Thank you SE (super dooper spoilers)

I know there is a of well earned negativity surrounding the state server stability and player capacity since launch BUT I'm really surprised that most of the story and gameplay related threads have been negative as well.

So I just wanted to throw my two cents in and say thank you to the writers of this expansion. Thank you for not making another morally gray, depressing and over all slog of a story.
I'm so glad that the story didn't head in that direction after we found out an over abundance of light caused the same problems as darkness did. I saw a good bit of speculation that zodiarc and hydealyn were two sides of the same coin.
Then only a few hours into EW we find out that NO, the light is actually just good and Venat really just wanted to preserve the future.

I genuinely felt excited and happy playing the final chapters of this story. I couldn't find any cynicism in any of the writing, no hopelessness and certainly no moral ambiguity. This is the kind of story, I think, that a lot of people playing the game needed this year.

It kind of sounds like you are thanking the writers for making a story that did not challenge you...

It was at least morally gray enough to not be Star Wars though thank god. "Fear bad, anger bad, hate bad, emotions and love bad." "Good over all."

What is challenging about ambiguity? I didn't even make a comment on the quality of writing, just the subject matter.

My comment was not about quality.

I think it's still morally gray in many places. Without Zodiark there'd not be any opportunity for the rest of this story, safe assumption at least.

Zodiark was an extreme worth stopping afterwards, but I would question if anything would have been better if without him there was nothing.

The motives of a lot of individuals were also morally gray-ish. Of course having mother be the same side of the coin would have taken it to another level, but I think saying the story had no 'think for yourself' moments (for ally and villain alike), as it has had in every expansion, I think isn't quite right.

Personally morally gray stuff tends to be more exciting than the obvious "that's a good guy" "that's a bad guy". Otherwise seems very non-believable, usually (not exclusive). Imo. Most heroes in real life are easily dislikeable if you research them enough, and haven't drank the kool-aid yet. Though not every story has to be trying to be too real lol.

The light isn’t good if there’s an overabundance of it. Should the Source have come under fall of an excess like the First did, nothing would have changed from Shadowbringers, so your point is kind of moot.

The only reason I accepted the “Hydaelyn has always been good” mantra was because Venat was written in a spectacular way. Otherwise, I find the black-and-white “Hydaelyn good” “Zodiark bad” narrative dull and predictable.

Moral ambiguity is intriguing. Predictable plots are not. To be honest, I didn’t find anything about the ending particularly emotional except for all the stuff with Hermes, Meteion, and the dead civilizations. The Scions sacrificing themselves for the sake of our progress through Ultima Thule wasn’t that interesting because I knew they weren’t actually dead. There was no emotional weight to that plot—which was disappointing following the ending of Shadowbringers where we all but became a monster, found ourselves sympathetic to Emet-Selch and Elidibus, and had our emotional journey with Ardbert. Instead, we had another fakeout of Scions dying and an “epic battle” with Zenos (which completely ruined the final scene with Meteion for me). Zenos has about as much emotional depth as a puddle on the sidewalk in the middle of a hot summer day, so…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saier

What is challenging about ambiguity? I didn't even make a comment on the quality of writing, just the subject matter.

---

Ambiguity adds depth. When you are faced with making a decision that isn’t black-and-white—such as a decision made “for the greater good” that also has dire consequences attached to it—it adds emotional depth to what you are doing. It’s also far more realistic than “this answer is always right” or “this answer is always bad”. Actions in life always come with consequences—and a lot of the most impactful ones are not purely good or purely bad. That’s unrealistic, and, as I said before, makes a story predictable and dull.

Witcher had a lot of fun gray moments. One of my favorite gray moment due to how smoothly it appeared. I remember this quest with a racist human and a dwarf, very minor side quest, the dwarf and human were fighting over the warehouse and a murder attempt. You can see the human is a huge racist butt, but if you actually care to investigate you find that the dwarf tries to kill the human (via a trap). Then the guards come and you have to decide who goes to jail. I tried both options by save scumming. I made my choice in the end but the quest didn't try to pat me on the back for making the right choice. Murder is bad, but you also want to hate the human. Maybe it isn't entirely gray but the quest caught me off guard as I was just walking down a back alley and it triggered lol.

Less side quest example would be the Scoia'tael and Roche. The world so big and everyone is suffering in some way that they're trying to solve and usually neglecting others also suffering (drawing real life equivalency I'd say things are not always the same tier but it's certainly universal to suffer).

A more funny / less serious game example that was interesting to me was far cry 4 with pagan min. He's clearly not a great guy, but if you choose the other two leaders it's honestly not clear you did any better (in fact it seemed worse, and technically he might have passed the reigns to someone better).

While I like the gray, not so simple, and sometimes dark setting- I do want to note that doesn't mean I want depression the game. Lol ;).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HyoMinPark

I find the black-and-white “Hydaelyn good” “Zodiark bad” narrative dull and predictable.

---

from my understanding of the story zodiark wasnt "bad"
its like saying "sun is good and the moon is bad" as the main goal of zodiark was to protect the planet, didnt went exactly according to plan but still, that was the plan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anguel

from my understanding of the story zodiark wasnt "bad"
its like saying "sun is good and the moon is bad" as the main goal of zodiark was to protect the planet, didnt went exactly according to plan but still, that was the plan

---

This.
Zodiark was not bad, he was keeping the Source protected from Dynamis and Meteion, his death opened the path for her.
Fandaniel possessing Zodiark doesnt make him evil either, he was used as a weapon.

Admittedly the stakes where higher than Shadowbringers tho, if the Source falls so do the other Shards.
Also Shadowbringers was literally "into the unknown", an entirely new Shard with not much to expect, Endwalker taking place on the Source didnt have that surprise.

I dunno that level 87 cutscene hit harder than the rest of the story, and even Shb for me. Plus I can dig the philosophy behind it.