Who knew the 6.15 Omega Quests… (Spoilers)

What is the difference between killing “new life” that came from Zodiark and Primals?

As always, I would expect those who - by their own admission - want to champion the 'mommy goddess with a soft voice' to say and do whatever it takes in order to try and push her as 'correct'.

At this point, I'm not even sure what the point of these circular arguments even is. Nothing being discussed is anything that can't be resolved with a simple 'agree to disagree'. It's just amusing that the same posters who screeched for years about the Ascians and the Garleans because of 'genocide' cannot handle a light bit of pushback and people saying they disagree and disapprove of Venat when...she engages in genocide and turns out to be directly or indirectly responsible for the majority of horrific suffering present in the setting itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tokinokanatae

What is the difference between killing “new life” that came from Zodiark and Primals?

---

It's the difference between killing a person and deleting a computer program.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KariTheFox

What are you talking about? Eden was the result of one guy dying. Surely if some sundered could figure out how to make the life energy of one ancient and some primals into an effective terraforming device, the ancients could have too.

Sure, maybe it would have taken longer than the sacrifice a large number of thier population to instantly restore the ecosystem, but we've confirmed it'd work.

Heck, maybe "terraforming with primals" was the original Azem's mysterious third option.

---

Eden’s transformation is what contributed to the flood of light maam. Aka the thing that wiped out nearly the entire world. Also…primals don’t contain a will or emotion? That’s very interesting to me because based on their dialogue they seem to possess a LOT of emotion, and i don’t think they consented either. Iirc you were all very against the ancients using any creations for their benefit and saw it as hubris, with one of you even saying that the eden primals….lol, “consented.” Sorry had to stifle a laugh there. But yeah to me they very much have a will and emotions based on their dialogue. At least moreso than egi’s or nixies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KariTheFox

It's the difference between killing a person and deleting a computer program.

---

What makes the difference between a computer program and a person, though?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brinne

Because Venat also demonstrated a perfect willingness to "sacrifice living beings" in order to "protect the Ancients" (from her own perspective) by subjecting them to the Sundering as well.

---

She showed a willingness to Sunder living beings that we’re going to self destruct their own civilization. The dilemma Venat faced is the trolley problem. The dilemma the Ancients faced is the fat man version of the trolley problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brinne

She herself never spoke of defending the sacrifices. The writers have never tied defending the sacrifices in to her motives. Her big speech before the Sundering was wholly centered on her love of her people as the driving factor for her decision. The sacrifices did not matter to her except how they factored in to what she saw as the Ancients' downfall.

---

I already know that I’ll get “that cutscene should be ignored” but I’m posting it anyway.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tokinokanatae

What makes the difference between a computer program and a person, though?

---

Sentience for one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

As always, I would expect those who - by their own admission - want to champion the 'mommy goddess with a soft voice' to say and do whatever it takes in order to try and push her as 'correct'.

---

And as always, the group solely interested in defending the Ascians, as well as pretty much every other opposing faction in the game, has decided they know best and we should all just shut up.

Clearly, we don't see the Eden Primals as alive, so killing them is not really murder.

Wait, no, that's nonsense. We've clearly seen that you can have conversations with Primals, even philosophical discussions, and they demonstrate a will to live and resistance to being killed, so...

Wait, I'm confused again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KariTheFox

It's the difference between killing a person and deleting a computer program.

---

And now we're at step one again, asserting it involved persons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KariTheFox

What are you talking about? Eden was the result of one guy dying. Surely if some sundered could figure out how to make the life energy of one ancient and some primals into an effective terraforming device, the ancients could have too.

Sure, maybe it would have taken longer than the sacrifice a large number of thier population to instantly restore the ecosystem, but we've confirmed it'd work.

Heck, maybe "terraforming with primals" was the original Azem's mysterious third option.

