[SPOILERS] Revelations from Patch 4.01

[Theodric]

I have to wonder if Midgardsormr will be incriminated somehow by Omega. Did Midgardsormr serve Hydaelyn as a means of atonement, perhaps? Given that very few aspects of this game's lore are black or white combined with the general vagueness and refusal of Midgardsormr to reveal key information I can't help but feel that there's much more to the conflict between them.

[Cilia]

Well I mean... this is the Dissidia raid, right? Obviously the final boss is gonna be Feral Chaos backed up by Shinryu Verus. Can't turn out any other way. He'll go into EX Mode on Savage.

/sarcasm

A-anyway, the other language versions don't really... change my stance? Still feels pretty clear.

Omega, a soulless automaton, seeks to understand what gives us the strength to overcome seemingly impossible odds by throwing increasingly powerful foes at us (note: it already considered the Delta subjects statistically superior). That something is will, heart, soul, self-determination, etc., concepts it cannot grasp because it does not (or cannot) act in ways contrary to its programming. However its creation, Alpha, will develop a soul... and probably sacrifice himself for us, since that tends to be how things go in XIV. As a result of this extremely illogical situation Omega will go ballistic and force us to defeat it or shut down out of sheer inability to comprehend; Omega may develop a soul, but will either be malevolent or be so heavily damaged in our battle it needs to shut down again.

I'm callin' it!

I have to wonder if Midgardsormr will be incriminated somehow by Omega. Did Midgardsormr serve Hydaelyn as a means of atonement, perhaps? Given that very few aspects of this game's lore are black or white combined with the general vagueness and refusal of Midgardsormr to reveal key information I can't help but feel that there's much more to the conflict between them.

Only you could try to incriminate the shady but ultimately benevolent dragon against the soulless machine that threatens us with genocide for its own betterment. Only you.

[EdwinLi]

Well I mean... this is the Dissidia raid, right? Obviously the final boss is gonna be Feral Chaos backed up by Shinryu Verus. Can't turn out any other way. He'll go into EX Mode on Savage.

/sarcasm

I say Chaos as the final boss for Omega Raid because Chaos seems to be the most logical choice if Omega continues to take "legends" and make them into our challenge in Omega Raid if he has no plans to fight the WoL himself but only remain on the side gathering data.

Even in FF14 world the story of FF1 WoL and Chaos is a story told for generations that no one can compare the defeat of Chaos to any other Hero story but a pure miracle. Something that would fit into what omega is trying to understand and would be the most ideal test Simulation for his goals.

[Theodric]

-snip-

I'm not sure I follow.

For starters, it was mere speculation. We do not have the full picture after all. The game - and franchise as a whole - also has a track record of creating very nuanced characters and situations that are far from black or white. I remember people posting theories that the Garleans and Ascians were more nuanced than people gave them credit for only to find themselves shunned and ridiculed for it. Then it turned out that their speculation was correct - but it didn't fit the narrative quite a few vocal posters here try to push so there's only a reluctant acceptance of the shades of grey that exist.

Could Omega be irredeemable? Possibly. As it stands, we don't know enough to say for certain. One can certainly make the argument that it is implied but then we've also been led to believe that other beings in the setting are completely irredeemable only to later find out that, whilst flawed, they had noble if misguided goals. Now whether this applies to Omega remains to be seen. It might or might not.

As an aside, though, there's a handful of people who post here regularly and a bunch of people who might post once or twice in passing. With that in mind I don't see a need for snarky quips just because a particular theory doesn't fit one's own point of view. Given that it's a completely fictional setting, too, there's little need for emotionally charged 'how could you support such a horrific thing' angle, either.

A lot of things in this game - and franchise as a whole - are also deliberately left open to personal interpretation and speculation. I'd like to think that's a large part of the charm of FFXIV and why it has a lot of fans invested in the game's lore. It mostly certainly appears that way from what I've seen of the role-playing community.

I guess what I'm getting at is that at the end of the day it's a fictional setting. If people are getting to the point where they're agitated by someone's else's interpretation of a make believe world then that, to me, is a pretty good sign that simply agreeing to disagree is the ideal solution.

Is such an arrangement to your liking?

[Cilia]

-snip-

It was a lighthearted jab poking fun at how predictable it was you would try and force moral ambiguity into a situation that has very little. (Before you bring out the flamethrower yes I do make fun of myself too - go read the Job quest thread where I called myself an edgelord.)

If you're free try and illustrate why you feel moral ambiguity exists in a given situation, others are free to disagree and tell you why. "Agree to disagree" is just a way of saying "I don't want to discuss it, I just want to say my piece. Anybody who disagrees can just... whatever." I'm far more fond of discussion, but if that's how you feel then I shall refrain from trying to engage you in future debates.

(Note: fantasy worlds may be fictitious, but they often run on moral systems very similar to the real world. XIV, by and large, does so - as far as I can tell, at any rate.)

[Theodric]

-snip-

If it was a mere jest, then fair enough! I wasn't entirely sure so I appreciate the clarification. As far as moral ambiguity goes, my stance is that it's generally pretty subjective. It's less a case of supporting a cause and more an acknowledgement as to why someone or something may be driven to act a certain way. From their perspective they may very well have justifications for their actions.

I'm not one to shy away from engagement or debates. I just don't feel it's my place or anybody else's place to try and enforce a particular interpretation of the game's nuances. That's pretty much what I meant by the whole 'agree to disagree' thing. It's clear we're not going to convince each other to see things differently and that's absolutely fine!

I also like to think that members of the lore team read this board every now and then. It's just a hunch and I have no solid evidence that it's the case but a lot of the questions and moral issues we've debated here have since found their way into the game itself. The DRK 60-70 quest chain is an excellent example of what I mean. I won't spoil it here for those who haven't done it yet but it addresses quite a bit of what the debates we've engaged in have brought up.

So, in my eyes, it's well worth continuing down such a path and as such I will do just that. I adore FFXIV's setting and I very much appreciate the nuances that exist - and I also love to explore the 'how' and 'why' that surrounds each character be they an antagonist or a protagonist.