[Spoilers] Why Zenos is the most important character moving forward

[GenericMagus]

A quick note about might makes right isn't more about control, but rather the power he has over people, those who are only worthy to his whims he uses them as tools. It's might makes right in regards to constant challenge to entertain and to prove superiority.

[RopeDrink]

Spoiler - I don't have anything juicy to contribute, other than I have zero interest in this 'test' and happen to be one of those who actually do very much enjoy Zenos as a villain.

What galls me is this constant use of Grynwhat like he's even remotely comparable to Zenos. One is so totally enured to emotion and completely devoid of anything other than a self-desire, without even a shred of care (and barely any true loyalty) for the Empire despite being one of its most prominent figureheads -- and another is a comedically used (albeit slightly tragic) yes-man of low intellect out to prove himself and settle a grudge out of loyalty to Yotsuyu. Zenos doesn't even have the capacity to know what a grudge feels like, let alone hold one. This isn't a vengeance/revenge angle, unlike Grynwhat, who got the story-build that was appropriate for a dungeon boss (ie. just enough, but not a lot). Zenos is 300% Grynwhat when you dissect his personality (or lack of, which is actually part of it).

It is like comparing an apple to a lime. I mean, they're both green fruits afterall. Might as well just call them the same thing.

Zenos also does not treat anyone as an equal.

Hello, my name is Fordola. I'm an Ala-Mhigan, somehow in an Empire regiment at the behest of a bored leader who'd sooner be challenging himself rather than sitting in a throne room listening to reports and politics. Those reports and politics are being uttered by the mouths of borderline racists/purists who see no value in me whatsoever, yet through a strong and determined personality, I stood up for myself and offered suggestions that would be in-line with my leader's goal. He was most pleased, politely offering me the floor and maintaining my position as a regiment leader, despite it galling everyone else in the room.

3rd person aside (as well as any moments where chain-of-command had to be upheld - ie. Zenos ordering Fordola to do things, thus break the 'equal' point), Zenos goes against a lot of what the Empire would normally be attributed for, simply because he has little to no value in their way of thinking and values that strength and determination far more than their actual ideal. An otherwise shamed Scientist was brought into his direct/secret confidence and seemingly treated very well. Fordola, even after failing, wasn't just allowed to maintain her post (despite tension from everyone else) but the first to become test-subject thanks to showing a semblance of the strength he values. There was no care or consideration for race, creed, ideology, any of that -- just like he himself couldn't give a damn about those things.

Another contrary is the WoL/D themselves, starting when Zenos is first defeated in Ala Mhigo dungeon. Hell, the entire story revolves around him initially looking at you like you're an incessant pest, building until he's legitimately thrilled that you are capable of standing up to him, so much so that he sees you as a frenemy. He doesn't even consider us an enemy any more, just the target of his desire to feel something. In his twisted head, you are an equal (if not a better), and has not insulted or demeaned you since. Hell, he was so enamoured that he borderline proposes friendship (possibly more).

Meanwhile, "DIE, DIE, DIE, MORE, MORE, MORE, WE GO TOGETHER!"

[Edax]

Spoiler - I don't have anything juicy to contribute, other than I have zero interest in this 'test' and happen to be one of those who actually do very much enjoy Zenos as a villain.

What galls me is this constant use of Grynwhat like he's even remotely comparable to Zenos. One is so totally enured to emotion and completely devoid of anything other than a self-desire, without even a shred of care (and barely any true loyalty) for the Empire despite being one of its most prominent figureheads -- and another is a comedically used (albeit slightly tragic) yes-man of low intellect out to prove himself and settle a grudge out of loyalty to Yotsuyu. Zenos doesn't even have the capacity to know what a grudge feels like, let alone hold one. This isn't a vengeance/revenge angle, unlike Grynwhat, who got the story-build that was appropriate for a dungeon boss (ie. just enough, but not a lot). Zenos is 300% Grynwhat when you dissect his personality (or lack of, which is actually part of it).

It is like comparing an apple to a lime. I mean, they're both green fruits afterall. Might as well just call them the same thing.

