[6.0 - 6.4 Spoilers] An interesting video detailing Venat's polarizing reception

https://youtu.be/fsk412wCrJY

Stumbled upon this video essay talking about some of the narrative moments involving Venat's lore and actions and how it might have rubbed players the wrong way. It's a lot more nuanced than "endwalker story bad"

The fact is if she hadn't done it, the ancients' fate will be the same as the third part of the dead ends. All it takes is for them to say "O, Zodiark, we don't want to live anymore, please give us our eternal slumber" and poof, the end of life in Etheirys. If your kids drown their sorrows in alcohol and drugs, would you let them be or would you intervene?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yuella

The fact is if she hadn't done it, the ancients' fate will be the same as the third part of the dead ends. All it takes is for them to say "O, Zodiark, we don't want to live anymore, please give us our eternal slumber" and poof, the end of life in Etheirys. If your kids drown their sorrows in alcohol and drugs, would you let them be or would you intervene?

---

The issue is the hypocrisy the story frames everything in. Literally in UT they beat your head in with the fact that even if a society is doomed to fail it should be on their terms and let them be, not to further expedite the process. This is the issue with Venat. She is the villain in this scenario the scions constantly bring up.

It's made all the more silly by the actual fact that the Nibirun are turned away from their nihilistic beliefs with relative ease at the end of the Omicron quests despite being framed as a possible end for the Ancients.

If the very people who fueled Venat's paranoia of a "death by apathy/perfection" weren't hopeless, it kind of undermines the message to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

Literally in UT they beat your head in with the fact that even if a society is doomed to fail it should be on their terms and let them be, not to further expedite the process.

---

And should that society not have input on their own fate?

The core difference between the Ancients and the societies of Ultima Thule is that most of Ultima Thule's fallen civilizations were due to outside impact; the dragons got hit by the Omicrons, the Grebuloffs fell to disease, the Karellians and Nibirun started their slides based on the influence of Meteion. The exceptions to this are the Ea and Omicrons, where debatably the crisis for both come from the fact that they didn't fall, they're both essentially gripped with crises of existential dread and 'what do we do now'.

The Ancients, meanwhile, fell to the Ancients. In fact, in all three of their possible endings, the fault lands at their own feet. Going in order of the times things spring up:
1. If for whatever reason they didn't come up with Zodiark, they would've died to the Final Days, which is pretty squarely Hermes' fault, although certainly Ancient society isn't entirely without blame.
2. If Hydaelyn didn't step on up to the plate, then everything we've been told would suggest that eventually they sacrifice the planet dry for Zodiark. This is more a societal thing, but if you want to put a face to this side, I'd personally say Elidibus.
3. And for what did happen, Hydaelyn leg-dropped from the top rope, leading to the Sundering. Venat's hands are the ones bloodied by this, clearly.

I would argue that the reason Venat comes off as 'the one villain' of this particular micro-story to some (which I think is a gross oversimplification of said micro-story, I'd say there's no villains in it) isn't because she's the only one with a gun, it's because she's the only one that landed her shot. Everyone else is only guilty of attempted murder, she managed to knock the 'attempted' off the crime list.

But something that must also be remembered is that her plan was the only one that would've left survivors. The End of Days would've wiped out the whole planet if not stopped (as evidenced by, weirdly, Hildibrand), and Zodiark sacrifices would've rendered the planet bone dry (as evidenced from the Nibirun). But the Sundering, (as evidenced by everything before Elpis and most of what's after it) didn't just leave a planet full of people, it left fourteen planets full of people, albeit mostly different people. That hardly makes her objectively morally right, but from an omniscient readers' perspective surely we can see that her decision the kindest and most ultimately fruitful out of all options.

While you are certainly allowed to disagree with her, Venat is not a villain. And to call her one requires brutally simplifying that part of the story in the single-minded pursuit to declare there to be one in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

snip

---

Yeah no, she is strictly a villain. Your entire hypothesis is just that, a hypothesis. One that has been refuted time and time again. Your entire logic and framing of Venat relies upon people not thinking too hard and just immediately believing her and her mindset. The story literally contradicts itself numerous times. We see in the beast tribe quests the Niburun actually able to overcome their nihilism. Funny how before they were totally doomed right?

At the end of the day, the biggest condemnation for Venat will always be she didn’t even try to help her people. She didn’t try to warn them beforehand. She waited until the final days actually hit to even mention anything. Not even her followers knew the full story. That’s not something a hero does. That’s something a narcissistic person does who believe their own views are wholly right and won’t let anything get in their way. You’re assuming they would have constantly sacrificed to Zodiark forever when that’s not even explicitly stated, it’s an assumption, one directly refuted by Hythlodaeus in ShB.

But regardless, in the end no, it’s not her choice to condemn all her people to death. Just as the scions themselves said it would be wrong to doom another world to save your own, and that everyone deserves a chance even if it ends in their death. Venat didn’t give them that chance, she didn’t even try any other way.

If you want to talk about gross oversimplification, it’s what you’re doing with basically attributing Zodiark as nothing more than a blood god demanding more and more sacrifices.

Also just to clarify again, because i feel this isnt spoken about enough. The kindest of all options would be to tell her people the truth and help them combat the final days. That is if she actually cared about her people and wanted them to survive. The kindest option isnt to stay quiet and watch as people are being massacred and sacrificing themselves to save their people and then condemning them for it and killing billions.