---

Are you just back to musing of "omg why didn't you think of this dumb dumbs"? To which one could add: why didn't Venat propose it, in that case? There are likely obvious reasons as to why this would not work, such as a planet being drenched in dynamis being harmed and atrophied by it in ways light, which solely causes aetheric stagnation but otherwise keeps the aether intact, would not be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

She showed a willingness to Sunder living beings that we’re going to self destruct their own civilization. The dilemma Venat faced is the trolley problem. The dilemma the Ancients faced is the fat man version of the trolley problem.

---

Venat Sundered everything, all life, sacrifices included. Remember Emet's line? "That light split the world, and every life upon it!" What you're saying would work if Venat Sundered only the Ancients, but everything got axed.

Quote:

---

I already know that I’ll get “that cutscene should be ignored” but I’m posting it anyway.

---

Yes, as noted, her primary objections are "reclaiming lives" and "weakness" with the sacrifices being incidental as the method used to do and express those things, respectively. Her focal point is the virtue of the Ancients. I don't see her arguing about how "the sacrifices don't deserve to be killed" or "the sacrifices are innocent."

I have my suspicions about the primals in the game as to how much of a true "will" they actually have considering Ramuh remembers events between summonings even if he was still in the Sea at the time the events happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tokinokanatae

What makes the difference between a computer program and a person, though?

---

That's a pretty philosophical question, and maybe some computer programs could theoretically qualify. But we know that primals are essentially just arcane entities that are running on the input (beliefs and wishes) of those who summoned them.

And actually, now that I think about it. It's not like deleting a computer program - it's more like ending the process of a running program. You can still summon the same primal again, after all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

Sentience for one.

---

Are the Elpis creations sentient?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KariTheFox

That's a pretty philosophical question, and maybe some computer programs could theoretically qualify. But we know that primals are essentially just arcane entities that are running on the input (beliefs and wishes) of those who summoned them.

And actually, now that I think about it. It's not like deleting a computer program - it's more like ending the process of a running program. You can still summon the same primal again, after all.

---

Again, Ramuh recalls events that happened between summonings. I suspect they are more like fae [aka amalgamations of bits of souls that have taken another form, in this case with crystals and faith] than actual spontaneously occurring arcane entities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

At this point, I'm not even sure what the point of these circular arguments even is.

---

There is none, especially when the opposition is arguing headcanon loosely based around ambiguously described events and misconstrued dialog. More power to those who have the patience to tackle someone's personal fan fiction. The amusing part is if they have to make up so much in their minds for the story and characters to work it just further goes to show how bad EW was.

Primals can converse with us, with one another—if we’re talking about Eden, they can also willingly fuse with one another to create entirely new entities beyond what we summon. Seems to me like “computer program” is just a fancy way of justifying killing then for our own benefit.

If "has the ability to hold conversations" is the one criteria for personhood, I have some unsettling news about a lot of computer programs that exist today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brinne

Venat Sundered everything, all life, sacrifices included. Remember Emet's line? "That light split the world, and every life upon it!" What you're saying would work if Venat Sundered only the Ancients, but everything got axed.

---

And all would be dead if the Ancients reach their Dead End. When a species reaches the conclusion that living isn’t worth it, and they are the “stewards of the star”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brinne

Yes, as noted, her primary objections are "reclaiming lives" and "weakness" with the sacrifices being incidental as the method used to do and express those things, respectively. Her focal point is the virtue of the Ancients. I don't see her arguing about how "the sacrifices don't deserve to be killed" or "the sacrifices are innocent."

---

If she was arguing that it was bad to try and reclaim those lives then there is no reason to add onto it “by sacrificing yet more.” She explicitly brings up the act of killing others as part of the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brinne

Clearly, we don't see the Eden Primals as alive, so killing them is not really murder.

Wait, no, that's nonsense. We've clearly seen that you can have conversations with Primals, even philosophical discussions, and they demonstrate a will to live and resistance to being killed, so...

Wait, I'm confused again.

---

I can have intelligent conversations with a chat bot! There are all sorts of programs that can resemble sentience, but I don’t think they're making living being yet. And their resistance to dying wasn’t motivated by their desire to live, but their desire to see through the will of their summoners!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

There is none, especially when the opposition is arguing headcanon loosely based around ambiguously described events and misconstrued dialog. More power to those who have the patience to tackle someone's personal fan fiction. The amusing part is if they have to make up so much in their minds for the story and characters to work it just further goes to show how bad EW was.

