Who knew the 6.15 Omega Quests… (Spoilers)

…Would lead to our WOL taking a stance on the Venat/Emet discussion?

It’s a lovely little quest though. Very sweet.

(Unless, perhaps… if that message ends up being from someone we know/knew/will know.)

I picked "Neither were justified" because screw that genocidal witch and the gaslighting trying to make her look like a hero.

Same. It’s interesting that they gave us a choice.

The quest overall was very thought-provoking in terms of how it revisited Endwalker's main themes and rather boldly questioned whether or not Venat actually made the right choice as well as considering the merits of Hermes and Emet Selch's actions. Omega was also just entertaining the entire way through with its commentary on matters both mundane and profound.

I did find the confirmation that the Watcher's original self was part of Venat's faction and one of the sacrifices for Hydaelyn despite not even knowing her true intentions a bit troubling, though, even if his simulacrum was satisfied with the end result.

I'm also wondering if/when they'll revisit the Omicrons after the TT card tease that Chi was housing the key to their survival. It's implied the thing possessed a heart with how it seemed to have developed an obsession with seeking out new targets against its original directive as well as remarking that it's "never felt so alive" when it's defeated.

Nice. This is something that I think we need more of - allowing players to come to their own personal conclusions. I hope we get more of this sort of commentary within the MSQ's as well.

We're finally getting a say on the matter, after we were not allowed to voice any kind of criticism during all of EW.

Maybe there's still hope for the game. If you wanna be morally grey, you gotta expect people to have different opinions.

It's proof that Ishikawa does understand the moral ambiguity of the Ancient situation, but for some reason it was entirely absent in 6.0. (executive meddling?)
The entire quest was really well written. Too bad it's not part of the MSQ as it's the best story content we got in a long while.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KageTokage

The quest overall was very thought-provoking in terms of how it revisited Endwalker's main themes and rather boldly questioned whether or not Venat actually made the right choice as well as considering the merits of Hermes and Emet Selch's actions. Omega was also just entertaining the entire way through with its commentary on matters both mundane and profound.

I did find the confirmation that the Watcher's original self was part of Venat's faction and one of the sacrifices for Hydaelyn despite not even knowing her true intentions a bit troubling, though, even if his simulacrum was satisfied with the end result.

I'm also wondering if/when they'll revisit the Omicrons after the TT card tease that Chi was housing the key to their survival. It's implied the thing possessed a heart with how it seemed to have developed an obsession with seeking out new targets against its original directive as well as remarking that it's "never felt so alive" when it's defeated.

---

This is really interesting to me tbh…. it paints the Watcher in a whole new light now because we know she consumed the souls of her followers and essentially erased them. The watcher is nothing more than her creation who will probably agree with everything she says so no wonder he says he’s satisfied. It’s interesting though that we now know he was one of her followers because maybe then he should’ve had memories of his og self, in which case he doesn’t know who or what meteion is….which could mean she didn’t tell any of her followers whatsoever.

I really loved this quest, not only for going over how people reacted, but also giving us an option to basically either take a side, say everybody was justified, or take nobody's side. The quest itself was deep, thought provoking, and truly was what we needed. As Kazhar said, it's a shame it's relegated to side story, it'd have fit in perfectly with the MSQ.

I really hope SE gives us the percentage breakdown on what people picked here at some point.

And I am over the moon that Omega pointed out that what Venat did is no better than what Hermes or Emet-Selch did.

I can't believe "Omnicide is always wrong" is a point even up for debate, and I'm glad we were finally able to express that in-character.

I wonder if people picked Hermes,

Normally this is two sided Emet vs Venat but really the quest points out its 3 sided. Hermes philosophy is in complete odds with Venat AND Emets

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jennah

I really hope SE gives us the percentage breakdown on what people picked here at some point.

And I am over the moon that Omega pointed out that what Venat did is no better than what Hermes or Emet-Selch did.

I can't believe "Omnicide is always wrong" is a point even up for debate, and I'm glad we were finally able to express that in-character.

---

Never going to happen, percentage breakdowns after the fact will just funnel players into picking a certain option when the content becomes older.

"All were justified" is my choice.
Though I don't really agree with the means. Each believed theirs is for the greater good. A woman who wanted the future to be there, a man who was consumed by curiosity and equal treatment, and an old man who want to have his nostalgic days back.

Regarding the whole questline. I had expectations it would be more mysterious and either a teaser or a build-up for future questlines/content. I guess I'm mistaken....