I would argue that Grynwhat is very comparable to Zenos. Both are antagonists whose stories revolve almost entirely around the Warrior of Light. Conveniently to the story, they have completely devoted themselves into fighting the Warrior of Light. As Khalithar said, "He's completely transparent about who he is, what he wants, and what he's about. In a story full of liars and manipulators, I actually love the fact that we have a villain with such a simple goal." This describes them both. Whether or not either of them know what a grudge is does not make a well written main antagonist. If Grynwhat got what he wanted, he would no longer have a story. If Zenos got what he wanted, he would no longer have a story. They might as well be vegetables to the function of the story if they killed the Warrior of Light.

Yes they both have slightly different personalities but could you imagine Grynwhat becoming the main antagonist? Killing the Emperor and swearing to hunt the Warrior of Light down? Would the story be any different? They're both thugs that seek a confrontation of the protagonist for it's own sake.

Hello, my name is Fordola. I'm an Ala-Mhigan, somehow in an Empire regiment at the behest of a bored leader who'd sooner be challenging himself rather than sitting in a throne room listening to reports and politics. Those reports and politics are being uttered by the mouths of borderline racists/purists who see no value in me whatsoever, yet through a strong and determined personality, I stood up for myself and offered suggestions that would be in-line with my leader's goal. He was most pleased, politely offering me the floor and maintaining my position as a regiment leader, despite it galling everyone else in the room.

3rd person aside (as well as any moments where chain-of-command had to be upheld - ie. Zenos ordering Fordola to do things, thus break the 'equal' point), Zenos goes against a lot of what the Empire would normally be attributed for, simply because he has little to no value in their way of thinking and values that strength and determination far more than their actual ideal. An otherwise shamed Scientist was brought into his direct/secret confidence and seemingly treated very well. Fordola, even after failing, wasn't just allowed to maintain her post (despite tension from everyone else) but the first to become test-subject thanks to showing a semblance of the strength he values. There was no care or consideration for race, creed, ideology, any of that -- just like he himself couldn't give a damn about those things.

Another contrary is the WoL/D themselves, starting when Zenos is first defeated in Ala Mhigo dungeon. Hell, the entire story revolves around him initially looking at you like you're an incessant pest, building until he's legitimately thrilled that you are capable of standing up to him, so much so that he sees you as a frenemy. He doesn't even consider us an enemy any more, just the target of his desire to feel something. In his twisted head, you are an equal (if not a better), and has not insulted or demeaned you since. Hell, he was so enamoured that he borderline proposes friendship (possibly more).

Meanwhile, "DIE, DIE, DIE, MORE, MORE, MORE, WE GO TOGETHER!"

I would argue that Zenos uses Fordola as a tool, but he does not treat himself that way. Zenos uses everyone around him as tools for his own self-gratification. Even the Warrior of Light is merely a tool for his own self-gratification. His "affection" is much like Vaulthy's short-lived affection of Alphinaud. Zenos doesn't treat anybody as he treat himself because he's the center of his own world. Does Zenos actually listen to what the Warrior of Light has to say? No. Does he care what the Warrior of Light wants? No. Does Zenos care what Zenos wants? Yes. So much so, that's his character.

This is in stark contrast to how Cid and Nero treat each other. The both are colleagues and rivals with uneven power dynamics but they both treat each other "more equal" then how Zenos treats anyone else. As I recall, it was Gaius that made Fordola a citizen and formed her Garlean militant group. Gaius gave Fordola equal legal status as himself and gave her the same chance of glory as he had, despite that taboo within the Empire. This ends up being far more respectful than Zenos ordering Fordola to kill her own men.

[LineageRazor]

I will admit to not having seen Othello though.

You're going to maintain, then, that ANY Antagonist whose goals are entirely wrapped up in the Protagonist is poorly written? That is what is expressed by your test, and it is an extremely bold statement. I provided only two examples off the top of my head, but there are many more.

There are, additionally, plenty of examples of Protagonists who are entirely wrapped up in the Antagonist of their story - revenge plots being a common source. The goal of their story or arc is to overcome their Antagonist, with events following that more or less irrelevant. Antagonists can have the motivation for revenge, as well, and the story of how the Protagonist attempts to resist allowing the Antagonist to have that revenge can be just as compelling.

