Are <5.0 main villain> fanboys also supportive of <6.1-6.5 main villain>? *SPOILERS*

Are Emet-Selch fanboys also supportive of Golbez? After all, they both only wanted salvation for their people and have labored for millenia to achieve it.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...3f277863baeef&

Do you count as an Emet-Selch fanboy if you like him as a villain too? Cause that's I think most Emet fanboys.

I like Golbez. He's stupid, he's tragic, he's evil, but in the end he found the right path again cause Zero was willing to give him a chance in light of his past and failure and in light of herself too. I like Emet more, because he was more of a guy.

Personally I will never understand this narrative regarding “redeemed” or “redeeming” villains that caused major havoc, beyond massive genocide & yet somehow they’re given some form of less punishable atonement.

Emet Selch, Golbez & any villain were truly despicable in my view & though we were given glimpses of their agenda & ideals still nonetheless it shouldn’t sway you to forgive them.

But of course we got the simpers that begs to object otherwise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vencio

Personally I will never understand this narrative regarding “redeemed” or “redeeming” villains that caused major havoc, beyond massive genocide & yet somehow they’re given some form of less punishable atonement.

Emet Selch, Golbez & any villain were truly despicable in my view & though we were given glimpses of their agenda & ideals still nonetheless it shouldn’t sway you to forgive them.

But of course we got the simpers that begs to object otherwise

---

Do you think Zero is a Golbez simp?

Perhaps “friend zoned”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eisi

Do you count as an Emet-Selch fanboy if you like him as a villain too? Cause that's I think most Emet fanboys.

---

Hardcore Emet-Selch fanboys don't think of him as a villain.

There's definitely a venn diagram overlap between 'Emet-Selch fans that like him as a villain' and 'Emet-Selch fans that think he's actually correct/agreeable', as well as both being distinct crowds in and of themselves.

I have absolutely no idea how to figure out how big each crowd there actually is, because all of them have a tendency to be much louder than their actual size suggests, and they blend with each other to a huge degree.

Emet hater(understatement) but Ardbert fangirl and while not a big XIV Golbez fan, I decided that yes, I do enjoy him both as an entertaining villain and am happy that he is starting the long process of redemption. And that he’s an even more failed Ardbert is part of the reason why. But also that his motivation and specific lines about Breaking the Wheel is pure Ishamael from Wheel of Time and far more sympathetic and palpable than the Ascians. Even the Durante as a shard of Zenos tease amuses me, as someone who isn’t a Zenos fan. So that’s my Venn Diagram.

I'm not going to say that Emet-Selch wasn't bad and genocidal, but I'll just say that his case is complex.

WoL tells the entire tale to Venat. Tells her about Emet-Selch being a genocidal villain in the WoL's timeline. Emet-Selch doesn't seem to agree with the actions of the Emet-Selch the WoL is describing. Then Emet-Selch's memory is wiped.

Venat was the only one with any memory of the discussion of this "future history". And she chose to chart a course that would in no way disrupt that history, ensuring that every word of it became true without any deviation. She could have deviated from that path. She could have told Emet-Selch. She could have used different tactics. She chose not to. She chose a future where Emet-Selch becomes genocidal. And importantly, he becomes genocidal in response to Venat literally committing genocide on his people.

I would never say that Emet-Selch is blameless, but he is a compelling villain because his situation is one we can feel compassion for once we understand his perspective. If a villain split a person you loved into multiple new people, and you could only get your loved one back by getting rid of those new people, would you? That's a complex, morally ambiguous question. And that's why Emet-Selch is a good villain: because it's not outrageous to have different answers to this question.

But one thing that's certain is that you would never have to make that disturbing choice without a villain splitting your loved one in the first place. That's why I see Venat as the larger villain, and see her as bearing a certain amount of responsibility for Emet-Selch's actions down the road.

Golbez is also kind of sympathetic, but not to nearly the degree of Emet-Selch. A big part of that is that Golbez doesn't seek out alternative solutions, even when they present themselves. Emet-Selch literally can't save his people without destroying the new world that followed it, because these new people are made from chunks of the old people. But Golbez just wants to allow his people to re-enter the lifestream, and that doesn't require taking over the Source. All you have to do is go to the Source and die, as demonstrated by Rubicante and Cagnazzo. And more than that, there are plenty of folks in the Source who would willingly work towards accepting those from the 13th as refugees, or even trying to repair the 13th (as several folks were already trying to do). Golbez did not try to negotiate, or to gain aid, or to find any manner of peaceful solutions. And that's what makes him...shall we say...dumb compared to Emet-Selch.