I actually believe the Omega quest served more as an epilogue to Endwalker. I disagree that they could have fit this narrative within the MSQ. I think this particular subject of who was right or whose perspective had bigger weight is too big of a topic to approach within the confines of the story. It's a morally grey topic but one that rather unravels countless corners of the story as a whole. Applying such a divisive element in the middle of the MSQ seems like it would have been distracting and poorly timed for something that should invite self reflection in-character.

Not saying it would have been impossible, but I would think reserving the time to appropriately "reflect" on everything is better than shoe horning this type of questioning in game and then moving on shortly after to the next big moment of the MSQ.

There’s something to consider in that Omega is a world destroyer as well, if I’m not mistaken. It commenting on the actions of the various Ancients may come from a place where it sees itself reflected in those actions. Hopefully not in admiration. The themes of this little adventure are quite weighty.

That message could be a breadcrumb to another storyline, or it could be just a sweet little endcap. We’ll have to see if there’s more to this story. I too am surprised we didn’t go to the restaurant at the end of the universe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shookbeast

That message could be a breadcrumb to another storyline, or it could be just a sweet little endcap. We’ll have to see if there’s more to this story. I too am surprised we didn’t go to the restaurant at the end of the universe.

---

Indeed. There are many possibilities to it.
It could be from someone who discovered Meteion's background and is sending a message in hopes it reaches a living world to survive her song. It could be a message from someone to cheer us up on our way to face her (Since it was received during the initial trip).
Or it's simply coming from someone who's like Hermis but is optimistic instead of being depressed. The possibilities are so many! :)

Perhaps it could even be that one guy after the second boss of the Dead Ends. You know, that guy who we never know what happened with him (but was highly inferred to have killed himself after having killed everybody). A final message before he offed himself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

This is really interesting to me tbh…. it paints the Watcher in a whole new light now because we know she consumed the souls of her followers and essentially erased them.

---

But we knew that already since Shadowbringers. The ancients on both sides of the conflict fully and willingly gave up their life energies to fuel their chosen primal's creation.

The biggest surprises of Endwalker are that souls are included in that energy and ultimately consumed (I had previously assumed it along the lines of sacrificing corporeal aether to become the primal, with the soul doing whatever it is that souls do after the body's death) and that Venat's consciousness could entirely survive as the heart, which seems at odds with the grieved reaction her companion has upon learning she intends to do it.

If anything, the description of the Watcher fits in with other sources indicating that individual souls are not erased within the primal but are all just whirling around in there together as an amalgamation that collectively forms "the primal's will", while remaining distinct enough that one can be plucked back out and resume individual consciousness if the opportunity arises.

There is Elidibus, of course, although Y'shtola theorises (apparently correctly) that it is the multitude of souls within him that are eroding his own soul's identity and memory – indicating that the many souls within Zodiark are not reduced to inert aether but retain at least some degree of identity and interfere with (let's call him) Themis's individual self. His appearance at the end of 5.3 and in Endwalker could be seen as Themis alone once everyone else's aether has been stripped away from him, leaving just the single soul.

And then we have Hythlodaeus on the moon, still lucid enough to identify as himself after all this time. Is he any different to the Watcher, or is it simply that one is inclined to see himself as himself and the other disassociates his past self with his present form? Or is it that the Watcher was picked out from the primal and transformed, while Hyth remains within it? Could Zodiark/Elidibus do the same thing to any of the souls within him?

I am suddenly struck by a new theory of where the black mask Ascians might come from.

Even Minfilia would fit into this idea, as (what we could now read as) a late addition into Hydaelyn's collection of souls, later set free as an individual again but transformed from mortal into something more, and aspected to the primal. She even says she is no different to an Ascian in that form.

And then there is Hydaelyn herself. If we can apply what we know of Elidibus to this other "primal heart" then it is possible that our early meetings with Hydaelyn are not directly with Venat at all, but with the amalgamated swirl of souls with Venat at the core. It isn't explored whether she might suffer the same loss of memories too, outside of core ones she repeats to herself and fixes upon.

In any case, by the time we arrive in the aetherial sea, she has apparently expended all the aether except the last soul remaining at her heart, so any other influence has receded and Venat speaks as herself once more.

This is speculation of course, and I would have to watch back through the scene to see if it fits.

Quite a good questline, and I feel that I don't have the personal ability to put into words why I feel the way I feel about the choices of the three Ancients, which I think was handled astonishingly well by making Omega compare them all.

