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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SDaemon

Said civilization had zero qualms about throwing away half their population twice over and were perfectly willing to commit genocide of every new life born into the world just so they wouldn't have to feel sorrow or despair and recluse themselves into ignorant bliss of "paradise". The rest of the Ancient population making decisions aren't of high standing moral character either.

---

I think that particular portrayal is rather disingenuous and doesn't really align with the established events. For starters, the first and second round of sacrifices were willingly given and actively supported. Had they not happened, Etheirys would not have recovered from the Final Days.

As for the third round of sacrifices it isn't explicitly highlighted what the 'new life' entails though if it were the creations of the Ancients themselves, then it would be the equivalent of arcane constructs. Which is what they were in comparison to their creators.

I'd strongly suggest completing the side quests in Elpis if you have not done as much already. They don't exactly paint a picture of the Ancients being callous, cold and uncaring. They show emotion, they show concern for the Warrior of Light (despite believing him to be a familiar) and they also clearly show concern for each other and their creations. So I disagree with the idea that they aren't of 'high moral standing'.

I'd also note that the Sundered engage in far more active and open depravity. From slavery, to attempted genocide, to actual genocide, to theft, to murder, to wiping out entire species for trophies and trinkets to all manner of other things. All of which, I note, came about as a consequence of Venat's decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

As for the third round of sacrifices it isn't explicitly highlighted what the 'new life' entails though if it were the creations of the Ancients themselves, then it would be the equivalent of arcane constructs. Which is what they were in comparison to their creators.

---

This is from Ere Our Curtain Falls, the same story I referenced in my previous comment

"The people were divided, unable to decide what to do with the future that now stretched out before them. Many wished to trade the new life which had sprung forth to reclaim those lost in sacrifice to Zodiark. No small number, however, insisted that the fate of our world should be entrusted to those selfsame freshly minted souls. "

So, this new life had souls and they wanted to sacrifice it to get back what they had.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SDaemon

Said civilization had zero qualms about throwing away half their population twice over and were perfectly willing to commit genocide of every new life born into the world just so they wouldn't have to feel sorrow or despair and recluse themselves into ignorant bliss of "paradise". The rest of the Ancient population making decisions aren't exactly of high standing moral character either.

---

How is sacrificing themselves for the betterment of the planet throwing lives away? I guess most of the protagonists in the story are just as bad as them then considering they’ve done that time and time again. It wasn’t every new life form. It was a portion. Hythlodaeus says as much so less not try to force a narrative that isn’t there hm? Besides, how exactly is this any better than committing genocide to all life on the planet, and and causing mass murder?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stachiko

At that point she should have become a villain. We should have fought her.

---

That wouldn't make any sense. Her action benefits us and she is not against us, so we have no reason to fight her as a villain.

Or, if you're arguing that SE should have made her an actual villain that poses a danger to us just because of her past action that you disagree with, well, that's not how that works. They can, but they don't have to and they didn't.

And yes, time travel is always a tricky concept, so I'm in agreement in having none in the future. That said, I won't discount it appearing again either as it has been established, after all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TaleraRistain

There's no guarantee they had to listen to Azem..

---

Except as we see when we go to Elpis, even though Hades may not believe us, due to his duty of the star he takes it upon himself to investigate. Not only this but he knows he was mind wiped. It’s as simple as Venat telling him how it happened. Irregardless he would have to investigate, and this isn’t even accounting for the fact she could just simply use the echo to show him. I feel like we’re going in circles with this because people are purposely being oblivious to fairly obvious ways it could’ve been addressed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by linayar

That wouldn't make any sense. Her action benefits us and she is not against us, so we have no reason to fight her as a villain.

Or, if you're arguing that SE should have made her an actual villain that poses a danger to us just because of her past action that you disagree with, well, that's not how that works. They can, but they don't have to and they didn't.

And yes, time travel is always a tricky concept, so I'm in agreement in having none in the future. That said, I won't discount it appearing again either as it has been established, after all.

---

I agree with you on Venat. If she were squeaky clean I'd have a bit of a yuck face. I love how both Zodiark and Hydaelyn aren't either completely corrupt or completely pure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

How is sacrificing themselves for the betterment of the planet throwing lives away? I guess most of the protagonists in the story are just as bad as them then considering they’ve done that time and time again. It wasn’t every new life form. It was a portion. Hythlodaeus says as much so less not try to force a narrative that isn’t there hm? Besides, how exactly is this any better than committing genocide to all life on the planet, and and causing mass murder?

---

I'm not forcing any new narrative. Its established that they were willing to sacrifice the new life that was born unto Etheirys after the Final Days. I also never said it was better than what Hydealyn/Venat did, nor was I attempting to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by van_arn

I agree with you on Venat. If she were squeaky clean I'd have a bit of a yuck face. I love how both Zodiark and Hydaelyn aren't either completely corrupt or completely pure.

---

The simplest way I can put it is, one country's hero could be another country's villain (or even traitor).

People who want to argue that Venat is a villain for her people could make their case (though as a former Azem, someone who is clearly independent, I'd say her deciding on her own is just in her nature). But that does not translate into us having to view her as a villain. So the story, which is told from our point of view, can still accept her as being a benevolent being because of how she benefits us.

I'm not particularly convinced they HAVE dealt with Zodiark.

This is a bit of a stretch but consider Hydaelyn sundered the world and Zodiark; splitting the source into reflections.

Then, it is pretty feasible that she remained unsundered herself while Zodiark may very much exist in multiple worlds simultaneously.
Within the realm of possibility that we only encountered the Zodiark fragment which remained in the Source

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StealthPaladin

I'm not particularly convinced they HAVE dealt with Zodiark.

This is a bit of a stretch but consider Hydaelyn sundered the world and Zodiark; splitting the source into reflections.

Then, it is pretty feasible that she remained unsundered herself while Zodiark may very much exist in multiple worlds simultaneously.
Within the realm of possibility that we only encountered the Zodiark fragment which remained in the Source

---

I believe it was said that, if the Source were to cease to exist, then all the reflections would to. I think the same could apply to Zodiark.