---

I don’t have to handwave whole cutscenes to justify my perspective at the very least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

There is none, especially when the opposition is arguing headcanon loosely based around ambiguously described events and misconstrued dialog. More power to those who have the patience to tackle someone's personal fan fiction. The amusing part is if they have to make up so much in their minds for the story and characters to work it just further goes to show how bad EW was.

---

Yep. Much like the false presentation of the 'trolley problem' when that comparison only works for a sudden, unexpected event and not when some nutty, delusional individual in the form of Venat decides to stand by and allow an apocalyptic event to occur with no forewarning only to then murder the survivors for not 'moving on'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

I don’t have to handwave whole cutscenes to justify my perspective at the very least.

---

You're well aware that it is a stylistic and false retelling of established events, I hope...?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tokinokanatae

Are the Elpis creations sentient?

---

They have souls which is an objective sign of sentience for this fantasy world so yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

You're well aware that it is a stylistic and false retelling of established events, I hope...?

---

Your hopes bear partial fruit! They are indeed symbolic, but nothing indicates the information conveyed is wrong or misleading. That is indeed what symbolism is for after all, to communicate information in a way that isn’t one to one with reality but retains the overall message. Unless you mean to argue that somehow Venat manipulated the visions we get in the rift? That would make them “false.”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

And all would be dead if the Ancients reach their Dead End. When a species reaches the conclusion that living isn’t worth it, and they are the “stewards of the star”



If she was arguing that it was bad to try and reclaim those lives then there is no reason to add onto it “by sacrificing yet more.” She explicitly brings up the act of killing others as part of the problem.



I can have intelligent conversations with a chat bot! There are all sorts of programs that can resemble sentience, but I don’t think they're making living being yet. And their resistance to dying wasn’t motivated by their desire to live, but their desire to see through the will of their summoners!



I don’t have to handwave whole cutscenes to justify my perspective at the very least.

---

You’re being purposefully obtuse. With how much you pride yourself on being a lore specialist, you should know them from bozja’s lore that personal memory events are EXTREMELY malleable and biased. We literally see this with Cid where he chose to see Varis shooting him as opposed to his father, to help make himself feel better about his decision. Hmmmm….wonder if Venat’s walk might be the same? Purposefully seeing things a certain way to make herself feel better and right about what she did. It would certainly mimic the actions of her advocates at least :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

And all would be dead if the Ancients reach their Dead End. When a species reaches the conclusion that living isn’t worth it, and they are the “stewards of the star”

---

Well, everything that lived in the world before the moment Venat Sundered them is dead now anyway, so...

Quote:

---

If she was arguing that it was bad to try and reclaim those lives then there is no reason to add onto it “by sacrificing yet more.” She explicitly brings up the act of killing others as part of the problem.

---

Therefore, she tries to prevent this by... killing everything?

Quote:

---

I can have intelligent conversations with a chat bot! There are all sorts of programs that can resemble sentience, but I don’t think they're making living being yet. And their resistance to dying wasn’t motivated by their desire to live, but their desire to see through the will of their summoners!

---

Hey, makes sense to me, Emet-Selch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

You’re being purposefully obtuse. With how much you pride yourself on being a lore specialist, you should know them from bozja’s lore that personal memory events are EXTREMELY malleable and biased. We literally see this with Cid where he chose to see Varis shooting him as opposed to his father, to help make himself feel better about his decision. Hmmmm….wonder if Venat’s walk might be the same? Purposefully seeing things a certain way to make herself feel better and right about what she did. It would certainly mimic the actions of her advocates at least :p

---

First I have never, ever, ever described myself as a lore specialist. That is something you guys repeatedly claim I think with no justification. I will however say yiu maybe should go back and look at the Bozja storyline again as I’m pretty sure the mechanism they use to look at acids memories is different than the means we used to travel the Rift. Better comparison is the Shadowbringers intro, which has us doing the exact same thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brinne

Well, everything that lived in the world before the moment Venat Sundered them is dead now anyway, so...

