[SPOILERS] Stormblood Ending

[Theodric]

No, I said we should be wary of leaning heavily on 1.0's lore as a lot of it has been retconned or not touched upon again since the shift from 1.0 to 2.0. If you were truly so outraged about people cherry picking aspects of the lore in their arguments then you would have absolutely no problem agreeing with the problem I described above. Yet that does not suit your agenda, does it? You literally saw someone say that they're tired of how heated and focused the debates over Garlemald get and then instead of either holding your tongue or agreeing that both sides have valid cocnerns and reasons to be criticised you sought to simply paint it in such a way as to pretend as if your 'side' is completely flawless.

I'm not sure how I'm 'attacking' or 'ignoring' you, either, when you specifically called me out on multiple occasions. It's a bit silly to stop posting over one particular poster, too - I don't buy that at all. Is there or is there not a forum ignore feature that you can make use of? If not, can you simply not skim over any posts I make and willingly ignore them? I have stated multiple times that Garlemald is in need of reform, so you can stop pretending as if I claim that Garlemald is without flaws and always perfect. I have never once said that - though, again, that does not suit the narrative you're trying to push.

Now, I shall ask you again, do you believe the following quote to be true in the context of our discussion? If not, then there really isn't any point in you engaging me at all - which makes your decision to do so all the more bizarre.

Except that isn't what is happening at all. Both sides are guilty of doing that and if you were truly objective yourself then you wouldn't be trying to throw your perceived 'side' atop a pedestal. Though I wonder, how many of those involved in these debates will even acknowledge that? More importantly, how many of those who do acknowledge it will do so in a manner that doesn't belittle the other side of what without a doubt a very nuanced and complicated set of issues?

Again, if people want the tiresome debates over Garlemald to cease then they need to break the cycle by learning to agree to disagree, think critically and acknowledge that both sides are guilty of bias. Not just one. If that isn't going to be the case then those responsible have no business complaining - especially if they're just going to try and pin the blame on one particular 'side', or worse yet an individual on that side. I'm almost flattered, really - but I would not claim to have any real influence here so it's all rather baffling. I'll even admit to being a little terrified! It's strange for such hostility to arise from a debate over a fictional setting - so please, cease.

Finally, I'll also point out that this is a very rich setting with countless different subjects to discuss. There's multiple threads that aren't related to Garlemald in any way that you can post in. Be the change you wish to be! I have the utmost faith in you.

[Cilia]

I'm not going to engage in ad hominem attacks.

All I'm going to say is that I try not to take sides - the only "side" I try to be on is that of the truth, which speaks for itself. The entire reason I got involved in this particular firestorm was because the Empire's endorsement of the Meteor Project was downplayed to try and make it look better... but Gaius, Nael, Lolorito, and Cid's accounts strongly suggest if not outright confirm the Empire knew full well what it was doing, did so of its own volition, and had a majority support among the aristocracy. (The margin is irrelevant, as is which particular individuals disagreed with it.)

The other issue was the origin of Garlemald's endless conquest - it began because, after conquering Ilsabard, Solus zos Galvus decided that wasn't enough and went after Othard... where the Empire first witnessed the potential of primals, leading to its call for the beast tribes' genocide and declaring its wars of conquest righteous. The problem is this is faulty logic - a self-fulfilling prophecy. "We have to conquer all lands and exterminate the beast tribes because they summon primals, which they summon because we conquer their lands and try to exterminate them." The unnamed primal in Othard, the unnamed primal in Gyr Abania, Ramuh, Shinryu, and Lakshmi were all summoned in direct response to the Empire's actions - and most others we've encountered were made easier or indirectly aided by the Empire's actions, as before Silvertear primals were rarer and the beast tribes traded crystals with the Eorzeans more freely. After the Empire's failed invasion 15 years ago and Midgardsormr's doomed intervention, primals were easier to summon and the beast tribes began hoarding their crystals to summon their gods if they felt pressed.