It is an old, old trope with myriad examples, and like all tropes can be executed competently or incompetently. Zenos is an example of it done badly, no doubt, but I still maintain that "The Edax Test" would find plenty of opposition in the world of literary critique!

You are welcome, of course, to have the personal blanket opinion that all such Antagonists are poorly written, but that doesn't even qualify it as a rule of thumb.

[RopeDrink]

Zenos isn't even remotely like Grynwaht in any way, shape or form. This doesn't become false just because they happen to have goals that (when stripped down to barebone basics) look similar. Pretty much everything can end up this way if you're going to compress it enough.

As said, if you want to call an apple a lime because their background = green fruit, then you're not likely to be compelled by much down the road.

[Alleo]

Contrary to most people here I think Zenos is the villain we need. If you hate him and want him to die then he's doing his job. Many of the single player FF games used the same kind of arch nemesis, one that is a true black lunatic with no redeeming qualities, killing indiscriminately, allied to nobody, too powerful to defeat in our first encounters with them, gradually amassing power on their journey to reach a zenith of evil power which they achieve in their final form. This is a very FF antagonist. Important to note that his story is in progress so there may be revelations that alter your perception of him a bit.

And those villians are fine for one arc but I honestly take a person with motives, backround and more over someone that is just insane and kills because of that. This can be fun for a time but I dont want such a person to be the endgame for us, especially if they somehow really write that he takes out either Hydealyn or Zodiark..Zenos if you want to fight then lets do it, but please on our own strenght and not through such means.

Also you can have a good written villian that you still want to see death or still hate. I liked Caius in FF13-2 because you got to know about his motives but what he did was something one still could hate. Emet was charismatic, had his quirks and reasonings but at the end of the day for me it was him and his people or our worlds and billions of lifes and that was something I could not agree with thus he needed to die. But he was well written and you can clearly see it with the reaction in the community. Zenos itself is split, some like him, some hate him and some just want him gone because they are bored of him.

[Edax]

You're going to maintain, then, that ANY Antagonist whose goals are entirely wrapped up in the Protagonist is poorly written? That is what is expressed by your test, and it is an extremely bold statement. I provided only two examples off the top of my head, but there are many more.

There are, additionally, plenty of examples of Protagonists who are entirely wrapped up in the Antagonist of their story - revenge plots being a common source. The goal of their story or arc is to overcome their Antagonist, with events following that more or less irrelevant. Antagonists can have the motivation for revenge, as well, and the story of how the Protagonist attempts to resist allowing the Antagonist to have that revenge can be just as compelling.

It is an old, old trope with myriad examples, and like all tropes can be executed competently or incompetently. Zenos is an example of it done badly, no doubt, but I still maintain that "The Edax Test" would find plenty of opposition in the world of literary critique!

You are welcome, of course, to have the personal blanket opinion that all such Antagonists are poorly written, but that doesn't even qualify it as a rule of thumb.

I admit, I just made up the test. Perhaps it will stand up the scrutiny or perhaps not. I would be interested in engaging with the literary if I could ever get the chance.

You reference revenge plots, but there have been countless bad movies made about revenge. It's about the cheapest and easiest way to provide motivation and violence. But if the protagonist only exists for revenge and the antagonist only exists to be revenged upon, can we true call that good writing? John Wick was compelling, but it was not necessarily a movie with well written protagonists and antagonists.

Zenos isn't even remotely like Grynwaht in any way, shape or form. This doesn't become false just because they happen to have goals that (when stripped down to barebone basics) look similar. Pretty much everything can end up this way if you're going to compress it enough.

As said, if you want to call an apple a lime because their background = green fruit, then you're not likely to be compelled by much down the road.

If these antagonists are interchangable, then perhaps they are alike, in some way shape or form. Replace Zenos with Grynwaht and the story probably does not change. Replace Zenos with Nidhogg and the story completely changes because Nidhogg has fundamentally different motivations that don't involve the Warrior of Light. Replace Zenos with Thordan VII and the story completely change because the Archbishop had fundamentally different motivations that don't directly involve the Warrior of Light. Replace Zenos with Fordola, ect ect.