Ah, this is that video series that your group kept advertising. I knew that I recognized this name from somewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thenightvortex

Another critical video analysis of Endwalker from Echoes of Etheirys, this time focusing on the writing’s treatment of Zenos.

https://youtu.be/F1wv4ehavhI

---

It does take a lot of effort to be an influencer. I think one difficulty that you'll encounter is that the debate over team Hydaelyn and team Zodiark has saturated this subforum for the better part of two years now, so a lot of people here are kind of just done with it. You may not get all that much benefit from placing this here.

I suspect the writers are also kind of done with this, which is why that metaphorical (and literal) story ship has sailed. If Endwalker truly was a 'lackluster' expansion, then you can be sure that they won't want to return to the subject matter of the Amaurotines and the Garleans any time soon. So you have been successful in a way, just not the one that you intended.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

Ah, this is that video series that your group kept advertising. I knew that I recognized this name from somewhere.



It does take a lot of effort to be an influencer. I think one difficulty that you'll encounter is that the debate over team Hydaelyn and team Zodiark has saturated this subforum for the better part of two years now, so a lot of people here are kind of just done with it. You may not get all that much benefit from placing this here.

I suspect the writers are also kind of done with this, which is why that metaphorical (and literal) story ship has sailed. If Endwalker truly was a 'lackluster' expansion, then you can be sure that they won't want to return to the subject matter of the Amaurotines and the Garleans any time soon. So you have been successful in a way, just not the one that you intended.

---

So op says they stumbled upon the video and you take that to mean they're part of some group behind said video? The leaps.

Oh, not the OP, my new old friend. Caelum.

Either way, it's not like it was that big of a secret anyways. It's good that you want to put your ideas out there, and it's a legitimate way of doing so. I just don't think it's that topical at the moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

Also just dropping this here, the product of a joint project of some of those of us critical of the story (or to some, 'Zodiark trancers'):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c98qO-wW30A

The remaining parts will be released gradually over the coming couple of weeks, so I'd recommend subscribing to the channel if these catch your fancy.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

Oh, not the OP, my new old friend. Caelum.

Either way, it's not like it was that big of a secret anyways. It's good that you want to put your ideas out there, and it's a legitimate way of doing so. I just don't think it's that topical at the moment.

---

Well i will say for it not being topical it sure is gaining far more views and likes than some other lore content creators around here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

Well i will say for it not being topical it sure is gaining far more views and likes than some other lore content creators around here.

---

Its not a competition.


This thread got weird now. Also, Venat did nothing wrong. :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

At the end of the day, the biggest condemnation for Venat will always be she didn’t even try to help her people.

---

Forgive me for having to break out some formatting for this one, I hope it helps you understand this.

SHE DID!

As evidence: The final cutscene of Beneath the Surface--the Anamnesis Anyder quest, and the first time in which Venat was ever named:

Quote:

---

Distressed Ancient One: Nay. Should we continue down this path, our fate will be the same.
I said as much to the Convocation, of course, but the stubborn fools turned a deaf ear to my warnings.
I had hoped that the defector, at least, would side with us, but I regret to report our overtures have gone unanswered.
Whither tend your thoughts, Venat? Where you lead, we will follow.

Venat:
I shall not speak ill of the Convocation─they too seek only to secure the future of our star.
Yet it is plain they will not countenance a permanent solution. That being the case, we must ask ourselves a simple question: are we prepared to pursue our chosen course, even should it mean suffering the eternal condemnation of our brethren?
If so, I see no further reason to demur.
Let us bring forth the Light that shall ever after keep the Darkness in check.

---

The text of this is, I thought, clear as day: Venat's crew literally were trying to warn the Convocation, and were getting nowhere.

One might ask why they took so long, as this was after the second sacrifice. And the answer to that lies in the first of the cutscenes in Thou Must Live, Die, and Know--the quest after Ktisis Hyperboreia. I won't quote the entire passage, because it's rather long.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Venat

[...]
With Meteion free to pursue her designs, 'tis only a matter of time until the Final Days are upon us.
We must be ready. From fortifying our defenses to securing our escape, there is much to be done.
In spite of this, we cannot allow the report that set this calamity in motion to become common knowledge. Were the masses to learn the fates of the other stars, I fear the situation would spiral out of our control.
I must carefully consider who can be trusted, and bring them into the fold.
Ordinarily, I wouldn't hesitate to call upon the Fourteen. However, it was the desire for a fair determination that drove Hermes to attempt to erase our memories; were he made aware of his actions, there is no telling whether he would remain a friend or become a foe.
Alternately, we might try to alienate him from the Convocation. Yet in doing so, we would deprive ourselves of a brilliant mind who would be invaluable in the crises to come.
Quite the dilemma... Which is why I must work independently of the Convocation.
[...]
We could not hope to survive the Final Days, much less take the battle to Meteion at her nest.
We must find a way to defeat despair. To unite and prepare as many as possible for the struggle ahead.
Heavy will weigh the burden of guiding this legion of souls...
Yet I have faith in mankind's potential. As long as he believes in himself, there is naught he cannot achieve. So I will not give up on him. On us.
You may find your world to be very different. Or perhaps the erasure of our friends' memories has sown the seeds of a conjunction between us.
We cannot know until the moment is at hand. So shall I strive to do my best, taking naught for granted as I walk my path.