Long story short, the Empire got greedy, encountered a primal in Othard, and used its malignancy as an excuse to keep going on wars of conquest; doing so has had nothing but a negative impact on Hydaelyn and largely been counterproductive. The Empire does care about environmental health... but only because not doing so will leave it with nobody and nothing to rule over.

Note: greed is one of the Seven Deadly Vices. Pretty hard to argue what they're doing isn't evil when it's driven by that. It's actually possible to apply most if not all of the Seven Deadly Vices to the Empire if you try, but I'll do so only at popular request.

The one thing I've done that could be construed as putting spin on the Empire is pointing out that Varis' and Regula's friendship was not clearly displayed, which was straw manned into stating I denied it. I do not, but it was not clearly shown - heavily alluded to, but never shown. (They spend all of like 2 minutes on screen together and never speak to one another.) That was all I was trying to say.

Other than that I've... just been pointing out the truth, reciting known facts, or researching to find the truth while calling out hypocrisy and fallacious arguments (many of them tu quoque fallacies designed to make the Empire look better and/or Eorzea look worse). That's my intent, at any rate; if I've failed at that please let me know when and where so I may clarify.

It's very off-topic but I don't mind defending myself. Still not going to attack other people.

[Theodric]

Garlemald isn't perfect, as I said. Though if we want to apply the 'Seven Deadly Sins' as a concept then so, too, could it be done with Eorzea...and much of Othard as well based on what we have come to know of the darker aspects of Doma, the Steppes and Hingashi.

Ultimately finding a solution to the Primal/Eikon threat is the main concern for pretty much everybody living on Hydaelyn. Whilst some Primals/Eikons have been conjured up as a result of Garlean aggression many have been brought forth through unrelated reasons - and as such they're mere symptoms of a much greater threat.

All signs also point to the Ascians and/or Elidibus being the greater threat in the grand scheme of things. Everything else is but a chess piece that is seemingly being moved time and time again in such a way as to benefit Zodiark. The Eorzeans need to realise that and the Garleans need to realise that that.

[Berethos]

Ultimately finding a solution to the Primal/Eikon threat is the main concern for pretty much everybody living on Hydaelyn.

True, but there's additional context.

Eorzea, beset as it has been by calamities, generally has shown they want to find a solution to the Primal/Eikon threat because it's an ongoing threat to the status quo.

Garlemald, from the information we have available and based on the known goals of the current leadership, wants to find a solution to the Primal/Eikon threat because it's an ongoing threat to their continued conquest, which acts as another potential threat to the status quo in Eorzea.

This means that any negotiations between Eorzea and Garlemald over the Primal threat does not occur on equal terms, as essentially without backing down from their conquest goals (which is fully within their power to do, and short of somehow beating them to a shell of their former size in a military campaign, Eorzea cannot force their hand...so the ball is in Garlemald's court, so to speak) Eorzea would be trading one major threat for another.

Short of needing a last minute hail mary to save Hydaelyn, there's very little reason for Eorzea to agree to ally with Garlemald so long as Garlemald chooses to not change its ways.

[Alleo]

I do believe that nobody that in any way chose a side can truly argue completely objective. We will always be clouded with some sort of bias. (Some stronger some less)

A lot of posters already said that we dont believe that everyone in Garlemald is evil and that it can change (thus we see that it can become more nuanced in the future) and we also more than once said that Eorzea have their faults too. All we are saying is that the empire did not show themselves in a good light in SB and even if this is the action of a few people it will still leave a bad impression about the whole empire especially since we know Varis goals with the beast tribes and their stance on conquering all. These things are facts and presented in the game.

But in the end I will stop the discussion about Garlemald in this thread since its getting a bit off topic. Also a lot of our long posts are ignored anyway.

So to have this more along the way of the ending and about further speculation:
- What will happen with Fordola? I am not really sure what her role will be. Is she going to become our enemy and creates trouble, or is she going to get a redemption?
- How do you thing will they introduce Gosetsu and Yotsuyu back into the plot? I just cant see how they will put them back in a believable way and I am not really sure what role they still play.