For me Durante had more than one opportunity to enact his plan. Especially if it was mostly just for a chance to rejoin the great flow. He and the others could have gone through the gate Azdaja came on in through five thousand years ago. Heck I don't remember if those on the Void Ark or the other parts of the Mach raid that had the void coffins were brought over whole sale or not. If it took him over ten thousand years to get to the point where he and the others were sick of not being able to die then that is on him. Or if it only took them that long to come up with the plan then again that is on them. Which for me is why I have little sympathy for him. Don't see him in the same light as Emet-Selch.

The rejoinings couldn't be rushed or you'd end up with another 13th on your hands. There's only so much trauma you can deal to the Source before you cause it to try and absorb a shard that's not been prepared for a rejoining. Meanwhile Durante and crew could have sweet talked various people to allow them to come over wholesale. The Allagans and Machi were greedy enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Carin-Eri

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...3f277863baeef&

---

I'm not sure it works, since the game calls out both Emet-Selch and Golbez for the consequences of their actions.

I'd say this is more fitting, particularly around these parts:

https://i.imgur.com/OHy14hl.png

The problem is assuming that all Emet Selch fanboys actually agree with his goals/methods.

But no, I don't like Golbez because he was just a dull rehash of an existing FF villain with the shortest redemption arc imaginable. The original version of him had an excuse for that because he was literally mind-controlled, whereas this version just took a small puff of logic from being reminded that his friend wouldn't like he was doing to do a 180.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LilimoLimomo

snip

---

In fairness -

One of the last things Venat tells you before you leave Elpis is that she is not just going to accept the history you've detailed to her as absolute fact, and will strive to make sure it doesn't come to pass. So the "Venat didn't try to change anything" argument holds no weight - she did try to change things and failed, and in no history we can observe does she succeed. Elidibus warns us of this before we set out to Elpis.

You might not agree with the choices she made - I don't wholly, though I understand why she made them - but there's no reason to believe Venat made no effort to create a history different from the one we described other than because you want to.

A villain's likeability has more to do with how entertaining they are, rather than out of any unironic support for their policies. Emet Selch is a fun, charismatic psychopath. Even his past self, in a moment of lucidity, was able to recognize that he was ultimately destined to become a monster who killed his own citizens, betrayed his friends, and slaughtered multiple worlds. You don't have to justify any of that in order to like him or appreciate the fact that he's a fantastic character. He doesn't.

Durante is a B-tier villain with much less screen and development time. I think you're better off comparing him to someone like Ilberd or Valens. I think Zenos is a much more fair comparison to make with Emet, given that they both have their own little redemption arcs. A lot of people (myself included) wrote Zenos off post-Stormblood, but they did an absolutely smashing job with him since (and his voice acting is great as well). They probably could have done more with his character initially, but he definitely did make a solid comeback.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

??

---

Two years is a remarkably long time to run a campaign against a fictional character on an online forum. Venat truly must have been more memorable to you than even Emet.

Nah, Durante as Golbez was a failboat of a villain. It probably couldn't have gone any other way, since the game now charts its course by levity, tacos, and Mary Sues.

Obviously they were going for FFIV references to the max in 6.5. Home boy literally sees Zero show up with some white aether, and is like, "OMG Mary. You got light here?!" As if the WoL hadn't dead ass brought an entire crystal of the stuff in ?6.2? or whenever Troia was.

This man had a whole 10,000 year crusade, and he decides to stop and be a good wittle boy for Mary just because. Man got warped around Zero worse than the Scions got warped around Venat. And Vrtra being entirely cold about him after he fed his sister to Zeromus? Shaking my head SMH

By comparison, Hades fought to the death for his beliefs and for his people. Ironically, he fought to try and restore the world to its old form, the same thing Mary now wants to do with the 13th. This makes the writing for the patch go against the expansion's theme, and as a result makes the already shoddy writing around Durante collapse.

Like OP's question is more or less:

Do you like this cardboard cut out of a plot device as much as you like this fully fleshed out character rich in lore and feelings?