---

There's a lot of things being said here, but fortunately, it's all directly in the text, not the subtext.
1. That immediately, she wants to 'fortify defenses and plan their escape'. This is very clearly a plan of action at an early stage; she doesn't know how to do this, only that it has to happen.
2. That she can't just tell everyone, because that's only going to cause mass panic. (She's right.) As a result, she has to pick carefully for secrecy and emotional integrity if nothing else.
3. While the Convocation would normally be her go-to, she immediately rules out talking to or working with them at this point, because their standard procedure both would and already has caused problems; we'd just see a repeat of the exact same responses that led to Ktisis in the first place. This clearly changed by the time of Anamnesis, but is true at the time she said it.
4. Hermes also can't be alienated or excluded, because he's integral to protecting the planet in the first place. Venat actually didn't have material evidence of this, she doesn't know how he'll be important, just that he will be.
5. She's doing her level best, and clearly not putting reliance on the time loop situation; in fact, she's clearly willing to strand us if that's what it takes, and just hopes that it doesn't.

Therefore: yes, we can safely and confidently assume that Venat tried to help her people, and just couldn't be open about it. All evidence about this leads towards 'she tried her best, and her best wasn't enough'.


I'm going to request that if you reject any of this, you do so with actual in-game evidence, rather than just broad dismissal and denial. I'm trying to put forward my viewpoint, readings and evidence in full view and in good faith, and I hope you are, too.

.. polarizing reception? I don't think so lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tehmon

.. polarizing reception? I don't think so lol.

---

Just because the negative reception is the definite minority doesn't mean it isn't there.

The video honestly wasn't made with the intent of trying to sway people who are already dug in on the narrative being flawless and more validating others who are questioning their sanity because of how overwhelmingly positive the reception was despite leaving very significant reasons to potentially feel otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

The text of this is, I thought, clear as day: Venat's crew literally were trying to warn the Convocation, and were getting nowhere.

---

1. Yeah, *after* the FD happens and they already summon zodiark

2. Warn =/= help when all she did is preach without offering any solution nor compromise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

1. That immediately, she wants to 'fortify defenses and plan their escape'. This is very clearly a plan of action at an early stage; she doesn't know how to do this, only that it has to happen.

---

So what exactly the realization of this plan? Show me in-game evidence

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

2. That she can't just tell everyone, because that's only going to cause mass panic. (She's right.)

---

How do you know she’s right when they never show us the proof? All we know that not telling anyone also results in people mass panicking because they don’t know what the cause of FD and have to waste time researching blasphemies and identifying its link to aether current.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

3. While the Convocation would normally be her go-to, she immediately rules out talking to or working with them at this point, because their standard procedure both would and already has caused problems; we'd just see a repeat of the exact same responses that led to Ktisis in the first place. This clearly changed by the time of Anamnesis, but is true at the time she said it.

---

In Ktisis they’re trying to prevent meteion escaping and to question hermes since they (and WoL) don’t know what will happen. Also, what procedure causing problem, exactly?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

4. Hermes also can't be alienated or excluded, because he's integral to protecting the planet in the first place. Venat actually didn't have material evidence of this, she doesn't know how he'll be important, just that he will be.

---

So it’s all just her hypothesis that she alone came up with, without even knowing the full picture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

5. She's doing her level best, and clearly not putting reliance on the time loop situation; in fact, she's clearly willing to strand us if that's what it takes, and just hopes that it doesn't.

---

What?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

Forgive me for having to break out some formatting for this one, I hope it helps you understand this.

SHE DID!

As evidence: The final cutscene of Beneath the Surface--the Anamnesis Anyder quest, and the first time in which Venat was ever named:



The text of this is, I thought, clear as day: Venat's crew literally were trying to warn the Convocation, and were getting nowhere.

One might ask why they took so long, as this was after the second sacrifice. And the answer to that lies in the first of the cutscenes in Thou Must Live, Die, and Know--the quest after Ktisis Hyperboreia. I won't quote the entire passage, because it's rather long.



There's a lot of things being said here, but fortunately, it's all directly in the text, not the subtext.
1. That immediately, she wants to 'fortify defenses and plan their escape'. This is very clearly a plan of action at an early stage; she doesn't know how to do this, only that it has to happen.
2. That she can't just tell everyone, because that's only going to cause mass panic. (She's right.) As a result, she has to pick carefully for secrecy and emotional integrity if nothing else.
3. While the Convocation would normally be her go-to, she immediately rules out talking to or working with them at this point, because their standard procedure both would and already has caused problems; we'd just see a repeat of the exact same responses that led to Ktisis in the first place. This clearly changed by the time of Anamnesis, but is true at the time she said it.
4. Hermes also can't be alienated or excluded, because he's integral to protecting the planet in the first place. Venat actually didn't have material evidence of this, she doesn't know how he'll be important, just that he will be.
5. She's doing her level best, and clearly not putting reliance on the time loop situation; in fact, she's clearly willing to strand us if that's what it takes, and just hopes that it doesn't.

Therefore: yes, we can safely and confidently assume that Venat tried to help her people, and just couldn't be open about it. All evidence about this leads towards 'she tried her best, and her best wasn't enough'.


I'm going to request that if you reject any of this, you do so with actual in-game evidence, rather than just broad dismissal and denial. I'm trying to put forward my viewpoint, readings and evidence in full view and in good faith, and I hope you are, too.