[Remedi]

after completing lv 70 DRK quest I think that the theory of Gaius beign alive is not as far fetched as it seems

[Cilia]

No, I said we should be wary of leaning heavily on 1.0's lore as a lot of it has been retconned or not touched upon again since the shift from 1.0 to 2.0.

Lie.

Varis was against the project as well, though - and given that he later became Emperor that's proof enough that there were those even higher up than Gaius who were opposed to it. 1.0 lore is also not necessarily canon as a lot of aspects of the game's story have changed since then.

Which is it? In the case of the former, how heavily may we lean on 1.0's lore? In the case of the latter, when is it and when is it not canon? More to the point, why are you the one who gets to decide?

Furthermore it's actually from 1.x, not 1.0, after Yoshi-P took over as producer and director. Things got a lot less vague when he did.

...

[Cilia]

So to have this more along the way of the ending and about further speculation:
- What will happen with Fordola? I am not really sure what her role will be. Is she going to become our enemy and creates trouble, or is she going to get a redemption?
- How do you thing will they introduce Gosetsu and Yotsuyu back into the plot? I just cant see how they will put them back in a believable way and I am not really sure what role they still play.

My current speculation is that Fordola's Resonant Echo is gonna have long-term, ill side effects, she'll mutate into a monster like Inferno, and we'll have to put her down. It feels very much in-line with the SOLDIER / Shinra vibes I got from all the stuff in Castrum Abania... and I still want an explanation for just what the hell Inferno was.

Gosetsu will likely play a minimal role. Yotsuyu will be hauled in front of the Domans, but Hien will beseech them to spare her because it's things like executing her that created monsters like Yotsuyu in the first place. She'll be imprisoned for the rest of her life.

after completing lv 70 DRK quest I think that the theory of Gaius beign alive is not as far fetched as it seems

How so?

[Theodric]

Lie.

Not at all. If you misunderstood what I was trying to point out then I apologise for not being more clear.

More to the point, why are you the one who gets to decide?

At no point have I claimed to hold some lofty position around these parts. I'm not entirely sure why some people seem to believe that I do. I have merely pointed out that some aspects of the lore are deliberately vague or appear to have been dropped completely or temporarily. I have also pointed out that a lot of what people claim to be problematic with Garlemald is based on subjective elements. Garlemald has made mistakes, certainly, but it Eorzea is far from perfect. Nor is it a competition as to who is more righteous. In a grim and bleak setting such as Hydaelyn then many are going to do what they deem is necessary for their own survival or for the perceived greater good. Much like how it is the case throughout history - and the present day - over in the real world.

As for Yotsuyu, she does not necessarily have to be imprisoned. Gosetsu was strongly implied to have killed thousands in Garlemald's name and that no doubt factors into his decision to spare her. In past titles characters have done horrific things and been spared modern day concepts of justice such as imprisonment or execution. Some of them redeemed themselves, others didn't - but took their leave to go off and do their own thing. We don't necessarily need things with Fordola and Yotsuyu to play out in a black or white manner.

A story is more interesting when characters such as Beatrix (FFIX) and Rufus (FFVII) are allowed to thrive without being stifled or forced to adhere strictly to modern day concepts of 'justice' and 'morality'.

[Cilia]

The entire point is that you don't have that kind of power, yet dismiss evidence for completely arbitrary reasons. If people cannot be sure what evidence is valid in your eyes they cannot contest your claims, and for all they know you will change your mind as to what is and is not valid evidence on personal whims... if there is no objective truth, no accepted canon but what you want, there is no way to argue against you.

So I ask again: is it that 1.0's (1.x's) lore is not necessarily canon, or is it that we shouldn't lean too heavily on it? In the case of the former when is it and when is it not? In the case of the latter, how heavily can we lean on it? I need to know what rules I'm playing by.

...?