No. Not at all, really. Though I will say if he hadn't been warped around Mary, then he would have been better even if his plan had still failed. If he'd died in the doing it would have been more true to his character and to him being hell bent on his goal for the past 10,000 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

Two years is a remarkably long time to run a campaign against a fictional character on an online forum. Venat truly must have been more memorable to you than even Emet.

---

Four years is a remarkably long time to run a campaign against a fictional character on an online forum. Emet-Selch truly must have been more memorable for a number of people than even Venat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Absimiliard

???

---

This is an Emet-Selch appreciation thread, no? But surely the man can speak for himself.

I have problems with Emet I don't have with Golbez, like Emet's choices with his family in Garlemald and the corruption of an innocent baby with a sineater, among others. Golbez at least changed course. Then again Golbez had the luxury to do so and still accomplish his goal. Emet's goal couldn't be accomplished any other way (besides time travel, and that was unlikely). Also, has Golbez actually killed anyone? I don't think so. He's gone to war on the 13th, but no one has actually died, cus they can't. They just rez or get eaten/merged. All I think Golbez has actually done is conquer, so far. He hasn't necessarily treated people well, particularly Azdaja. And he wasn't a protective ruler, like Zero with her safe haven where people didn't eat each other involuntarily.* But he never actually got as bad as an ascian before he changed course.

I'd call myself an Emet fan, despite having the problems with him. I also like Golbez. But they aren't the same type of character, imo. If anything, Golbez is a Gaius with better motives. Or another Ardbert I can help.

Speaking of Ardbert, it just occurred to me. If we're successful in restoring the 13th... that means Golbez/Durante (and possibly Zero)will die at the end, yeah? *That's* gonna be a fun expac. >_>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SannaR

He and the others could have gone through the gate Azdaja came on in through five thousand years ago.

---

His goal wasn't just for him and a couple others to die, his goal was to fix it for everyone on the planet. So Going through Xande's portal wouldn't have accomplished it. Not to mention, I think the only voidsent that could go through it were the ones the Cloud of Darkness was in charge of. Given what we now know of how the 13th works, the portal likely opened right in the middle of her territory and Golbez wouldn't have had access in the short time it was open, anyway.


*"Strange sentences I never thought I'd type." for 100, Alex.

Its cause ones cute thats why. And you can't see the others face thats also why. The storytelling in this game is very squeaky clean at times where you know a character deserves their just desserts, but its very boring at this point and just honestly doesn't go in a good direction for me. It's the same issue I have with the scions now, they have no inner conflict or any disagreements of ideals or anything to challenging their characters within their own circle. Like c'mon, *rolls eyes*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elucesta

It's the same issue I have with the scions now, they have no inner conflict or any disagreements of ideals or anything to challenging their characters within their own circle. Like c'mon, *rolls eyes*

---

Define 'now', because Endwalker itself had Urianger have a very visible crisis about the fact he just keeps having to lie to people and wants to stop doing that. The thing is that the Scions have mostly had their big character development things in the past: Alphinaud in late ARR to Heavensward, Estinien in Heavensward with a decent amount afterwards, Lyse in Stormblod, Thancred and (to a lesser degree) Y'shtola in Shadowbringers, Alisaie in 5.x. Endwalker just wasn't really a time for that for most of them, partially because they've already had those developments and partially because Endwalker's story is very external and doesn't really put them in those sorts of situations. And, again, Urianger still found the time, and I wouldn't say Endwalker was a footnote for the twins either. And if we're only talking about 6.x? Well, there's some clear development for Estinien and Y'shtola, it's just not 'disagreements' or 'challenging their ideals' and more about them figuring out what to do after that whole 'saved the world' thing.

But fortunately, one of the very few things we know about Dawntrail is that it's leading with a situation that causes a divide between the Scions! So if you want interpersonal drama, you're getting it, and it'll probably be good fun!

Serious faces on:

I enjoyed Emet-Selch as a villain, but don't see why so many people treat him with some kind of reverence. I've seen such villains before and already decided on my answer to their question(s), so while he was well-written he was nothing new. You'd think he's some kind of revolutionary or revelatory antagonist... maybe it's just that I've seen villains of his ilk, maybe because I'm schizoid, but he just didn't tug at my heartstrings the way he seems to have for so many other people.

