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

[kidalutz]

This is the problem I have with Zenos. As far as villains go especially with the Litany of Square-Enix Villains He's The most One Dimensional Villain that they've created. What makes an Antagonist memorable isn't oh my god their powers are cool it's their motivations their quirks and mannerisms what makes them tick what compels them outside of the Protagonist Zenos has nothing else that compels them outside of the protagonist, rule an empire nope they want to fight the protagonist , yeah they mentioned merging with Hydaelyn or Zodiark but for no other purpose than challenging the Protagonist to another fight. They cannot exist without the Protagonist which makes them little more than a rather obsessed stalker that just happens to have some cool powers and is stupidly powerful. That is NOT A MAIN VILLAIN these are the behaviors of a Second Tier Antagonist the Right hand of an Antagonist.

Let us look at some of the absolute best Main Enemies SE has made in the past. Kefka: Kefka was driven , scheming , and brilliant, but has such a wild persona that even his own supposed master failed to realize the full extent of his hate and schemes that were kept behind that Jesters Smile. He destroyed the world in his quest to become God and he succeeded the ONLY villain to succeed in his plan to ruin the world rule it and become a living Deity. What made him memorable? What made him such a villain that he had every right to be a main villain? It wasn't just that he succeeded it was that every single thing about him was memorable including his laugh. Zenos doesnt have anything memorable about him aside from a body count Even his introduction didnt stand out. Kefka stood out the moment he showed up in the Desert, and when he poisoned domas water supply killing his men and the domans, when he killed ghestal with the warring triad, when he killed general Leo, when he was finally confronted all of it.Zenos I had honestly forgotten shortly after he killed himself after Shinryu. and by the time the Lakshmi fight in return of the bull he wasn't even a distant memory. I was actually disappointed when he got the Lazarus treatment as far as I was concerned his story was done and he was the major reason for myself at least that the Main Story of Stormblood was boring While the MSQ after the main story was far more interesting until he showed up again. To be completely honest once he's beaten again I'm not going to remember him at all aside from going well that happened. Whats next?

Sephiroth: Again a memorable villain yes he killed people but it wasn't just the deaths that made him memorable. It was everything he discovered his entire existence was a lie, everything that he fought for and believed in was torn form him in an instant and it made him snap he hated it he hated the lies he decided since he had been used to murder for his creators that he would destroy it all again a broken mind like Kefka before ,but Sephiroth's hate was pure he wanted a world just for him and his mother where he wouldn't be used again. Zenos doesnt even have this in his motivations he just likes to kill and fight like a Sociopath it's boring not even remotely dynamic or exciting it doesn't invoke thought or rationale.Like Sephiroth, Zenos has long flowing hair, a penchant for swords, a callous nature , and is reasonably attractive on the outside. However, he doesn't have the same Presence Sephiroth displayed during the story and again albiet for a short while in Advent Children.

Lezard Valeth: The guy that had an obsession with the protagonist of the first game series valkyrie profile but he was so much more than an obsessed stalker he befriended people traveled with them saved their lives all while waiting for the opportunity to strike and empower himself enough to make his obsession his. Everything about him oozed confidence and the Psychosis rarely if ever manifested outwardly though we always seen it simmering on the surface.only occasionally would it break out and in interesting ways. such as pondering if he could become something else might he not also become a god or getting upset at the physical limitations of his body and destroying it so he could continue his experiments unhindered. Zenos cant even do that right he's just flatly written not an interesting character no quirks personality nothing that makes him stand out as anything more than hey theres that guy we gotta kill because.. well look at him.

[Gaethan_Tessula]

It's possible to like Zenos and antagonists like him, while still admitting that they aren't suited to run the show.

I like Azrael in Blazblue. In a game that, much like FF14, is full of major antagonists with plans within plans (in Blazblue often involving contrived technomagibabble), the shredded guy who bulldozes through the plot, loves fighting, and can punch people REALLY HARD is somewhat refreshing. Since it's a fighting game, he's playable and hella fun (big, meaty, plus on block normals). Yet I am quite glad that he never once sat in the main antagonist seat. Terumi, Nine, Izanami et al. were far more suited to the task, even in the trainwreck that is Blazblue's story.

[RopeDrink]

Since it's a fighting game, he's playable and hella fun (big, meaty, plus on block normals). Yet I am quite glad that he never once sat in the main antagonist seat. Terumi, Nine, Izanami et al. were far more suited to the task, even in the trainwreck that is Blazblue's story.