Therefore, she tries to prevent this by... killing everything?

---

She tries to prevent the destruction of all life but sundering the world yes, I’m glad we’re on the same page.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brinne

Hey, makes sense to me, Emet-Selch.

---

Now you’re just trolling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

If she was arguing that it was bad to try and reclaim those lives then there is no reason to add onto it “by sacrificing yet more.” She explicitly brings up the act of killing others as part of the problem.

---

Nope, it really doesn't. The writers have now articulated what her concern was, i.e. reaching the fate of the Plenty (and secondarily, ability to manipulate dynamis.) The sacrifices just happen to be the specific method they were going to use to embark on that path in her eyes. Her referencing them adds nothing more than that - not to mention, she is making an emotional appeal here, because she is unable/unwilling to offer the full reasoning for her concern, hence she is motioning for them to stop and trying to appeal to them with reasons to do so - and again, she does so with recourse to the word 'weakness' and follows up with: No paradise is without its shadows. If we cannot accept this truth and learn from our pain, then our plight shall be repeated.

If they hit upon some other method that would allow them to restore a civilisation she was concerned would hit upon that fate, then that would become the problem. Those four words aren't saying what you're trying to twist out of them, i.e. that human sacrifices were involved or that she was intrinsically concerned about them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

They have souls which is an objective sign of sentience for this fantasy world so yes.

---

Elpis is a test facility where they are testing creations submitted by others. The planet may imbue the creations with a soul eventually, but we don’t have any evidence that the ones being tested there have souls, since the ones pointed out to us in this context (the butterflies) are said not to have them.

In other words, congratulations. If a “soul” is what makes it wrong to kill something, then Hermes is doing the equivalent of someone saying we’re wrong for what we did in Eden.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

First I have never, ever, ever described myself as a lore specialist. That is something you guys repeatedly claim I think with no justification. I will however say yiu maybe should go back and look at the Bozja storyline again as I’m pretty sure the mechanism they use to look at acids memories is different than the means we used to travel the Rift. Better comparison is the Shadowbringers intro, which has us doing the exact same thing.



She tries to prevent the destruction of all life but sundering the world yes, I’m glad we’re on the same page.




Now you’re just trolling.

---

It doesn’t change the fact that, again, it is obviously her personal account of events, considering that it’s all out of order from what we know of actual events taking place. In which the cid analogy applies. It’s her own biased view of how things happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tokinokanatae

Elpis is a test facility where they are testing creations submitted by others. The planet may imbue the creations with a soul eventually, but we don’t have any evidence that the ones being tested there have souls, since the ones pointed out to us in this context (the butterflies) are said not to have them.

---

https://i.imgur.com/0amf1YQ.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tokinokanatae

In other words, congratulations. If a “soul” is what makes it wrong to kill something, then Hermes is doing the equivalent of someone saying we’re wrong for what we did in Eden.

---

Yep he is. I don’t agree with him. Bottom line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

It doesn’t change the fact that, again, it is obviously her personal account of events, considering that it’s all out of order from what we know of actual events taking place. In which the cid analogy applies. It’s her own biased view of how things happened.

---

So is it false or is it from her perspective? The Amaurot dungeon was from Emets perspective, doesn’t mean it’s incorrect. Just means we have to keep that in mind right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tokinokanatae

Elpis is a test facility where they are testing creations submitted by others. The planet may imbue the creations with a soul eventually, but we don’t have any evidence that the ones being tested there have souls, since the ones pointed out to us in this context (the butterflies) are said not to have them.

In other words, congratulations. If a “soul” is what makes it wrong to kill something, then Hermes is doing the equivalent of someone saying we’re wrong for what we did in Eden.

---

Alpha did not have a soul until the ending of the Omega questline. It's reassuring to know we would have been free to rip him apart with no guilt up until that point.

Oh, Omega itself, too!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Midgardsormr

'Twould seem your understanding is yet lacking. Scant grasp have I of that which men know and know not...