Durante ("Golbez") was a filler villain and performed adequately in that respect. Not every villain is going to be an Emet-Selch and that's not a bad thing; variety is the spice of life (kind of why Athena was such a breath of fresh air after so many villains with loads of pathos). Given the constraints placed on the story he was important to (filler, had to wrap in 6.5 at the latest) I think he was decently handled - had a good reason not to comply with the Message™ of the story and victory came within his grasp. I don't have a problem with his character or how he was portrayed; it's everything else that's an issue with 6.x for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alleluia

Speaking of Ardbert, it just occurred to me. If we're successful in restoring the 13th... that means Golbez/Durante (and possibly Zero)will die at the end, yeah? *That's* gonna be a fun expac. >_>

---

I mean, they've been alive for who knows how many thousands of years... while I imagine they'd want to get the ecosphere up and running again, they've earned their rest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

Define 'now', because Endwalker itself had Urianger have a very visible crisis about the fact he just keeps having to lie to people and wants to stop doing that. The thing is that the Scions have mostly had their big character development things in the past: Alphinaud in late ARR to Heavensward, Estinien in Heavensward with a decent amount afterwards, Lyse in Stormblod, Thancred and (to a lesser degree) Y'shtola in Shadowbringers, Alisaie in 5.x. Endwalker just wasn't really a time for that for most of them, partially because they've already had those developments and partially because Endwalker's story is very external and doesn't really put them in those sorts of situations. And, again, Urianger still found the time, and I wouldn't say Endwalker was a footnote for the twins either. And if we're only talking about 6.x? Well, there's some clear development for Estinien and Y'shtola, it's just not 'disagreements' or 'challenging their ideals' and more about them figuring out what to do after that whole 'saved the world' thing.

But fortunately, one of the very few things we know about Dawntrail is that it's leading with a situation that causes a divide between the Scions! So if you want interpersonal drama, you're getting it, and it'll probably be good fun!

---

Thats not challenging their ideals, or characters within their own circle. But it seems you understand what I'm talking about, because you mentioned thats what dawntrail will do, so thats good. Tired of the squad of scions being on the same page ALL the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cilia

Serious faces on:

I enjoyed Emet-Selch as a villain, but don't see why so many people treat him with some kind of reverence. I've seen such villains before and already decided on my answer to their question(s), so while he was well-written he was nothing new. You'd think he's some kind of revolutionary or revelatory antagonist... maybe it's just that I've seen villains of his ilk, maybe because I'm schizoid, but he just didn't tug at my heartstrings the way he seems to have for so many other people.

Durante ("Golbez") was a filler villain and performed adequately in that respect. Not every villain is going to be an Emet-Selch and that's not a bad thing; variety is the spice of life (kind of why Athena was such a breath of fresh air after so many villains with loads of pathos). Given the constraints placed on the story he was important to (filler, had to wrap in 6.5 at the latest) I think he was decently handled - had a good reason not to comply with the Message™ of the story and victory came within his grasp. I don't have a problem with his character or how he was portrayed; it's everything else that's an issue with 6.x for me.



I mean, they've been alive for who knows how many thousands of years... while I imagine they'd want to get the ecosphere up and running again, they've earned their rest.

---

It's kind of funny for me as it's the same feeling for me when it comes to another villian (in a different game) who has done a lot(though maybe not as high of a body count as Emet-Selch) horrible things that a lot of the fanbase goes wild for and keeps on asking for them to show up somehow. That being Handsome Jack. Or as I like to do is use Tassiter's name for him aka John. Is he a great villian and one I love killing? Yes. But he is an annoying piece of trash that any time I'm playing the pre-sequal I'm constantly telling him to stfu. And his reson for why he did ANYTHING was all due to a very bad parenting decision in response to trauma. That he then used to go and do all of those other horrible things. Well that and greed. The only thing that's connected to him and well it's more of a person that I like and give some level of sympathy for and want more of is poor Timothy cause that guy didn't know wtf he was signing up for when he made the deal to become a doppelganger in order to clear out his debt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SannaR

It's kind of funny for me as it's the same feeling for me when it comes to another villian (in a different game) who has done a lot(though maybe not as high of a body count as Emet-Selch) horrible things that a lot of the fanbase goes wild for and keeps on asking for them to show up somehow. That being Handsome Jack. Or as I like to do is use Tassiter's name for him aka John. Is he a great villian and one I love killing? Yes. But he is an annoying piece of trash that any time I'm playing the pre-sequal I'm constantly telling him to stfu. And his reson for why he did ANYTHING was all due to a very bad parenting decision in response to trauma. That he then used to go and do all of those other horrible things. Well that and greed. The only thing that's connected to him and well it's more of a person that I like and give some level of sympathy for and want more of is poor Timothy cause that guy didn't know wtf he was signing up for when he made the deal to become a doppelganger in order to clear out his debt.

