The nature of the Sundering has been spelled out in a Nier Reincarnation side story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

Yeah, this is broadly how I read it too. Being connected doesn't mean they're actually important to each other, it just means they share a space and one day bumped into each other. 2B and the WoL have their own lives and deal with their own problems, the fact they met one day didn't really impact on either of them. It's like Gilgamesh; The fact that he's the same guy from FFV (who was also the same guy in VIII, XII, XIII-2, Dissidia 012...) is at the same time unarguably true, and in no way important.

Honestly, that's how most crossovers used to work. I can think of so many TV show crossovers that are neat at the time, but ultimately don't impact beyond that; just because Magnum P.I. and Murder She Wrote had a crossover, doesn't mean that said crossover is a huge inflection point for either, but at the same time, the fact they aren't a huge inflection point doesn't mean they didn't happen.

---

crossover lost that meaning in more current era stories due to how big they are often made to be advertisement wise.

FF14 on the other hand is following more to that old style being canon but not important nor impactful to the over Main story as a whole. Just a small moment in time when two paths of different stories cross with each other and split off again on their own path once more. They may add more to the lore by expanding old lore we know but will not impact the grand scheme of things.

They did this back in Final Fantasy Mobius (RIP that FF game) as well where they made the FF game crossover canon to the other FF game stories. FF7 crossover event is when Cloud mind was still messed up in the wheel chair, FFXIII crossover event takes place after FFXIII Lightning returns right before she fully reincarnated to the new world (aka Earth), FF8 crossover event took place during the moment when Squall was lost in time and space while traveling to that spot he promised to meet Rinoa at the ending of FF8, and FF10 crossover event is even confirmed directly by the original writers of FF10 to be Tidus side of FFX-2 story (love how they brought back the laugh in HD and how they show Tidus being aware he is never called his real name during FFX).

Wow….this is kind of crazy lol. So instead of showing the event in game they just describe it in some random crossover? I guess they really didn’t want to show peoples souls getting torn apart otherwise it’d probably look even worse on Venat lol, i’ll take what i can get though. A bit horrifying to see how she basically reduced men to animals and they had to be raised from the ground up. Actually, that’s extremely tragic. A successful, brilliant race of people who took honor in keeping their star safe were eventually betrayed by two of their own and their entire civilization and the world itself was ripped apart because someone had lost hope…. utterly tragic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

Wow….this is kind of crazy lol. So instead of showing the event in game they just describe it in some random crossover? I guess they really didn’t want to show peoples souls getting torn apart otherwise it’d probably look even worse on Venat lol, i’ll take what i can get though. A bit horrifying to see how she basically reduced men to animals and they had to be raised from the ground up. Actually, that’s extremely tragic. A successful, brilliant race of people who took honor in keeping their star safe were eventually betrayed by two of their own and their entire civilization and the world itself was ripped apart because someone had lost hope…. utterly tragic.

---

Well as I said before, this is not the first time SE writers made canon lore for a different game in a different game. It is still not that impactful as people are making it out to be since it won't impact the grand scheme of things for future events since the focus is more on expanding on current lore we know that won't affect future events.

Either way I am not surprised Emet's tale is used in Nier Reincarnation event as it fits the tone and theme of the game being the tales of the dead and Emet is very much dead in FF14 now.

Makes me wonder how SE may handle Emet if they ever considering introducing him into Dissidia Opera Omnia because lore wise (at the point this game is in story wise), Emet being introduced will have to be Post-Endwalker version of himself with him having all his memories up to the point he dies. However, people may probably enjoy Emet in Opera omnia more for his interactions with other FF characters over any new lore he may provide.

What I find very curious about this collab and some reactions from it is that most of it is information and events than we already knew, just rephrased. Nothing contradicts the game, we only get expanded knowledge on what happened to "humanity" right after the sundering.

I find highly suspicious that anyone would take issue with either a re-telling of the same events we already know, just in a grimmer light, and with the added info on the state of sundered humanity. Why exactly dispute that? What part of it is questionable with the game's established lore? I want you guys to tell me exactly what part of it is questionable.

...Or is it just because it happens to paint a certain character in a darker light? Because it makes the lives that were destroyed while she kept her complicit silence more humane and relatable? And not as the caricature of "self-destroying (one day in a very distant future) paradise" that "had to change" some seem to be fixated on? Because it depicts the brutality of the sundering in a different light, without Flow Answers sounding in the background and the perpetrator being the one telling us how she saw it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sicno

What I find very curious about this collab and some reactions from it is that most of it is information and events than we already knew, just rephrased. Nothing contradicts the game, we only get expanded knowledge on what happened to "humanity" right after the sundering.