Personally, I chose to say I find Venat the most justified, because her philosophy is the only one that pretty much perfectly overlaps with mine (though her methods continue to seem incredibly strange, perhaps idiotic, without further elaboration).

The message to "Forge Ahead" truly was a nice little ribbon on top. I do love when the writing in this game gets more introspective and really reflects on what has happened and where you fit in amongst it all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WillIrishclover

Never going to happen, percentage breakdowns after the fact will just funnel players into picking a certain option when the content becomes older.

---

Why not? They gave us the results of the still leaves people bitter over it Valentiones day successor vote and who did you choose at the start with Anogg and Konogg at the end of the six weeks of post story from the Nier raid. Still amazes me every sever ended up voting the same way with about the same split for the latter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SannaR

Why not? They gave us the results of the still leaves people bitter over it Valentiones day successor vote and who did you choose at the start with Anogg and Konogg at the end of the six weeks of post story from the Nier raid. Still amazes me every sever ended up voting the same way with about the same split for the latter.

---

those were one off side contents.

The moment Ultima Thule music kicks in . My heaart T__T

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sidurgu-12

those were one off side contents.

---

The only way you can repeat this quest is either doing it on an Alt or NG+. How many people do you think are going to do either? And yes I checked for it in the unending journey.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jennah

I really hope SE gives us the percentage breakdown on what people picked here at some point.

---

Do they really need to? The answer is going to end up being "They all were" because that's the 1st option on the list. Most people are just going to click through, even in FFXIV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WillIrishclover

I wonder if people picked Hermes,

Normally this is two sided Emet vs Venat but really the quest points out its 3 sided. Hermes philosophy is in complete odds with Venat AND Emets

---

I'm new to this section of the forums. Do people still argue for our against either side after finding out about the time travel stuff in EW? Because it's pretty clear that Hermes was the least justified of all since he set it all in motion for a very selfish reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oextra

I'm new to this section of the forums. Do people still argue for our against either side after finding out about the time travel stuff in EW? Because it's pretty clear that Hermes was the least justified of all since he set it all in motion for a very selfish reason.

---

Accidently set it in motion. But his intention was still for the betterment of his race at least in regards to their hubris in not seeing the value of life (and death) in a vacuum. From his pov, he felt his people disregarded things too easily and quite literally took it for granted since they had very little limitations. You could say him setting Meteion free wasn't entirely in accordance with that but it still comes off as he forcefully tried to teach mankind a lesson about the world and life around them and more importantly to appreciate it, albeit in a roundabout way.

All three Ancients had reasons one could sympathize with, but the sheer loss of life and lack of consent involved made their methods contentious.

I think I would've only felt comfortable saying none of them were justified if I didn't agree with what they wanted for their people and found their methods detestable, but it was really only the latter in play, so I opted for "justified in their own ways".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

This is really interesting to me tbh…. it paints the Watcher in a whole new light now because we know she consumed the souls of her followers and essentially erased them. The watcher is nothing more than her creation who will probably agree with everything she says so no wonder he says he’s satisfied. It’s interesting though that we now know he was one of her followers because maybe then he should’ve had memories of his og self, in which case he doesn’t know who or what meteion is….which could mean she didn’t tell any of her followers whatsoever.

---

Honestly, I think the only thing that might give me a little additional peace of mind would be the revelation that Venat's faction knew our whole story and they were perfectly okay with the Sundering and all it entailed with no deception, half-truths, and/or omission of information involved.

It would still leave the uncomfortable reality that the other Ancients had no idea what it was their opposition truly desired, though. There were truths they deserved to know, Hermes and the timeline be damned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Havenchild

I disagree that they could have fit this narrative within the MSQ. I think this particular subject of who was right or whose perspective had bigger weight is too big of a topic to approach within the confines of the story. It's a morally grey topic but one that rather unravels countless corners of the story as a whole. Applying such a divisive element in the middle of the MSQ seems like it would have been distracting and poorly timed for something that should invite self reflection in-character.

---

I believe they absolutely should have fit this within the MSQ. A large part of the controversy with Venat, in particular, is she's portrayed as a tragic heroine of righteousness and benevolence. It's never once addressed that in actuality she represents everything the Scions have consistently fought against and condemned, instead she's universally treated favorably despite her striking similarities to other villains such as Thordan and Hermes. If inserting logic, consistency, and realism into the story would've caused corners to unravel I'd say that speaks volumes about the narrative they were trying to spin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Havenchild

You could say him setting Meteion free wasn't entirely in accordance with that but it still comes off as he forcefully tried to teach mankind a lesson about the world and life around them and more importantly to appreciate it, albeit in a roundabout way.