---

I've made the same Emet and Handsome Jack connection, too. Mainly because there's one thing Borderlands 2 does with Handsome Jack that Shadowbringers never did with Emet:

Bruise his ego.

The best part of having a character with such a towering image of themselves and what they've made is to see what happens when it actually gets damaged. (It's the entire reason Frasier was a good TV show.) Handsome Jack's full of fun quips and jokes, but the times he really got interesting for me were when we actually foil his plans or break his things, and he gets genuinely mad, it's great. His attacks on you and your allies get so much blunter, meaner and more personal, and his delivery starts carrying so much venom that it could kill an elephant. It's actually the thing that takes him from a kind of funny joke to a genuinely compelling villain for me, and adds so much texture to the arc, there's enormous peaks and valleys in Jack's mood and attitude.

Emet might have a more complex inner life, but externally he's much the same sort of character... except he never takes those hits. We never see him have to respond to his best-laid plans going awry, he just stays in his smug, self-assured internal castle for his entire screentime. Hell, he even dies on top, as far as emotional storytelling and stability goes. I think that's a real mistake in how to handle a character like that.

I have more and bigger problems with Emet-Selch, fixing this would hardly save him in my eyes, but I do think his Shadowbringers story could've benefited from having him really lose his cool once or twice. We had him doing a bit of that during Elpis in Endwalker, but that was too little too late.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

I've made the same Emet and Handsome Jack connection, too. Mainly because there's one thing Borderlands 2 does with Handsome Jack that Shadowbringers never did with Emet:

Bruise his ego.

The best part of having a character with such a towering image of themselves and what they've made is to see what happens when it actually gets damaged. (It's the entire reason Frasier was a good TV show.) Handsome Jack's full of fun quips and jokes, but the times he really got interesting for me were when we actually foil his plans or break his things, and he gets genuinely mad, it's great. His attacks on you and your allies get so much blunter, meaner and more personal, and his delivery starts carrying so much venom that it could kill an elephant. It's actually the thing that takes him from a kind of funny joke to a genuinely compelling villain for me, and adds so much texture to the arc, there's enormous peaks and valleys in Jack's mood and attitude.

Emet might have a more complex inner life, but externally he's much the same sort of character... except he never takes those hits. We never see him have to respond to his best-laid plans going awry, he just stays in his smug, self-assured internal castle for his entire screentime. Hell, he even dies on top, as far as emotional storytelling and stability goes. I think that's a real mistake in how to handle a character like that.

I have more and bigger problems with Emet-Selch, fixing this would hardly save him in my eyes, but I do think his Shadowbringers story could've benefited from having him really lose his cool once or twice. We had him doing a bit of that during Elpis in Endwalker, but that was too little too late.

---

I never found any of his quips and jokes as funny. He was always an unbearable pos in my eyes had zero redeeming qualities who as I said over reacted and thus ended up punishing his daughter. Who he then abused the crap of emotionally and mentally. I'm not sure how her prison kept her in there unless they said it had a very strong power dampener. So that by the time Moxi comes up with a plan for his casino I'm just groaning and rolling my eyes. The only saving feature of that whole DLC is Timothy and the whole Doubling Down side quest.

For me when he gets mad it's just the rare time he needs for a time to accept that he has always been that level of despicable. That the only reason anyone else saw it hiding under the surface is because his wife died. And even then I'm sure it would just have taken a longer amount of time to start showing. I mean for most of the pre-sequal the nice guy mask is barely on even before the game remembers that he has to become the most despicable, capital A a-hole he is for the rest of the series's timeline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cilia

I mean, they've been alive for who knows how many thousands of years... while I imagine they'd want to get the ecosphere up and running again, they've earned their rest.

---

Presumably they'll be your teammates at that point, so at least people who complain the scions don't die will get what they want? If restoring the 13th and its people kills off the residents somehow and doesn't just restore them to their bodies after 10000 years. Its much more complicated than undoing the light infections on a non-sineater. And I honestly don't know how it could even work when dealing with the voidsent who've merged. Dominant personality wins out?