---

Except you’ve already been given constant refutations towards these claims Cleretic, please don’t try to play the oblivious card here. That anamnesis dialogue you quoted doesnt specify whatsoever what they even tried to tell them. We at the veryleast know that it wasnt anything to do with Meteion as Emet Selch didnt even know what the cause of the final days was. As for Hermes being integral, Kairos exists. Pandaemonium exists. Theres ways of keeping him and using his talents without him becoming a threat. She could have approached Emet or Hyth secretly. There are dozens upon dozens of avenues she could have taken. The truth is she didnt.

The issue here as well is, all of this is revolving around what Venat THINKS. And im sorry, but there is absolutely no way the risk of her telling her people or the convocation and working in unison with them to solve the issue is in any way shape or form more of a gamble than literally placing the fate of the entire universe in the hands of a single person she had only just met. Especially if her plan revolves around the 3 unsundered ascians lol. Its common sense.

If you'd like play by play proof might i introduce you to the wonderful video that this very thread revolves around? They answer all of this and refute quite literally every single one of your points thus far with in game textual evidence, the very thing you're looking for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alleluia

Its not a competition.


This thread got weird now. Also, Venat did nothing wrong. :P

---

This just in: Genocide is perfectly fine and if you commit it so long as you look pretty and say you're sorry it doesnt count! Totally did nothing wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

This just in: Genocide is perfectly fine and if you commit it so long as you look pretty and say you're sorry it doesnt count! Totally did nothing wrong.

---

Some people have selective morality yet they don't realize it, sadly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

If you'd like play by play proof might i introduce you to the wonderful video that this very thread revolves around? They answer all of this and refute quite literally every single one of your points thus far with in game textual evidence, the very thing you're looking for.

---

Sorry, not only is 'nearly two hours' far too much time to ask for me to devote to a timestamp-less video with a clickbait-y, factually tenuous title that tells me nothing of its contents, Lyth managing to dig up at least one of the people who takes credit for the account shows me that this isn't a video made by people speaking in good faith. I'm not inclined to give that much time and attention to someone who applauded an 'improved rewrite' of the story of Endwalker that turned Venat into a serial killer and tried to create a 'good Empire' by putting their self-insert in charge of the Empire, and whose response to people arguing about that was 'diddums'. This is not someone who I can ever have confidence is making arguments in good faith, and won't give them that sort of attention.

Tehmon is right: there's absolutely nothing 'polarizing' about Venat, any more than any other character, except in this one small subset of the community that echo-chambers themselves. The only places that I've ever seen talk about Venat as 'polarizing' and not 'universally beloved as a complex and tragic character' was exactly the group of official forums posters in the group of pretty clear friends that the poster Lyth found rolled in, and a small cluster of Twitter posters that I suspect might've just been one person with a half-dozen sockpuppets. Everywhere else? Hugely popular character, right up with the more conventional fan-favorites in character polls, popular subject for cosplay (for whatever that means to you, but it's hardly a negative), really any measurement of character fondness and popularity I can think of she's up there next to Emet-Selch. I see more genuine controversy about G'raha Tia than Venat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

Sorry, not only is 'nearly two hours' far too much time to ask for me to devote to a timestamp-less video with a clickbait-y, factually tenuous title that tells me nothing of its contents, Lyth managing to dig up at least one of the people who takes credit for the account shows me that this isn't a video made by people speaking in good faith. I'm not inclined to give that much time and attention to someone who applauded an 'improved rewrite' of the story of Endwalker that turned Venat into a serial killer and tried to create a 'good Empire' by putting their self-insert in charge of the Empire, and whose response to people arguing about that was 'diddums'. This is not someone who I can ever have confidence is making arguments in good faith, and won't give them that sort of attention.

Tehmon is right: there's absolutely nothing 'polarizing' about Venat, any more than any other character, except in this one small subset of the community that echo-chambers themselves. The only places that I've ever seen talk about Venat as 'polarizing' and not 'universally beloved as a complex and tragic character' was exactly the group of official forums posters in the group of pretty clear friends that the poster Lyth found rolled in, and a small cluster of Twitter posters that I suspect might've just been one person with a half-dozen sockpuppets. Everywhere else? Hugely popular character, right up with the more conventional fan-favorites in character polls, popular subject for cosplay (for whatever that means to you, but it's hardly a negative), really any measurement of character fondness and popularity I can think of she's up there next to Emet-Selch. I see more genuine controversy about G'raha Tia than Venat.

---

Riiiight. You’re going to trust the person who routinely goes off-site to post tantrums and crucify those of us who don’t adhere to the Venat Was Right message(although peas in a pod and all that i suppose). I think the real reason is that you know the video refuted you and, like always, you refuse to believe that Venat was just overall written horribly and in the end with the way they wrote her, is a horrible disgusting person. You claim to want good faith debates and conversations yet there is a nice good faith video brought to you(there’s broken up versions of it btw) and you still refuse to watch it with some empty excuse. If someone actually wanted to debate in good faith then they’d follow their own advice. You wanted in game textual evidence that refutes your claims? Its right there. Whether you watch it or not its there. And its full of comments of people's eyes actually opening because there actually is logical proof and in game evidence to show why Venat was wrong, why she is flawed, and why in the end she is ultimately the villain of this story along with Hermes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

Sorry, not only is 'nearly two hours' far too much time to ask for me to devote to a timestamp-less video with a clickbait-y, factually tenuous title that tells me nothing of its contents, Lyth managing to dig up at least one of the people who takes credit for the account shows me that this isn't a video made by people speaking in good faith. I'm not inclined to give that much time and attention to someone who applauded an 'improved rewrite' of the story of Endwalker that turned Venat into a serial killer and tried to create a 'good Empire' by putting their self-insert in charge of the Empire, and whose response to people arguing about that was 'diddums'. This is not someone who I can ever have confidence is making arguments in good faith, and won't give them that sort of attention.