---

I won't argue that Ishikawa clearly has a different view of Hermes than I do because I don't consider an extinction level event to be any sort of 'first step' for mankind, but as far as what's depicted in the game by the time we meet Hermes he seems driven by spite more than a genuine concern for the betterment of his people.

The whole of EW seems to justify violence if people aren't acting the way you think they should and that is a subject that should have been addressed in more than a side quest not everyone will do.

The thing with "this should be in MSQ" is that then they need to find a way to weave it into the MSQ.

FFXIV is written with the expectation that if people are into the story, they will play and experience the various sidequests to get the full picture. Being a sidequest doesn't make it insignificant, but lets it sit apart as its own story path separate to the direction that the post-credits MSQ is going.

Also, it inherently requires completion of the Omega raids before the story can play out.

On answering the question, I opted for "they were all justified in their own way" but would like to have been able to add "...but at the same time they also weren't."

On whether they could keep score of the answers, I don't think they can when it's just a conversation response in a cutscene. The two times we've had a tallied response to player choices (dwarves and Valentiones) it has been trackable through each choice being presented as an individual quest that locks you out of completing the others.

It's a really nice little quest chain. Omega's quest is essentially about the emotional understanding and empathy underpinning Endwalker's themes. The reason why it's presented after the story is not just to let you digest the ideas, but also to serve as a quick sparknotes rundown of the themes to put them into perspective.

I chuckled over Omega's oddly familiar ruminations on Thavnair. What caused some people to survive and others to transform? Was it superior 'strength of will'? Was it the the power of drinking draconic blood? Not really. It could happen to anyone. The power of your bonds, your memories, your friendships, and your family certainly help, though. I very much enjoyed Manius' humanistic perspective on the Garleans' situation. Sure, there will always be miserable people who are lost without factions to shout at others through. But lot of people just want to get on with their lives.

I'm a bit curious about the fluffiness hierarchy. So far we have:
First rung: Viera ears
Second rung: Argos
Third rung: Alpha
Fourth rung: Growingway

Hopefully we'll see this expanded on as we learn more about the fluffsent.

I really enjoyed the Watcher's story, as well as a bit of perspective on Venat's circle of friends. I'd like to hear more about his story as a researcher in Anyder, even if it comes out in supplementary materials.

Either way, it was great to see Omega progressively emotional mature as he moved through Endwalker's themes. I'd actually love to see him and Midgardsormr sit down for tea some day. Although I'm sure that there will be roles for both to play in the new storyline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jennah

I really hope SE gives us the percentage breakdown on what people picked here at some point.

---

So, practically speaking I don't think this is possible even if they wanted to. (And the fact it doesn't appear to be is probably indication that they didn't want to). They can't take metrics on dialog choices, because that's essentially entirely clientside with no recording of anything; the Anogg/Konogg choice was actually a quest fork, so they could measure by how many people picked up which quests. That said, if those stats were actually being collected I think we'd have seen the results in more or less the same order we saw them; not only are the topmost options statistically favored because of the 'don't care, I'll check the top one and move on' factor, but people also broadly just pick the 'good/nice guy' options more often than not. Mass Effect does collect statistics for player choices and it's always in that direction (unless it comes to punching reporters), and I remember that The Secret World actually did secretly record moral choice options without people knowing, and it was phenomenally 'good guys' inclined. Even with a similar sort of dynamic to what we see between Venat and Emet; the clear visual 'good guys' being inscrutible and daunting, with the visual 'bad guys' being REALLY shady but with some clear charisma while directly acknowledging that the other guys are clearly not benevolent.

Personally, I picked Venat, because my perspective was always that she was ultimately making the correct decision by Ancient philosophy, to do right by the planet (me being an environmentalist probably helps, too). Emet-Selch went against that in a time of extreme duress, which is completely understandable and I can't entirely say I wouldn't do the same, but I think still wrong. And incidentally I do love that Omega put forward Hermes when literally nobody else was or would have, Hermes potentially included. Even when learning emotions, Omega's still a logical being first and foremost, so it makes complete sense that they'd put 'well this guy was factually correct, surely that's also valid' on equal standing.

And honestly, the part of that scene that I most valued: the Watcher is based on the guy from the second Anamnesis recording! Didn't expect him of all people to come back into play, but I'm so happy he did. And answers the very small minority who seemed to think that Venat went against her allies' wishes; he was pretty clearly on board with it all.

I chose, "None of them were justified." Self-justified, sure. Actually justified? Nah, homie don't play that.