Though Zero is an edge case, being only partly voidsent, so restoring the 13th may not kill her off, even if it does generally kill off other people. Though, I suppose the process can't kill everyone immediately or else we won't have any npcs to revisit. Maybe in the end they'll have persistent islands of darkness in the world, alongside a restored lifestream and a method for actually dying, rather than just restoring the whole planet at once.


... I'm sorry, this is getting ridiculously off topic now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Carin-Eri

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...3f277863baeef&

---

When did Emet-Selch apologize for his actions? He was dedicated to seeing it through till the last moment of his life.

Sadly, they butchered Golbez in the last moment, but he was a pretty cool villain too, and I say that as someone who didn't play FF4 yet.

what about Gaia, is it ok that she is just as guilty and culpable as emit or any other ascian and yet because she forgot all the people she murdered she is off the hook?
what about Fordola, just cause she had a sad backstory doesn't excuse her actions..
crap even Estinien was a crazed lunatic through the lancer quest line, but hey he was nice to that spoiled kid that got firewood once so all is forgiven i guess..

this entire game is full of this crap, its anime troupe that villains become alleys after defeated..
and not to mention we can be 10000000000% ok with a fake genocide in a video game because no one actually died regardless of how emotionally delusional it made you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kranel_San

When did Emet-Selch apologize for his actions? He was dedicated to seeing it through till the last moment of his life.

Sadly, they butchered Golbez in the last moment, but he was a pretty cool villain too, and I say that as someone who didn't play FF4 yet.

---

You should play FF4 before making this comment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mostly_Raxus

what about Gaia, is it ok that she is just as guilty and culpable as emit or any other ascian and yet because she forgot all the people she murdered she is off the hook?
what about Fordola, just cause she had a sad backstory doesn't excuse her actions..
crap even Estinien was a crazed lunatic through the lancer quest line, but hey he was nice to that spoiled kid that got firewood once so all is forgiven i guess..

---

Gaia is not Loghrif, the Eden questline was all about that point. Gaia has the soul of Loghrif but she's her own person with her own wants and wishes and actions.
Fordola is still being punished. The Ala Mhigans outright said "I thank you for saving us, but I don't forgive you for for hunting us." And she herself is undergoing a redemption arc of feeling exactly how she hurt others and the grief she put them through. So, uh, congrats? The game and Fordola herself agree with you.
Estinien has been getting a crap-ton of character development and the people he needs to make ammends to (the dragons, and the WoL) he turned to defend them instead, so really he's a whole separate case.

Are you somehow confusing Estinien with Foulques? I get that they're both Elezen, but I doubt most would call a guy who was slowly becoming corrupted by an outside force that happens to any Azure Dragoon that carries around the eye for a long enough time a villain. Vs a Duskwight who felt the way the lancer guild teaches people to be the wrong lessons to teach. Who also trying to get some form of revenge on Gridania as a whole cause of how they treat Duskwights.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhiteArchmage

Gaia is not Loghrif, the Eden questline was all about that point. Gaia has the soul of Loghrif but she's her own person with her own wants and wishes and actions.
Fordola is still being punished. The Ala Mhigans outright said "I thank you for saving us, but I don't forgive you for for hunting us." And she herself is undergoing a redemption arc of feeling exactly how she hurt others and the grief she put them through. So, uh, congrats? The game and Fordola herself agree with you.
Estinien has been getting a crap-ton of character development and the people he needs to make ammends to (the dragons, and the WoL) he turned to defend them instead, so really he's a whole separate case.

---

I'd actually point to Fordola as a great example of a redemption/atonement arc, because they REALLY have her walk it. With this sort of thing, I ask a question of 'what more could they have done to sell me on this', and with Fordola I genuinely don't think there's anything else they could've done both in terms of action and treatment. I have a similar view of Gaius, although it's a bit more conditional: I think they've done everything they could've done within the confines of the stories he's been in. If he were in parts of the game with more storytelling space and freedom it wouldn't be enough, but he's not.

Golbez is sort of in the same boat as Gaius: I don't know if what they've done with him is enough for me to believe his face turn, but I also know that he didn't exactly have the luxury of space for it. If/when he comes back I'd hope to see some 'Fordola in EW healer quests' work on him, where he's clearly doing the hard yards and going through an uphill battle.

(Also, his story even now is better than IV Golbez's, which is a game with far less excuses.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

(Also, his story even now is better than IV Golbez's, which is a game with far less excuses.)