This is about as helpful as me counter-claiming that characters such as Balrog in Street Fighter (despite being a no-story train-wreck itself) can be endearing to some people even though his entire story is "Imma punch you really hard for mah fight money coz I'm totally not a Mike Tyson inspired character". You don't have to be complex and/or capable of sitting in the driver seat to appeal, which leads into...

It's possible to like Zenos and antagonists like him, while still admitting that they aren't suited to run the show.

Entirely assumption, for now. I doubt he will be the main villain. If you ask me, it'll be more about characters in the background capitalizing on the results of Zenos' bonkers antics, starting with Garlemald in utter chaos, with Mr.WhiteRobe on his little moon-office twirling his moustache as things get crazier. Plenty of room for other characters to be introduced and shine as well now that the Ascians are almost extinct and prominent Empire characters are either gone or in trouble.

I have already made numerous comparisons between Grynwhat and Zenos. Grynwaht is that Garlean antagonist that is alike to Zenos

Which was already debunked. They are nothing alike whatsoever.

I would say it's inspiring that people would want better written villians in their video games.

Do not mistake my critique of the reasoning people use as some sort of affront against better-written villains. I've liked the humble majority of villains in FFXIV, actually. Even if you restrict it to the empire alone - Gaius, Varis, Nero, Darnus, Regula, heck, even schmaltzy characters like Livia could resonate with people on some level. Then there's Zenos, who is refreshingly different from every single one of them by a country mile.

Just because the antagonist's game function is little more then bullet sponges doesn't mean they should have to have the motivations of a sponge.

And we're back to this apparent need for a character to have fleshed motivations or goals. We've had plenty of those and will continue to get them on tap for as long as the game goes on. I'm quite welcoming of the occasional character who goes against the norm rather than follows the same old assessments. There is no shortage of complex characters. We've had a fair share of twisty-turning villains, or others that are straightforward but work through (or are defined by) complex background shenanigans. Zenos is the first (main) villain to bypass all that at the expense of everyone around him, even his own so-called allies. Practically the entire roster of empire-related villains have oft been hyper-patriotic and either borderline racist or (insert Garlemald v Eorzea thought-train here that conveniently allows us to quickly build a natural dislike for them as the 'baddie faction'), usually with a slice of Ascian influence on the side. Zenos doesn't apply there either, because he's confined to his own bubble and couldn't give a damn for their way of thinking. For a game so centric on Light vs Dark 80% of the time, I'm more than happy to have at least one villain who could make things go either way out of sheer apathetic arrogance rather than yet another hair-brained scheme backed by some obnoxious monologue about how powerful X is or how unstoppable Y is until they're laying broken at your feet and everyone goes home for tea. Again.

Having said that, I'll repeat my earlier comment - I doubt Zenos will be the front-runner. He'll be the seed sower and the thorn in the side, but bigger fish to fry will loom above it. As much as I like Zenos, there's no reason to believe they'd go from someone like Emet to Zenos, but they most definitely can utilize him much the same way as they did Vauthry as the door-man under the guise of being a big player.

[Edax]

Which was already debunked. They are nothing alike whatsoever.

I'm afraid we're just going to have to agree to disagree there.

There is no shortage of complex characters.

I'm afraid we're just going to have to agree to disagree there.

by some obnoxious monologue about how powerful X is or how unstoppable Y is until they're laying broken at your feet and everyone goes home for tea.

I didn't care for Zeno's obnoxious monologues displaying how pointless he was to the story. If he's not going to care, why should we?
At least when previous antagonists talked, they spoke words that had value. What was there ever to take away from Zenos when he opened his mouth?
That's he's bored? That's he's strong? That he only cares about himself and nothing else? That this doesn't matter?
It's so obnoxious, I wish Zenos cut his tongue instead of his throat.

[Cilia]

Zenos' character is meant to be a shadow to the Warrior of [Light / Darkness]. His narrative purpose is not to advance the overall plot or exposit things about the world's mythos, but to serve as a contrast to the Warrior of [Light / Darkness] and show what they could become if they let battle lust override their concern for the common good.

Being unconcerned with the mythos of the world does not make Zenos a badly written antagonist.

[Edax]

Zenos' character is meant to be a shadow to the Warrior of [Light / Darkness]. His narrative purpose is not to advance the overall plot or exposit things about the world's mythos, but to serve as a contrast to the Warrior of [Light / Darkness] and show what they could become if they let battle lust override their concern for the common good.

Being unconcerned with the mythos of the world does not make Zenos a badly written antagonist.