Hermes was on the list for two reasons. One, he caused the other two to make the choices they wound up making, and two, the writers of the story really do believe he's a compelling villain.

Venat wasn't justified, because she merely rose to play Hermes' inherently flawed game. It was also made apparent by this quest that she did not inform her followers about her plan to Sunder the world.

Hades, bereft of memories that Venat could have partially restored to him after Zodiark's creation(the point where Hermes' "genius" is no longer needed) via The Echo, is most akin to an innocent of the three. As crazy as that sounds, all of the bad that he did was essentially done in the name of correcting a grievous wrong. Of course, it still can't be excused, but he was the only one of the three performing his actions without being informed. With full knowledge of Meteion and Hermes and his future self, what do you think he would have done?

If we hadn't been given Options 1 or 5, then I probably would have chosen Hades.

More interesting to me though, was the mention Omega made of the Ancients' civilization being a Stage IV civilization. If you're unaware of the Kardashev Scale, then I suggest looking into it. Stage 4 is actually a further step added to the theory later by someone else. The scale itself is about potential energy consumption/usage that a civilization is capable of.

Stage 1 is a civilization a bit above modern day society in terms of power it can consume when compared to the Sun's power output.

Stage 2 is a civilization that can use all of the energy the sun radiates.

Stage 3 is a civilization that can use all of the energy an entire galaxy is comprised of.

The extra stages, Stage IV is a civilization that can use all of the energy in the universe. Stage V is all energy in multiple universes.

I never really doubted they were okay with whatever they thought Venat had planned, but considering that he stated that none of them knew her true intentions, it felt like it was implying she didn't tell them the whole story.

I suppose that truth will likely come to light in Myths of the Realm assuming the Twelve really are of Ancient make like many suspect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

...

---

It's similar to what happened with Emet's Amaurotian simulacra in the Tempest. Creation magic is very precise, so a single stray thought can result in a deviation from what you had originally anticipated. Most of the simulacra lack self-awareness, but the thought 'Hythlodaeus will realize the truth' gave Hyth 2.0 a special insight into the true nature of the place. The same seems to be true of Venat and the Watcher, given that they were close originally.

I'd really like to know more about his name, his backstory, and what lead him personally to stand up against the rest of his society's decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shookbeast

…Would lead to our WOL taking a stance on the Venat/Emet discussion?

It’s a lovely little quest though. Very sweet.

(Unless, perhaps… if that message ends up being from someone we know/knew/will know.)

---

I loved the quest. Being able to take a stance on something historic like this was awesome. Please more "taking stances" if the situation allows it. Absolutely dug that multiple choice answer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vyrerus

I chose, "None of them were justified." Self-justified, sure. Actually justified? Nah, homie don't play that.

Hermes was on the list for two reasons. One, he caused the other two to make the choices they wound up making, and two, the writers of the story really do believe he's a compelling villain.

Venat wasn't justified, because she merely rose to play Hermes' inherently flawed game. It was also made apparent by this quest that she did not inform her followers about her plan to Sunder the world.

Hades, bereft of memories that Venat could have partially restored to him after Zodiark's creation(the point where Hermes' "genius" is no longer needed) via The Echo, is most akin to an innocent of the three. As crazy as that sounds, all of the bad that he did was essentially done in the name of correcting a grievous wrong. Of course, it still can't be excused, but he was the only one of the three performing his actions without being informed. With full knowledge of Meteion and Hermes and his future self, what do you think he would have done?

If we hadn't been given Options 1 or 5, then I probably would have chosen Hades.

More interesting to me though, was the mention Omega made of the Ancients' civilization being a Stage IV civilization. If you're unaware of the Kardashev Scale, then I suggest looking into it. Stage 4 is actually a further step added to the theory later by someone else. The scale itself is about potential energy consumption/usage that a civilization is capable of.

Stage 1 is a civilization a bit above modern day society in terms of power it can consume when compared to the Sun's power output.

Stage 2 is a civilization that can use all of the energy the sun radiates.

Stage 3 is a civilization that can use all of the energy an entire galaxy is comprised of.

The extra stages, Stage IV is a civilization that can use all of the energy in the universe. Stage V is all energy in multiple universes.

---

Well articulated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

snip.

---

Uh, we didn’t know that her followers souls were literally consumed and extinguished though which is my point, and which is something they had answered in a QnA. Their souls are gone. Like gone gone. We don’t know if her followers willingly did it knowing their souls would be extinguished, in fact what we see in 5.2 contradicts this, in that they say they’ll miss venat. They can’t really miss her if they don’t exist anymore now can they?