Mark me, then. Omega hath no soul. No mind's eye in which to envision a rival.

---

Smash up that toy robot, everyone.

Emet also states that only the WoL and the scions would have been spared. So the rejoinings and the 3rd sacrifice was still going to happen. Just we'd of had front row seats.

A lot of you show that you haven't played Horizon Zero Dawn. I also am not sure why I didn't think of it as an example of how telling people about Meteion could have gone as the entire back story of how the world you play in both HDZ and the sequel came to be is an example of what could have happened if the person who set the world on the path of its destruction knows about it and still ends up sabotaging the whole thing at the last second. For those who haven't played either the original or the sequel here's at least spoilers for the first. As even though there is a secondary sabotage that might have some light shed on it in the sequel it's the first one that really matters the most. I haven't played the sequel yet so I'm not sure if the cause for the second one becomes known or the huge list of what/whom could have caused it gets narrowed. Anyways

So this dude named Ted who is the CEO of a company that makes machines various world governments use to conduct war with has made it so that not only can they be built by other machines and communicate with each other but also run on biomass if they run out of power. This function is only supposed to be used as a last ditch effort type situation. Now everything is going good til a small portion of machines need to use said biomass as fuel. Where a malfunction happens and they're stuck to that setting. Somehow a bug was in the code (at least I want to say it was a bug) and they very quickly spread the bug to other machines cause they're all on the same network. Ted and various coders who work for him find out about this and Ted chooses to hide it while trying to fix it. Only problem is he told those who made all the codes to make them unhackable by people. Ie the machines can put up or slow down any hacking attempt faster than humans can adjust. In the meantime he reaches out to an ex-coworker that's the smartest person he knows and who left the company due to not agreeing to putting in the biomass as fuel option. Elizabet tells him there is no fixing the problem as there's no way a person could come up with a way to shut them down. By this time the various generals of the militaries that these machines are being used by have noticed the bug and want answers.

They get the scoop and at first balk at the idea of not telling the general public about it let alone what the real purpose of the people fighting the machines are actually doing. And that's to buy time for everyone working on the world's biggest time capsule. Along with building a machine that once the rouge machines shut down cause they can't sense any more fuel it can upload a code that will fix the problem. Ted agrees to be the money backer for all of this cause to him and this plays into why he ends up sabotaging the project is that if he doesn't help try and advert the fall of mankind not only will his companies look bad but he will also look bad.

Yes Ted is that much of a selfish, arrogant, egotistical prick that he cares more about saving face that after he sort of learns more about what the plan entails he chooses to delete all known versions of a subfunction that's to basically let other subfunctions they cam move on to further steps. He then remotely kills the only other people who would be able to reverse to some degree his sabotage. All because he's afraid that the clones that get made will learn of how the world had to be restarted. Which would paint him in a bad light. Course by the time the sabotage happens the game highly suggests that Ted has gone insane. Yes, he knew about the project and was kept in the dark about the finer details because everyone knew that there was a high chance of Ted behaving in a way that would have caused the project to fail in some manner.

The shade of Hythlodeaus was also a biased creation from Emet-Selch and—coincidentally—the only person that ever mentions the sacrifices themselves as being the main motivation of the Hydaelyn faction. Why are people willing to take Emet-Selch at his word there, but not actual recordings, Venat’s recollections, and WoG for hers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tokinokanatae

The shade of Hythlodeaus was also a biased creation from Emet-Selch and—coincidentally—the only person that ever mentions the sacrifices themselves as being the main motivation of the Hydaelyn faction. Why are people willing to take Emet-Selch at his word there, but not actual recordings, Venat’s recollections, and WoG for hers?

---

Bearing in mind the Convocation was amongst those she sought to (at least nominally) convince, they'd have been presented (along with the rest of their people) with arguments for their consumption, and not the true account (deliberately being withheld from the Convocation and general public), an account which is given in those sources you mention. So I agree it's strange to hang on that as an indication of what were the true motives of her faction, particularly when their viewpoint, as understood by Hyth's shade (Emet), seems to be to hand over the star to these beings - again, she is trying to convince them to stop. To what end? Who knows, because if she truly thought there was no work-around to the dynamis issue, the only solution seems to be to line up to be sundered. And if they didn't agree?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

https://i.imgur.com/0amf1YQ.jpg



Yep he is. I don’t agree with him. Bottom line.