Tehmon is right: there's absolutely nothing 'polarizing' about Venat, any more than any other character, except in this one small subset of the community that echo-chambers themselves. The only places that I've ever seen talk about Venat as 'polarizing' and not 'universally beloved as a complex and tragic character' was exactly the group of official forums posters in the group of pretty clear friends that the poster Lyth found rolled in, and a small cluster of Twitter posters that I suspect might've just been one person with a half-dozen sockpuppets. Everywhere else? Hugely popular character, right up with the more conventional fan-favorites in character polls, popular subject for cosplay (for whatever that means to you, but it's hardly a negative), really any measurement of character fondness and popularity I can think of she's up there next to Emet-Selch. I see more genuine controversy about G'raha Tia than Venat.

---

Damn, this is pretty tragic if you ask me! I have listened to about 18 minutes of the video and it's very chill, the speaker has the exact cadence and intonation of cuck philosophy - very easy on the ears - and they bring up great points that have always bothered me about the Endwalker storyline in a succinct way without hyperbolizing or going for cheap outrage. You have dealt with people being emotional on this board which I understand is off-putting when you see this coming from the same people who have left such a negative impression on you, but it would be depriving yourself of a treat imo! There's clearly a lot of heart and love put into that video. It comes from a place of loving this game, not nihilistic rage or smug contrarianism.

Also it's criticizing the writing more than anything. I don't see the hatred for Venat, they rather attempt to contextualize problems with her character as born of a feeling of whiplash experienced as a result of a clash of the narrative framing of her position and the player's potential own ethical framework or something like that. I think it's appropriate to meet people who did not like the 6.0 story (like me for example, I think it sucked hard) from a point of understanding. It also doesn't matter whether something is almost universally beloved - your own feelings are still valid and it's still worth critically examining the medium.

However I agree with you that the Aveyond rewrite sucked in terms of Venat and some other stuff. I would have done things entirely differently and actually wrote Venat as a tragic character. I still loved parts of it and I appreciate when fans put so much heart into their fanfiction.

If you actually check the channel, Cleretic, you can find that the full video is broken down into bite sized chapters for easier digesting. I'd personally suggest the 'Dehumanisation of the Ancients' segment as perhaps the most important section to view.

There's a separate video relating to Zenos and another revolving around Hermes - both viewed through a critical but constructive lens.

It's also very strange to consider Lauront as not speaking in 'good faith'. He's consistently sourced his talking points when discussing the lore and neither is he the only individual involved with the project.

I'll admit to being very amused that the counter to the video is in the form of the very common talking points and misconceptions that the video itself refutes, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eisi

Damn, this is pretty tragic if you ask me! I have listened to about 18 minutes of the video and it's very chill, the speaker has the exact cadence and intonation of cuck philosophy - very easy on the ears -

---

Uhhhhh... did you make a typo? Because if you didn't, I'm not sure what you're trying to say, and am not sure I want to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

Uhhhhh... did you make a typo? Because if you didn't, I'm not sure what you're trying to say, and am not sure I want to.

---

Oh no! Cuck Philosophy is a channel on Youtube talking about philosophy. Although these days it's called CCK Philosophy.

Having a bit of a laugh over how quickly this thread turned to crap. But then, given the subject matter, I'm not terribly surprised.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

Sorry, not only is 'nearly two hours' far too much time to ask for me to devote to a timestamp-less video

---

It's got timestamps, Clere. It's also a compilation of 14 videos, all of which are bite-sized in comparison. It would definitely take you less time than stalking this thread—which seems to have clocked in at five hours now. Though to be fair, you might actually be at work right now and just checking your phone. Wouldn't explain the whole paragraphs you're throwing up over here, but hey, maybe you're just really good at navigating a crappy touchscreen keyboard or something.

EDIT: I hate it when I'm the last person to say something in a thread. Always makes me feel like someone's gonna throw up a dissertation on how I'm wrong and also morally bankrupt, fat, and poor. Only one of those three ever happened on this board, mind you, but still. So someone else reply already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rosenstrauch

EDIT: I hate it when I'm the last person to say something in a thread. Always makes me feel like someone's gonna throw up a dissertation on how I'm wrong and also morally bankrupt, fat, and poor. Only one of those three ever happened on this board, mind you, but still. So someone else reply already.

---

It can be me instead! Seems like everyone predisposed to "agreeing to disagree" at me is already back in Lore (now in convenient "blank white box" form!), as of this thread, so I can't exactly make things any worse for myself.:cool:

I clicked one timestamp, landed on "Venat is just one person no more predisposed to making the right choices than anyone else." No frigging s*kupo*t.

Do I really need to watch more? Like, the "Venat is prefect good" side is a little cringe, sure, but this video seems to be little more than offering a shoulder to cry on for people who just want to feel validated. I'm not actually sure which "side" came first, but I'm pretty sure it was the latter, regardless. There's more than just two sides, though.


Venat is not perfect, or even good. She's the Ubermensch, bringing about the Eternal Recursion. That's an inherently controversial act. She's not just killing the Ancients there, she's taking a portion of responsibility for all the calamities, for Minfilia, for Haurchefant, for everyone dead in the present. That's so metal!