Q: Venat said that not even her soul would remain but what does that mean? I’m very fond of her character and would like to see her again. A: The answer is that souls are also made of Aether, and she gives up so much Aether that includes all of her soul as well. By contrast Zodiark was summoned using sacrifices of a lot of people, yes? But he was able to only use their Aether aside from their souls up because Zodiark was really strong and summoned by the Convocation of the Fourteen and so on. Hydaelyn had a much weaker summoning and because of that she didn’t have the option to leave the souls untouched, and that includes Venat she ended up using all of her Aether. In 5.2 there was some discussion of Venat’s group that assisted her in doing this and also how much of the Ancient people were sacrificed to create Zodiark so if you look back at that time it might be of your interest now. At the very end, Hydaelyn still had her own soul, which is Venat’s. That was the very power that she used to fight the Warrior of Light. When she tells you before the final bout she had saved enough Aether specifically to fight you, and that specifically points to Venat’s soul.

Also, the watcher is a simulacrum. Nothing more than that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

I'd really like to know more about his name, his backstory, and what lead him personally to stand up against the rest of his society's decision.

---

Ten gil on him being a Tales From the End viewpoint character at some point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

I believe they absolutely should have fit this within the MSQ. A large part of the controversy with Venat, in particular, is she's portrayed as a tragic heroine of righteousness and benevolence. It's never once addressed that in actuality she represents everything the Scions have consistently fought against and condemned, instead she's universally treated favorably despite her striking similarities to other villains such as Thordan and Hermes. If inserting logic, consistency, and realism into the story would've caused corners to unravel I'd say that speaks volumes about the narrative they were trying to spin.

---

To your first point, it's written morally grey to an extent but they need to usher the story in a certain direction to compel certain characters to do certain things. That's just a literary tactic. FFXIV is unique in the fact that the center of events revolves around the player character so obviously everyone will interpret the story different based on perception, personal experiences etcetc, which is imo what insights the morally grey story telling.

But they still have a story to tell. They still have events and a lore to orchestrate. Inviting an open ended element within the MSQ is offputting if you have nothing to back it up with.

Case 1) Player vehemently disagrees to Hydaelyns / Venats actions:

-> Player journeys to Elpis -> Disagreeing with Venat's Actions, refuses to work alongside her knowing what she would do ->>???? (How do you progress this storyline?)

While not impossible, I highly doubt any story writer would create an MMO with such an open ended execution to conclude all story paths (different cutscenes) etcetc. It's too much of an undertaking. What FFXIV does, and well I might add, is inviting open ended narrative while still keeping a general focus on a goal point. I don't believe that's a failing on the narrative of the game and in fact a clear indication of the risk involved with telling a story that has so many perspectives woven inside. Art that imitates life in a way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

I won't argue that Ishikawa clearly has a different view of Hermes than I do because I don't consider an extinction level event to be any sort of 'first step' for mankind, but as far as what's depicted in the game by the time we meet Hermes he seems driven by spite more than a genuine concern for the betterment of his people.

The whole of EW seems to justify violence if people aren't acting the way you think they should and that is a subject that should have been addressed in more than a side quest not everyone will do.

---

Hermes is a conflicting character in alot of ways. If you pool Hermes, Amon, and Fandaniel together, you essentially have a character that has changed face depending on his setting / circumstances. Hermes flipped once at least (pre memory wipe). Amon seemed to have flipped 2 or 3 times in terms of his motivations iirc. Fandaniel is just hard nihilism.

Idk if it justifies violence persay, and I wouldn't leave that to only EW either. SHB AND EW both fuel a narrative that when extreme viewpoints clash, it still falls to "might makes right". SHB Emet tries to argue for the opposite but the irony in that is that ultimately it still plays out that way regardless. It's very hard to have conversations with extreme viewpoints and in turn, that leads to violent clashes.
That's a mirror to society imo.

The only way to really come together is to turn down the temperature first one brick at a time. You see both of these viewpoints of extremes and descaling in Garlemald and even with the beast tribes over the course of the story.

I would instead say that EW elevates an aspect of selfishness and how that can lead to terrifying consequences. Almost every storypoint in EW has an aspect of selfishness associated with it. From the forum, to Zenos, to Garlemald armies, to Hermes insistence on listening to Meteion and "testing mankind", to Hydaelyns decision to sunder etc. All irrespective of any motivations or ultimate goals.