So is it false or is it from her perspective? The Amaurot dungeon was from Emets perspective, doesn’t mean it’s incorrect. Just means we have to keep that in mind right?

---

Yes, however we have other evidence to support his amaurot dungeon spheal. Between the cave paintings, prior knowledge and the knowledge we come across throughout Amaurot. Whereas with Venat’s walk a lot of what happens in it is contradicted by what we know as fact happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

And all would be dead if the Ancients reach their Dead End. When a species reaches the conclusion that living isn’t worth it, and they are the “stewards of the star”

---

Other races not unlike Sundered people, say the Global Citizen race, did reach their Dead End despite not being all powerful godlike beings. Besides, we don't know how long it'd have taken for them to reach that stage of their evolution: it could be millions of years.
Life isn't extinct either on the Plenty world; there's Ra-La, the butterflies it summons, the rest of the monsters we meet, and the flora. So no, all would not be dead. The Ancients would. Even then, their soul would return to be recycled into other beings.

Even though Ascian involvement caused a bunch of calamities, some were prevented by Warriors of Light, but don't seem to come from Ascian schemes: Koryu and Ultima the High-Seraph from the top of my head. Koryu was a near global calamity.
So tell me, how did making people mortal, willing to wage war when they were at peace before, and strip them of a bunch of power they could have used to survive help them not go extinct?
If the conclusion "All life is meant to end" is to be taken seriously, why would Sundered people who almost killed themselves 7 times already wouldn't end, too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alenore

Other races not unlike Sundered people, say the Global Citizen race, did reach their Dead End despite not being all powerful godlike beings. Besides, we don't know how long it'd have taken for them to reach that stage of their evolution: it could be millions of years.
Life isn't extinct either on the Plenty world; there's Ra-La, the butterflies it summons, the rest of the monsters we meet, and the flora. So no, all would not be dead. The Ancients would. Even then, their soul would return to be recycled into other beings.

Even though Ascian involvement caused a bunch of calamities, some were prevented by Warriors of Light, but don't seem to come from Ascian schemes: Koryu and Ultima the High-Seraph from the top of my head. Koryu was a near global calamity.
So tell me, how did making people mortal, willing to wage war when they were at peace before, and strip them of a bunch of power they could have used to survive help them not go extinct?
If the conclusion "All life is meant to end" is to be taken seriously, why would Sundered people who almost killed themselves 7 times already wouldn't end, too?

---

Precisely this. The ancients were only really possibly heading towards one dead end. Whereas now, after the sundering, there is the possibility of reaching either one of the 3 dead ends. It kind of makes her plan incredibly idiotic in a way.Granted we knew she wasnt the sharpest tool in the shed what with her "backup plan" basically equating to people mass turning on a spaceship the moment they left zodiark's shield. She makes even a himbo like me look smart!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

Precisely this. The ancients were only really possibly heading towards one dead end. Whereas now, after the sundering, there is the possibility of reaching either one of the 3 dead ends. It kind of makes her plan incredibly idiotic in a way.Granted we knew she wasnt the sharpest tool in the shed what with her "backup plan" basically equating to people mass turning on a spaceship the moment they left zodiark's shield. She makes even a himbo like me look smart!