The Venat debate was never supposed to be about morality. It was always about nihilism. The dead timeline in Shadowbringers essentially self-terminated, believing their own situation to be beyond hope. We're presented with the same possibility by going back to the beginning, and Venat's own answer is to consider and then reject it. She takes some notes and then flings us back to the future by our bootstraps to save a universe beyond saving. She gives us permission not to like anything she did, or anything that resulted, but we do have to accept it. Again, metal.


Clere will inevitably lecture me about subjectivity and not citing sources and not fully remembering details unrelated my overall impression. I still think I got the gist, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eisi

Oh no! Cuck Philosophy is a channel on Youtube talking about philosophy. Although these days it's called CCK Philosophy.

---

Right. I... hope you understand why I'm gonna just take your word for that and not put that in my search history or a private Firefox window!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rosenstrauch

It's got timestamps, Clere. It's also a compilation of 14 videos, all of which are bite-sized in comparison. It would definitely take you less time than stalking this thread—which seems to have clocked in at five hours now. Though to be fair, you might actually be at work right now and just checking your phone. Wouldn't explain the whole paragraphs you're throwing up over here, but hey, maybe you're just really good at navigating a crappy touchscreen keyboard or something.

---

If what I've been doing is truly important, it's been a combination of FFXIV fishing, editing a podcast, making dinner, watching more interesting Youtube videos to me (there's a new Dorktown episode today, nothing's gonna win that fight today), and checking both this and a couple other forums/social media feeds. Some of those overlapping, but of course not all of them. I admit I have poor habits, and being in here is exhibiting at least one of them, but I assure you I haven't been sitting idle just staring at this thread for five hours.

I also did a spot of looking around the internet to find where people outside of that small part of these forums actually do genuinely dislike Venat enough for her to be considered 'polarizing' or 'controversial'. I haven't found hide nor hair of them, but I have found out that 'venat' is Albanian for 'veins' and that people apparently think Worthy of His Back is difficult.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenral

Clere will inevitably lecture me about subjectivity and not citing sources and not fully remembering details unrelated my overall impression. I still think I got the gist, though.

---

Nah, you're good! You're not exactly claiming objectivity or making assertions that need proper proof, nobody should need sources for that. For what it's worth: I agree in concept, although I've never seen the 8UC timeline brought in as part of this, and I'm not 100% on if I'm in agreement on that part.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

I also did a spot of looking around the internet to find where people outside of that small part of these forums actually do genuinely dislike Venat enough for her to be considered 'polarizing' or 'controversial'. I haven't found hide nor hair of them, but I have found out that 'venat' is Albanian for 'veins' and that people apparently think Worthy of His Back is difficult.

---

It's really rather strange to me that you're seriously attempting to pretend as if Venat's actions were not at all controversial. There's been numerous debates over the years relating to the subject and many posters have come forward expressing their concerns regarding the character independently of one another, largely coming together under one 'banner' precisely because of the absolutely unhinged behaviour and accusations launched at anyone critical of Venat.

I do think you should actually watch the video before commenting, though. If not now then at some point in the future when your schedule allows for it. Perhaps it might dispel some of the - frankly bizarre - framing you have of certain posters and their motives here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

Nah, you're good! You're not exactly claiming objectivity or making assertions that need proper proof, nobody should need sources for that. For what it's worth: I agree in concept, although I've never seen the 8UC timeline brought in as part of this, and I'm not 100% on if I'm in agreement on that part.

---

I think this forum's debates on the ethics of altruistic suicide were before your time, but they're definitely coloring my impression. It seems like people get their wires crossed about thematic consistency and ideological consistency WRT Venat, under the fallacious belief that a creative work needs to represent a specific, singular ideology, but I think it's ideologically inconsistent while being thematically very consistent. In the larger narrative, the 8UC timeline is a counterpoint. We as players reading the lore dumps every Rising know that that timeline ultimately continued to exist despite believing it wouldn't, but nobody active in the story does.

Flipping the issue around, had Venat been able to intervene in a way that saves the Ancients, leaving us Exarch-stranded and our timeline in an unknowable and likely doomed state, she would have been making the decision that our lives didn't matter beyond serving as one big extra failure on the path to the success of Amaurot society. It's the meaty philosophical concept that Chrono Cross entirely failed to capitalize on: what does it mean to live in a "bad end" timeline? Still probably controversial, ultimately. Not sure there was ever a "moral" way out for Venat, but I think the intent is that she accepts that.

Alright, I was gonna dip out after my first post here. My time away from this shithole over the past... year? Few months? Can't remember when I last posted here. Point being, I'm a happier person now, and I'd like to keep it that way.

But I do want to address this one thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenral

leaving us Exarch-stranded

---

The idea that the WoL would be permanently locked out of their own timeline if they meaningfully altered the past is completely unsubstantiated. Fact is, the Exarch only ever hypothesized the reason why he continued to exist. He never questioned whether or not he could return to his future. Nor did he ever indicate a desire to do so, to say nothing about actually making the attempt.

I know that's hard to accept, but any ideas folks have one way or another about the possibility of going to the Eighth Era is pure headcanon as of 5.0 to now. And the only reason I think it won't stay that way is because "The WoL travels into the Bad Future for plot reasons" is bound to happen sooner or later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rosenstrauch

Alright, I was gonna dip out after my first post here. My time away from this shithole over the past... year? Few months? Can't remember when I last posted here. Point being, I'm a happier person now, and I'd like to keep it that way.

