There seems to be a marked double standard where things are good when the protagonists do it but the moment someone else does it's wrong. I don't get why the the ancients giving the lives to save there world and fellows seems to be treated as something to demonise the ancients overQuote:
Originally Posted by Solarra
-
01-07-2023, 10:14 PMjameseoakes
-
01-07-2023, 10:28 PMAtelier-BagurOh I dont prolly because when the Scions did it was just only them but when the Ancients did it, it was literally HALF of the population. Im pretty sure not everyone was willing to go with that plan, I have a hard time imagining to be so. Especially the non-AmaroutunesQuote:
Originally Posted by jameseoakes
-
01-07-2023, 10:35 PMjameseoakesThe game has made no implication that it was forced, and Shadowbringers made it clear the Amaroutines valued self sacrifice and I don't think they would have had any means to force people to do and we know Hytholdes volunteers and I can't see him agreeing to a plan involving people being forced nor can I see pre-sundering EmetQuote:
Originally Posted by Atelier-Bagur
Edit: and even if it was forced there's still a double standard as when Venat forces her will on everyone that's treated as heroic -
01-07-2023, 10:55 PMAtelier-BagurThe way I see it there were these outcomes: Summon Zodiark by sacrificing and then reviving the population only to forestall their inevitable demise when Meteion sings her song to end the universe anyway, let the Final Days destroy Etheirys or sunder mankind in order to give them a chance to sense dynamis and mature and grow in their potential to confront Meteion someday.Quote:
Originally Posted by jameseoakes
It was crappy situation no matter what. The ancients couldnt combat the Final Days by themselves. I dont fully blame the Ancients for doing what they tried to do, nor do I blame Venat for doing what she did (especially since it turned out to be the better choice for the survival of the planet) -
01-07-2023, 11:01 PMGraehamThis is the good point. If the Venar tell the Solus King future he can win in the Shadowbringer. And then bring back No Shadow God and live for all the time like the Rala people. Is the best ending.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magikazam
-
01-07-2023, 11:03 PMGraehamThis is the bad plan. If No Shadow God is die can not become the mustard race under the Solus King. Is not recommend.Quote:
Originally Posted by jameseoakes
-
01-07-2023, 11:34 PMjameseoakesVenat tried nothing, see could have told people, spun off her cable in to a group to counter the dynamis threat but no she didn't even try, as only she gets to decides who gets hopeQuote:
Originally Posted by Atelier-Bagur
Also given the the eugenic angle this this take the game push some of the vilest thinking humanty has come up with as acceptable if the victims can be othered other and frankly it's evil -
01-07-2023, 11:48 PMAtelier-BagurShe actually did though. Its how they came up with the group of people who supported Venat (which included Azem) against the Convocation because they believed in what was happening.Quote:
Originally Posted by jameseoakes
-
01-07-2023, 11:52 PMjameseoakesWhere does it say that? I thought Venat kept her true plan secret from them and I refuse to believe Azim would ever join in on the extermination of his own people and would betray Emat, Hytholdous and Eldibus like that my characters a hero not some monster.Quote:
Originally Posted by Atelier-Bagur
Edit: The ingame codex clearly states Azim did not take part in her plan -
01-08-2023, 12:06 AMBrinne
As far as the mass sacrifice of lives to Zodiark goes, the game has been crystal-clear and unwavering on that it was an utterly heroic action that saved the world, and that Emet-Selch's point about it reflecting the benevolence and general goodness of the Ancients as a whole stands true.
Trying to undermine that has always struck me as pretty off-base and wildly cynical - if you're going to try to prop up the Sundered and frame the Ancients as less worthy, I don't know that I'd resort to pointing at their heroic self-sacrifice that enabled to Sundered to live at all, and continue living for thousands and thousands of years, not gonna lie.
I also tend to think the angle of "they were going to die anyway/their doom was inevitable" is really strange, since the game simultaneously talks out of the other side of its mouth about how everything is "going to die anyway" no matter what you do, and the doom of everything is inevitable and how we must accept that while not seeing it as a reason to end things prematurely. Not to mention, I'm pretty sure the game also thematically settled this question back in Shadowbringers, where the Scions' chief defiance of Emet-Selch revolved around the fact that even though they knew that they and their loved ones would one day "turn to ashes and dust," they still loved them and wanted to protect them for as long as possible - that knowing that everything they knew and loved was fundamentally doomed was still "no reason to forsake it."
There was no immediate threat to the Ancients or the world when Venat committed to the Sundering. They were "going to die eventually" in the same way everything was, and still is - but she thought the particular end she believed they were heading towards was ideologically unacceptable. Rather than a slow, quiet end by hypothetical ennui, Venat prefers an inevitable end achieved via struggling, suffering, and screaming. One's mileage may obviously vary.
Unfortunately, I think what a lot of the toxicity comes down to partially reflects the nature of the game as an ongoing, serialized story with long stretches of time between its major plot developments: the reveals about Hydaelyn's motivations in Endwalker turned out to not be what was told to us back in Shadowbringers, and what was told to us in Shadowbringers was what years of arguments and personal investments and discussions were based around. Endwalker spun things around so that - rather than Shadowbringers's fairly straightforward "Hydaelyn was just trying to protect vulnerable lives, and there were just tragic, unforeseeable consequences" - Hydaelyn turns out to have deliberately, with complete foreknowledge, committed the same acts as most of the mass-murdering antagonist factions along with following several of their ideals, methods, and justifications (rewriting history and erasing victims if it's used to manipulate people towards violent action is good now, apparently! Aymeric and Nanamo were obviously just being dumb and not seeing the Big Picture when they condemned this). It does this while pretending that it totally isn't. So it doesn't feel like the flow of discussion and debates should be totally upended from 5.0, even if what the text demonstrates in front of our eyes says otherwise.
Shadowbringers presented Hydaelyn's faction as the side attempting to prevent mass murder, and in doing so tragically (and probably accidentally) triggered an apocalypse that killed all the Ancients. Endwalker revises this so that to Hydaelyn, actually, the point was always just killing all the Ancients. In fact, she was so determined to kill all the Ancients she was willing to kill everything else on the planet, too, if that's what it took. No acknowledgment of this extreme shift happens in the text, to the point of very weird stuff like the WoL recounting everything in Elpis to the Scions, who have no reaction in particular besides "Oh, okay, so Dynamis, huh?" and when the topic of Hydaelyn comes up, she's still just generally referred to as a benevolent deity whose help we need. The writing tries to preserve the Shadowbringers vibe of the situation while presenting text that completely contradicts it. Of course wires get crossed and baffled and tangled up. One critical aspect of the storytelling is dramatically lagging behind, or refuses to connect to, the other.
For me, if Hydaelyn's actions remained in the same framework as Shadowbringers presented, as sympathetic as I am to the Ancients, I would have remained in my 5.0 position that she had the right of things in the inter-Ancient conflict (and the Sundering was just a horrific tragedy for everybody involved). Instead, with Endwalker's revised version of events, there's just the deep unease of seeing a weird Ilberd-Thordan fusion gunning for Social Darwinist ideals - just with with a nice song, a cool character design, and the full gratitude and worship of every notable figure in the story except the toy beetle robot in a sidequest - suddenly being presented as the game's Big Good.
The Codex states flat out that Azem refused to join Venat, too, for what it's worth - if you take its recounting of concrete events, at least, as canon. Venat's short story in Tales from the Dawn has also relatively recently confirmed she didn't even tell her followers anything - in fact, she actively and deliberately chose not to - which is a very baffling decision to me as far as the writing of the character goes.