---

You do realize that they wouldn't have made it to any of the bad ends of that dungeon had the sundering not happened. Because of Metion killing everyone in the universe before they could even make it to those points. Besides neither of those other two ends are on the path the sundered are on now. There seems to be no mass disease that is gonna pop up to be the cause of the first area. The war with the empire is over, which is the parallel with the second area. Why do you think the goal was to stop any possible downfall in the far flung future and not: Stop being trying to murder us all at this very moment. Could the sundered society collapse at one point sometime later? Sure, everything ends those people who are alive them will have to deal with it. That wasn't Venat's goal. Metion was trying to kill everyone and the greater part of her people were making a choice that wouldn't allow them to fight back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thegreatonemal

You do realize that they wouldn't have made it to any of the bad ends of that dungeon had the sundering not happened. Because of Metion killing everyone in the universe before they could even make it to those points. Besides neither of those other two ends are on the path the sundered are on now. There seems to be no mass disease that is gonna pop up to be the cause of the first area. The war with the empire is over, which is the parallel with the second area. Why do you think the goal was to stop any possible downfall in the far flung future and not: Stop being trying to murder us all at this very moment. Could the sundered society collapse at one point sometime later? Sure, everything ends those people who are alive them will have to deal with it. That wasn't Venat's goal. Metion was trying to kill everyone and the greater part of her people were making a choice that wouldn't allow them to fight back.

---

Venat's worry was them becoming the plenty. But with you rlogic, why should she care? The society would just collapse later not right now. Your logic is incredibly flawed, and you dont really have much room to talk when you were trying to argue with the blatant definitionn of genocide. Try again oatmeal.

The discussion regarding Dead Ends seems completely pointless to me. Venat's actions were based on stopping the Final Days and trying to birth a civilization of people who'd have the best chances of overcoming said calamity and defeating Meteion for the good of all life in existence, not just the ancient civilization. When she didn't think her people were capable of that, she resorted to the sundered. There was no active goal in trying to prevent ancients from reaching a fate like the Plenty, or for the sundered to never reach a dead end either. I'm not sure what Venat's opinion on the inevitable destruction of humankind is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tehmon

The discussion regarding Dead Ends seems completely pointless to me. Venat's actions were based on stopping the Final Days and trying to birth a civilization of people who'd have the best chances of overcoming said calamity and defeating Meteion for the good of all life in existence, not just the ancient civilization. When she didn't think her people were capable of that, she resorted to the sundered. There was no active goal in trying to prevent ancients from reaching a fate like the Plenty, or for the sundered to never reach a dead end either. I'm not sure what Venat's opinion on the inevitable destruction of humankind is.

---

Erm….did you watch the QnA?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thegreatonemal

You do realize that they wouldn't have made it to any of the bad ends of that dungeon had the sundering not happened. Because of Metion killing everyone in the universe before they could even make it to those points.

---

The Dead Ends were mostly natural (or caused by the inhabitants) ends to civilizations. Meteion (Not Metion, I guess you can't read names either, Oatmeal) found planets that already met that end prior to her arrival. Yes, she did end a few herself, but world ending events are not exclusive to her.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thegreatonemal

Besides neither of those other two ends are on the path the sundered are on now. There seems to be no mass disease that is gonna pop up to be the cause of the first area. The war with the empire is over, which is the parallel with the second area.

---

The plague was caused by overpopulation which can still happen. The war with the Garleans isn't the only war that's ever existed on our star, nor will it be the last. People thought the first World War was gonna be the last one. It wasn't. There could also be an entirely different dead end awaiting our star.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thegreatonemal

Metion was trying to kill everyone and the greater part of her people were making a choice that wouldn't allow them to fight back.

---

Gee... it would have been great if the Ancients knew exactly what they were supposed to fight back at. I mean, they had thought that they won with Zodiark, but it's a shame no one who knew about Meteion could have told them. Oh wait. Venat could have. But instead she killed them all for the great sin of not fighting something they didn't know existed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

Erm….did you watch the QnA?

---

Yes, but I don't think it really conflicts with what I say. I don't really believe that was THE reason for the sundering. There was no message to the sundered that we must never let humankind reach their end. It was the Final Days that had to be averted, as Venat believed humankind in some way was capable of that. The rest would be up to people to figure out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alenore

Ultima the High-Seraph

---

When Meteion claimed the universe to be dead, my first thought was: "So from where did Ultima the high-seraph come from?"
I wish they'd expand on this side. Wouldn't do to have an alien descending from another world only to know two expansions later that the universe is dead.