---

I mean, same here, honestly. I'll even spare you further disagreement (though I do disagree). Go now, with my blessing.

Asks for in game evidence. Presents video proof with broken up videos and very specific time stamps. Refuses to look at said proof but continues spouting lies. Just your typical lore talk i guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

It's really rather strange to me that you're seriously attempting to pretend as if Venat's actions were not at all controversial. There's been numerous debates over the years relating to the subject and many posters have come forward expressing their concerns regarding the character independently of one another, largely coming together under one 'banner' precisely because of the absolutely unhinged behaviour and accusations launched at anyone critical of Venat.

I do think you should actually watch the video before commenting, though. If not now then at some point in the future when your schedule allows for it. Perhaps it might dispel some of the - frankly bizarre - framing you have of certain posters and their motives here.

---

I was specifically looking for sources outside of here, because I know the situation here; I didn't know the situation on, say, Twitter or Reddit, so I wanted to see if there's a large population there that I've just never looked at. I was also specifically looking for people basically saying 'I dislike this thing Venat did and am steadfastly anti-Venat because of that', which is an at-times subtle but usually distinct difference from 'Venat made choices that weren't necessarily good and I may not personally agree with but are on some level understandable and part of what makes her a compelling character', which is... broadly the most widely-held opinion among people who've written about their thoughts long enough to make it clear. Basically: I care less about the evidence the video thinks it has for why people don't like her, and more about who doesn't like her.

I've found a handful of them across the past year. Outside of here maybe a single-digit amount; mostly on Reddit, making threads where they were very clearly the minority opinion. Like what I often see from Reddit lore-talking, it was all pretty surface-level; very 'I just finished Endwalker and have some thoughts', that they're not really held tightly to or even stating all that strongly; very milquetoast. Twitter is harder, and I opted for the angle of searching for 'Venat' and reading both top posts and the last month of posts; this was a bad time for that exercise thanks to Fanfest cosplays and both her and XII Venat being brought up in relation to XVI, but I still went through and only found one person being anti-Venat. (That one guy proved that it wasn't 'people are quiet because they're afraid of getting brigaded', nobody responded to them.)

I also checked the character polls. There hasn't been a lot since Endwalker, and I'd have liked a more recent one than this time last year to see if there's been a change from people falling off over patches and if Zero blips on them, but Venat lands really well into top three. The only person who consistently beats her is Emet, who... incidentally, I do generally see get the same response as Venat of 'did stuff I definitely don't like, but part of a complex character I do like'. Both are fairly unambiguously popular, for pretty much the same reasons. Turns out, people really like this kind of complexity!

I wanted to do a search to see you as more than 'a half-dozen very opinionated people in a corner'. I want to see the side that's large enough to make 'Venat is controversial/polarizing' any sort of authoritative statement. Unfortunately, I just haven't; there's more evidence to say Harchefaunt is polarizing than Venat.

EDIT:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenral

I think this forum's debates on the ethics of altruistic suicide were before your time, but they're definitely coloring my impression. It seems like people get their wires crossed about thematic consistency and ideological consistency WRT Venat, under the fallacious belief that a creative work needs to represent a specific, singular ideology, but I think it's ideologically inconsistent while being thematically very consistent. In the larger narrative, the 8UC timeline is a counterpoint. We as players reading the lore dumps every Rising know that that timeline ultimately continued to exist despite believing it wouldn't, but nobody active in the story does.

Flipping the issue around, had Venat been able to intervene in a way that saves the Ancients, leaving us Exarch-stranded and our timeline in an unknowable and likely doomed state, she would have been making the decision that our lives didn't matter beyond serving as one big extra failure on the path to the success of Amaurot society. It's the meaty philosophical concept that Chrono Cross entirely failed to capitalize on: what does it mean to live in a "bad end" timeline? Still probably controversial, ultimately. Not sure there was ever a "moral" way out for Venat, but I think the intent is that she accepts that.

---

There's definitely something of this going on; the game deliberately doesn't make a moral judgement on the entire decision, and basically leaves it to you to decide where you stand on the entire conflict around the Ancients' End of Days (to the point of a patch quest literally asking you), while also making it quite clear that this decision isn't for you to actually act on; these events are twelve thousand years ago, and outside of one emotionally confused robot, nobody in the game's present day is either interested in litigating the point, nor impartial enough to do so. We're simply asked to answer that question for ourselves, with no objective right answer to be found.

And while I think a vast majority of players accepted that quite readily (or at least didn't talk openly about it), there's some amount of people that are unhappy with there being no right answer; that there's no way to say with full assuredness that your choice is the correct one. And I think some amount of those people then respond to that by trying to make their answer the right one, often by declaring the opposition to somehow be objectively wrong. Because if the opposing side is 'the villain's side', then suddenly we've moved from a situation of moral greys to a clear good and evil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

snip

---

It’s moreso an issue of obvious bias. Venat being called a hero isn’t morally grey. Her being called a primal of peace isn’t morally grey or correct in any relativity. Zodiark’s codex entry being nothing but negative while hers is nothing but positive etc. There is constant obvious bias that a lot of people ignore that is the root of this whole issue.