I find highly suspicious that anyone would take issue with either a re-telling of the same events we already know, just in a grimmer light, and with the added info on the state of sundered humanity. Why exactly dispute that? What part of it is questionable with the game's established lore? I want you guys to tell me exactly what part of it is questionable.

...Or is it just because it happens to paint a certain character in a darker light? Because it makes the lives that were destroyed while she kept her complicit silence more humane and relatable? And not as the caricature of "self-destroying (one day in a very distant future) paradise" that "had to change" some seem to be fixated on? Because it depicts the brutality of the sundering in a different light, without Flow sounding in the background and the perpetuator being the one telling us how she saw it?

---

It is just common reaction these days for any new lore, no matter how small it is, being introduced in another game rather than the Main Game.

This reaction happens very often these days. Nothing really complicated about it, it is just how some people react to not keeping everything considered important related, no matter the amount of lore it adds to something we already know, in the Main Game.

In this case it is the small lore added to Emet's view of events from the sundering to when he establish Garlemald. Nothing really changed what we know about Emet but it added a bit of understanding to what lead him to where he is in Shadowbringer though insight of his mindset and viewing of events.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EdwinLi

It is just common reaction these days for any new lore, no matter how small it is, being introduced in another game rather than the Main Game.

This reaction happens very often these days. Nothing really complicated about it, it is just how some people react to not keeping everything considered important related, no matter the amount of lore it adds to something we already know, in the Main Game.

---

I totally understand getting mad at parts of missing lore being presented on a different game, even if it's small. The part I don't get is that questioning if/how that new lore fits in the original game is an analysis that has to be done case-by-case, and in this case... I don't see what part could be questioned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EdwinLi

In this case it is the small lore added to Emet's view of events from his the sundering to when he establish Garlemald. Nothing really changed what we know about Emet but it added a bit of understanding to what lead him to where he is in Shadowbringer though insight of his mindset and viewing of events.

---

Exactly, and I don't see why that should be questioned as "non-canon".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sicno

I totally understand getting mad at parts of missing lore being presented on a different game, even if it's small. The part I don't get is that questioning if/how that new lore fits in the original game is an analysis that has to be done case-by-case, and in this case... I don't see what part could be questioned.




Exactly, and I don't see why that should be questioned as "non-canon".

---

I can't speak for others why they do the whole case by case thing to justify it being non-canon when it is canon. I can only go by what I always assume is maybe their reason being they do this as a way to justify why it should be consider non-canon to themselves and others.

That is often what it comes down to, in my opinion, being people always need some kind of justification to convince themselves and others why something should be non-canon and canon to remove any doubt they may have themselves and with other people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jandor

I think it's more accurate to say that Nier in FFXIV is inconsequential. Yeah the events are canon, but they're so disconnected from everything else that it doesn't really matter.

I'd say the same is true in reverse too. No main story beats change as a result of this, it just adds some neat extra fluff around events we already know about, cool stuff for those invested in the lore but of no real consequence to most people.

---

It's pretty consequential for Nier considering it shows how the machine lifeforms integrated real magic into their system and evolved into godlike beings out of a desire to become human, which would create a timeloop where they were responsible for their own creation and humanity's destruction. Not to mention the whole thing with the dwarves ties back into the themes of XIV.

I mean… this doesn’t change Venat’s character at all, though? She outright says that her actions introduced suffering to a people who weren’t used to experiencing it.

And losing ancient music speech doesn’t make the people who went through the sundering “like animals”. It just means they forgot how to talk like they used to. Seems akin to the aftermath of the Tower of Babel bible story to me. Universal language lost, confused mumbling for a time, then new languages developed. It’s a detail we didn’t have before, but I guess it makes sense. And it in no way means they lost the means to think. People can have thoughts while being unable to communicate them.

And yeah they don’t clearly and consciously remember the ancient world. We knew that already, too, though? Otherwise we’d have stories passed down about the specifics of the age of Gods (ie the time of the ancients) and the final days and everything in between.

And saying they “die and die” when you have a character coming from a society where the term “die” was apparently something you didn’t hear death called much isn’t really an indicator that the dying happened in a way that we’d consider horrific. Any death that wasn’t voluntary suicide after fulfilling your life’s purpose would be horrific to Emet. We already knew people were now normally mortal after the sundering. That’s all he’s describing. This doesn’t change anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphor

it was stated

---

Please link to the statement.