---

Have you played the DS port of FFIV or any variation of The After Years, out of curiosity? The former makes apparent several key aspects of Golbez's story that, while supposedly intended, were conspicuously absent from the original and all of its non-DS ports. The latter fills in even more blanks while also addressing the matter of seeing the rest of his redemption arc through.

I'm not going to say XIV's Golbez isn't more fleshed out by the time they're done with him, but I do think people are selling the original quite a bit short.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thegreatonemal

You should play FF4 before making this comment.

---

I shouldn't need to play another game to state an opinion regarding a game I'm currently playing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kranel_San

I shouldn't need to play another game to state an opinion regarding a game I'm currently playing.

---

Considering it would give you better context for the character and what to expect given the game you are playing, I'd recommend it. It was something you were already planning to do. You said you haven't played it yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kranel_San

I shouldn't need to play another game to state an opinion regarding a game I'm currently playing.

---

I mean if you're saying 'they butchered Golbez', that's a claim you can only make with authority if you've actually played the game Golbez is from.

I have played it, and I can tell you there's not much to butcher; Golbez is probably the worst FF villain among the ones with actual... y'know, characters. XIV's Golbez has actual agency and XIV Zeromus is more than a last-minute 'Space Flea From Nowhere' final boss, that puts them both above the originals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Absimiliard

Have you played the DS port of FFIV or any variation of The After Years, out of curiosity? The former makes apparent several key aspects of Golbez's story that, while supposedly intended, were conspicuously absent from the original and all of its non-DS ports. The latter fills in even more blanks while also addressing the matter of seeing the rest of his redemption arc through.

I'm not going to say XIV's Golbez isn't more fleshed out by the time they're done with him, but I do think people are selling the original quite a bit short.

---

Specifically, I played a few versions of FFIV in part, the one I actually completed was the pixel remaster last year. IV was never exactly a game that grabbed me. That's nice that Golbez gets more non-brainwashed scenes, but it doesn't really factor in for me; scenes added that long after the original don't really feel like they should be used to excuse it. Also, doesn't really solve the problem that he spends most of the game mind-controlled by a secret villain with even less characterization; technically speaking, the problem with FFIV's villains might not be that Golbez is underbaked, it's that Zemus is, since he's essentially the one we're fighting against the whole time.

I know the story of The After Years from reading a Let's Play of it at some point, but I don't count The After Years because it's bad and FFIV doesn't deserve being shackled with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yuella

Are Emet-Selch fanboys also supportive of Golbez? After all, they both only wanted salvation for their people and have labored for millenia to achieve it.

---

Since Golbez seems to be a part of Azem, yes 100% and even if he wouldn't be a part of Azem. I have a nack for Villains, I prefer them more as the Scions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cilia

Hardcore Emet-Selch fanboys don't think of him as a villain.

---

He is a Villain.
If you had the Power that the 3 Unsundered had and if you lost your World, without knowing what the Heck happend, would you not try to get back what was lost?
12000 years is a damn long time, for suffering. Maybe those 3 could have made it, if Lahabrea and Emet would have stayed in the Shadows.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aneshda

Since Golbez seems to be a part of Azem, yes 100% and even if he wouldn't be a part of Azem. I have a nack for Villains, I prefer them more as the Scions.

---

Pretty sure people are talking about "Golbez" (Durante), not Contramemoria-era Golbez. They're two different people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aneshda

He is a Villain.
If you had the Power that the 3 Unsundered had and if you lost your World, without knowing what the Heck happend, would you not try to get back what was lost?
12000 years is a damn long time, for suffering. Maybe those 3 could have made it, if Lahabrea and Emet would have stayed in the Shadows.

---

Me, personally?

First I'd try to find out what and then why, so as to prevent it from happening again if at all possible. Going back to the old status quo would be completely meaningless if the same phenomenon just broke it again! ... but I would also recognize that going back to the old status quo is impossible no matter what you do, and so try to find a way forward.

Certainly not engage in a millennia-long genocidal campaign weakly excused by failings I engender in the new humanity! I mean, if you focus only on the bad - judge people at their worst - well, you've kind of already made up your mind, haven't you? Conversely if you look back on the past with rose-tinted goggles you'll never see, much less appreciate, the endless possibilities of the future...

Has that not been like, the core overarching message of the story since A Realm Reborn? Did I miss something somewhere?