plan if humanity ended up not being capable of fighting the Final Days and Endsinger or if they just "gave up".
She specificaly said "[I] saved [...]my power for this very moment" testing us was the plan A, if we failed, she would send us away to never look back(specificaly she says in the trial herself "Follow your light, Or Fly my children and Never look back")


and what you mean "instead of fighting with us to give us an edge" SHE IS A PRIMAL!! A BEING SOLELY COMPRISED OF AETHER!!! She is the least usefull thing that could have "helped" us in the fight,

at best its a Stalemate where noone can do anything, at worst the dynamis would drown her out(she is CONSIDERABLY weaker then Zodiark).

---

The exodus was not the plan B. It became the plan B. Hydaelyn explains to Y'shtola after she asks if she really expects mankind to just flee that the exodus in one of two paths, and that the other will take the adventurers to Meteion. The scions already inacted the plan to wipe the floor with Psychotron before even confronting Hydaelyn in the Aetiascope. It was their intention to do everything possible to save the star before abandoning it to its fate. When Hydaelyn says the other path takes us to Meteion, we are kind of like, "Bingo. So are you going to help, or not?" Then she proceeds to tell us that she bars the path to Meteion, and we are like, "So no, then?"

Obviously, I'm using some paraphrasing based on my feelings towards Venat, but it doesn't change that the Scions learn of Hydaelyn's plan of Exodus through the Loporrits, and decide for themselves that is without question, the last resort. This was when it became fundamental to contact Hydaelyn because they just had to know if this was her true intention.

When I mention fighting with us, that doesn't necessarily mean she is there intervening on Ultima Thule. *sigh* I admit to being wrong here. I know she did give us the ability to conjure forth both Emet and Hytholdaeus and restore the Scions, empowered the mother crystal, which also served to get Zenos to Utlima Thule, created the Loporrits, and loves us like no other. I know she placed the burden of burdens on her shoulders, and was punished heavily for the sundering. There's a part of me that remains bitter though. Very similar to an actual mother/daughter relationship. Anger makes it easier to part from her. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

SNIP

---

No, the dialogue you reference just means she strongly considerd the Exodus, Plan B, to be the one to be fullfilled given everything that had happend
it dosnt mean that that was her prefeered plan, nor her "plan a"


Plan A was always to stop the final days for good, exodus would been a delay, like Zodiark, not a solution.


HOWEVER her plan A was specificlay for US(as in the Species of Etherys) to decide on their own to confront the final days, all she ever did was guide us when no other option was available (mostly do to ascian machination) or to give us the actual understanding what the final days are with Elpis.


Plan A dosnt mean you expect it to work, its just the PREFEERED way or outcome for something.
The Prefeered outcome is "ending the final days for good" thats her Plan A, she just believes it has a infinitly small chance of happening(given the ancients and everything i cant truely blame her, she sunderd us so we had a CHANCE, however small it be, but that is it, a chance), so she stacks a lot of her work into her Plan B because she cant help with Plan A much without kinda ruining the whole point of it.


The "one of two paths" dosnt indicate that one or the other is better, or her prefeered option, just that its, "one of two paths"
Ystohla also correctly summarizes afterwards iirc that that was hydelins intention all along. To Test them. And nothing gets you better into the mood of beating aprimal, then said primal saying "My Plan is contrary to your own, lets fight".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

The exodus was not the plan B. It became the plan B.

---

I never got the impression the exodus was anything but a backup plan in case it turned out that we weren't up to snuff in facing Meteion. That's why I gathered she challenged us. The ship was something she could actively work on as a contingency plan since she wasn't entirely certain it was all going to come out right. Otherwise she was just waiting to see if our timelines converged and resulted in a Warrior of Light who could defeat the Song of Oblivion for good.

Ancients deserving better doesn't mean they should have it. That's how things work irl and I'd prefer it to stay as such to give a touch a logicality.