[ObsidianFire]

Zenos annoys me for the same reason Grynwaht annoys me. They are obstacles to the main conflict of the story and don't have good character development outside of that.

Grynwaht thinks he and the WoL are the leading conflict going on and gets incredibly frustrated that the WoL has more important things to do like freeing Doma. Zenos thinks he and the WoL are destined fighting buddies for life and can't seem to get it at all that the WoL is really more concerned with freeing Ala Mhigo. And would now be concerned with stopping the Ascians.

As a game player, those are the things in the story I care about. I don't really care about a character who is so obsessed with himself that he can't imagine other people don't view the world the way he does. Which applies to both Grynwaht and Zenos. Zenos is just a more stuborn obstacle then Grynwaht does and didn't have the decency to stay dead after he killed himself. Grynwaht is at least funny and doesn't outstay his welcome.

This is a lot different then Gaius or Regula or even Varis. None of those characters felt annoying the way Zenos did and a lot of that comes down to how all of them at least listen to what the WoL says their goals are. Do they agree with the WoL's goals? No. Do they believe the WoL is telling them the truth of how they think? Yes. Zenos outright dismisses any explanation that makes anyone out to be different then he is, and that makes him a very unlikable character to have on screen.

I'd actually go so far as to say that he might be my most unliked antagonist in the entire game to be honest. Lahabrea and the other Ascians were at least entertaining. Elidibus is fun to watch since he is so easy to play the "what did he conveniently not mention" game with. Emet-Selch is actually likable (to bad he was tempered). Gaius has some of the best thought-out reasoning for doing what he is doing and ends up effectively becoming our ally because of that same reasoning. Regula at least is an honerable enemy. Watching Varis bounce off of Solus and the responsibility of the throne is both hilarious and pitiable.

And like... I hate some of those characters for what they end up doing or planning to do in the game. But none of them cause me to think "oh no... we have to watch a cut-scene about them again... why can't we watch a cut-scene about literally any other character?" whenever they come on screen. But Zenos does, and I think it's a failing on the part of the writers that instead of him being a "love to hate" kind of character (which is what they said he is supposed to be), he has turned into a "hate that he is still in the story" kind of character.

[RopeDrink]

Let me put it a different way:

Zenos --- Grynwaht

Leader --- Underling
Apathetic --- Enthusiastic
Calculated --- Reckless
Emotionless --- Emotive
Self Serving --- Serves Others
Seeks Challenge --- Seeks Vengeance
Elated by Defeat --- Infuriated by it
Intelligent and Imposing --- Dumb, Brutish Thug

The list goes on.

Even in the scene where Zenos and Grynwaht are in the same room, they are shown as total opposites - Zenos callously and emotionlessly tormenting Yotsyu with his cruelty (to display tension) while Grynwaht is constantly emotive about it, before bursting into enthusiasm at the mere tease of a chance to get his vengeance in a completely comical fashion (to lighten the scene). They don't even fight the WoL for the same reasons, let alone act in any way remotely similar. The list goes on and on to a point where one could see them as total opposites. The only unifying factors are that they a) serve the empire (to some degree) and b) are antagonists, but if the one thing required to make this not matter is "their arc involves the WoL", then this conversation will go nowhere other than disagreement-circles, because that is pretty much the fate of 99% of antagonists anyway. It is cutting corners to compress something into a pulp so they look the same to further an argument.

You can compare their goals - at least then you have some modicum of similarity (even if they are very, very far apart from one another) - but let's not pretend like they are the same character or even similar.

[ObsidianFire]

I'm fine with people not seeing it the same way. Nothing wrong with that. But please, dispense with the comparisons. That's cutting corners and compressing a background to make everything look the same just to further an argument.

Um... nearly all literary critique basically runs on comparisons. Either by saying how different two things are or how similar they are. Or how one work does something better then another work does. Without comparisons, there could be no discussion like this.

I would say that Grynwaht is Zenos, in a different window dressing. All the ways that they are different are superficial at best. As it is, this is less a comparison of who they are as characters and more a comparison of what function they serve the plot. Which is being the lesser antagonist of the greater story... at least right now.