Frankly, I can't wrap my head around how people look at the complete destruction of an entire species as not controversial. Just the mere concept of taking all those people and effectively killing them. Yeah, their biological matter and souls weren't entirely eradicated, but their identities were stripped away by the Sundering process and all the building blocks that comprised them instead went on to become wholly distinct organisms. That is in many ways worse than just being outright dead. Then there's the matter of how things went in the time period immediate following the Sundering, which we're lead to believe was positively horrific for all involved.

Whether or not it was justified is an entirely separate matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

This just in: Genocide is perfectly fine and if you commit it so long as you look pretty and say you're sorry it doesnt count! Totally did nothing wrong.

---

Yeah, sure. That's exactly what I said. Thank you for quoting me so directly. :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kozh

Some people have selective morality yet they don't realize it, sadly.

---

And some people don't know how to tell when the horse is dead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Absimiliard

Frankly, I can't wrap my head around how people look at the complete destruction of an entire species as not controversial. Just the mere concept of taking all those people and effectively killing them. Yeah, their biological matter and souls weren't entirely eradicated, but their identities were stripped away by the Sundering process and all the building blocks that compromised them instead went on to become wholly distinct organisms. That is in many ways worse than just being outright dead. Then there's the matter of how things went in the time period immediate following the Sundering, which we're lead to believe was positively horrific for all involved.

Whether or not it was justified is an entirely separate matter.

---

Y'know, you bring up an interesting point that I never really thought about before. Venat sundered the world into shards to keep ancients from just sacrificing themselves over and over again summoning Zodiark, but... to what end?
The end result from the sundering is that, yes, life survives... but as sundered beings, those new lives are new entities from the ancients they came from. So basically, if we consider those original lives "lost" to split into new ones with new personalities and new bodies, then the whole thing was a failure because everyone died anyway to make that new life.
The surviving few Ascians think they could regain their friends' past lives by Rejoining, but it doesn't seem like it was part of Venat's original sundering plan to account for a few ancients escaping into a rift to avoid being sundered. So if she didn't account for any survivors who would reinstate those lost lives/personalities, what was she really saving by sundering anyway? She basically killed all the ancients with the Sundering process.

If I was an ancient, I could certainly be convinced that that was an evil, or at the very least morally grey, action...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gaddes

it doesn't seem like it was part of Venat's original sundering plan to account for a few ancients escaping into a rift to avoid being sundered. So if she didn't account for any survivors who would reinstate those lost lives/personalities, what was she really saving by sundering anyway? She basically killed all the ancients with the Sundering process.

---

It was planned for. Well, to be specific, Emet-Selch was planned for. She meant to leave him intact, although she wasn't 100% sure she could pull it off in the moment the sundering began. She essentially left a little flaw in it, one which she hoped he would recognize and exploit as a means of saving himself. Elidibus and Lahabrea just so happened to be in his company at that time, and so he was able to save them as well. Venat did this to preserve the timeline that gave rise to the WoL she met in Elpis. The horrors those three would unleash, the lives sacrificed in pursuit of the Rejoinings -- she knew about it all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gaddes

So if she didn't account for any survivors who would reinstate those lost lives/personalities, what was she really saving by sundering anyway? She basically killed all the ancients with the Sundering process.

---

I think it was more about saving or protecting "life" in general than anything specific.

I think a problem we have with trying to reconcile Zodiark, Hydaelyn, and the Sundering is that a lot of their thought processes and their culture is alien to us. To me, the Ancients seemed to be of the mind that they were ultimately "custodians of the star" and that everything they did was for a greater whole rather than masters of it that bent the world to their own will for their own needs.

It was already established that Ancients will die and return their aether to the star to reenter the cycle of death and rebirth once they have "finished their job". Venat was already somewhat of a heretic (a trait shared with her Occurian namesake) in that she didn't do that. Seemingly related to the standard Ancient death custom is that it seemed to be a great honor to sacrifice your aether to Zodiark. To harvest life that had finally returned to the planet in order to revive people who sacrificed themselves seems pervert that notion. That they titled Zodiark "Will of the Star", called him a god, and called themselves His "servants" doesn't seem to paint a good picture either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikkoAkure

It was already established that Ancients will die and return their aether to the star to reenter the cycle of death and rebirth once they have "finished their job". Venat was already somewhat of a heretic (a trait shared with her Occurian namesake) in that she didn't do that. Seemingly related to the standard Ancient death custom is that it seemed to be a great honor to sacrifice your aether to Zodiark. To harvest life that had finally returned to the planet in order to revive people who sacrificed themselves seems pervert that notion. That they titled Zodiark "Will of the Star", called him a god, and called themselves His "servants" doesn't seem to paint a good picture either.

---

Sacrificing your life and aether to Zodiark was regarded as honorable specifically because you were giving yourself up to save your world and fellow man. The initial sacrifices, to save the planet and heal it, respectively, were purely for the sake of preserving the world and its remaining inhabitants. We aren't given any reason to doubt the nature of these particular sacrifices. As for subsequent intended sacrifices; there was a great deal of debate over them. Some were for it, some against it. I strongly suspect this opposition was in fact a direct result of the ancients' duty to the star and strongly held belief they should return the aether of their very souls to it when their purpose was served.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikkoAkure

That they titled Zodiark "Will of the Star", called him a god, and called themselves His "servants" doesn't seem to paint a good picture either.

---

Meanwhile Yshtola calls her an all powerful being. The Hydaelyn codex entry(presumably written by us) calls her the will of the star, and she herself refers to herself as a supreme deity. Yeah uh, she doesn’t seem to paint a good picture herself either lol.