Even if the Warrior of Light gave into battle lust, he/she would still be far far far far more selfless the Zenos. Which means they would still be completely different. And if the Warrior of Light is a healer, then having battle lust as a healer would still be a good thing would it not? He/she would be the ultimate selfless warrior saving lives if they were a battle lusting White Mage. So what would it even say if the Warrior of Light White Mage gave into battle lust and still ended up being completely different then Zenos? If Zenos is a shadow, he's not a very good one. Is he only a shadow to Samurai only because he wields a katana?

[Cilia]

Even if the Warrior of Light gave into battle lust, he/she would still be far far far far more selfless the Zenos. Which means they would still be completely different. And if the Warrior of Light is a healer, then having battle lust as a healer would still be a good thing would it not? He/she would be the ultimate selfless warrior saving lives if they were a battle lusting White Mage. So what would it even say if the Warrior of Light White Mage gave into battle lust and still ended up being completely different then Zenos? If Zenos is a shadow, he's not a very good one. Is he only a shadow to Samurai only because he wields a katana?

I must reiterate - if they let battle lust override their concern for the common good. If they decided that nothing mattered except for getting good fights, consequences (positive or negative) be damned.

As for healers? Well, you brought up Kenpachi Zaraki a while ago, so you have some familiarity with Bleach. Did you just watch the anime, or did you read the manga to the end? It has the perfect example of why combat healers aren't necessarily purely benevolent. It details that Retsu Unohana, the captain of the medic division, was the first Kenpachi (Zaraki taking it up as a title later on), and her zanpaku-to heals people so she can keep fighting them.

Think about what a healer does - they stand back and watch as someone else gets cut, stabbed, shot, set on fire, electrocuted, etc. and they heal them so it can continue (maybe not forever, but there will be later battles to do this all over again). What does that say about them, really?

There is the potential for perverse desire, even in offering succor to those in need.

[Edax]

Think about what a healer does - they stand back and watch as someone else gets cut, stabbed, shot, set on fire, electrocuted, etc. and they heal them so it can continue (maybe not forever, but there will be later battles to do this all over again). What does that say about them, really?

(I just watched the anime)

Well if we're talking about combat medics, then they're heroes, no matter how many battles then charge in to. Even if it's a perverse desire, it's not like Zenos because that medic is endangering themselves to save lives. It remains a fundamental opposite to Zenos selfish desires. Just as a philanthropist might give money to the needy for the sake of self gratification, it still remains a selfless act.

You say Zenos serves "as a contrast to the Warrior of [Light / Darkness] and show what they could become if they let battle lust override their concern for the common good." But what character wouldn't this apply to? If Estinien gave into battle lust over the common good, would he also become Zenos? If Yugiri Mistwalker gave into battle lust over the common good, would she become Zenos? If Alphinaud gave into battle lust over the common good, would he become Zenos? If Taruru Taruru gave into battle lust over the common good, would she become Zenos? The problem here is that Zenos has no connection to the Warrior of Light so there's nothing to link him as being the shadow/reflection of the WoL.

[Elladie]

The point of "The Bechdel Test" is to point out a specific problem: the number of times two women are talking about men in a way that doesn't have to do with romance happens far, far less in fictional works (especially film) then all the times they do talk about men in the context of romance. If you have women talking about men in ways that has nothing to do with romance... then great! That is a non-stereotypical way for women to talk about men! But nine times out of ten, romance is the context we see women discussing men in or worse, women never talk to each other without men around in the first place. The point is less about what the answer is and more how] the question is answered.

Edax's "Antagonist" Text does much the same thing. It honestly isn't just about if the Antagonist can progress their plans if they destroy the Protagonist (although if they can't, that is a really huge issue right off the bat). It has a lot to do with why the Antagonist can or cannot progress their plans. Zenos just happens to have bad or unsatisfactory answers and reasoning for the entire question while other villains in FFXIV don't.

BTW, can I borrow that question in other forums Edax? It's a great one to ask about a lot of unsatisfactory villains to see how it is answered and why they are so unsatisfactory...

I am pretty sure Hamlet would fail the Bechdel test. So would Macbeth. So would Othello. Where as Sex in the City would pass it, pretty sure they all talk about their careers etc at some length. So we can clearly see that some arbitrary rule ( set up to construe a conclusion that's motivated by a narrow political agenda) certainly isn't universally applicable when making value judgements. I mean if you're going to dismiss Hamlet just because Gertrude and Ophelia dont talk about anything but him when they talk, I think you missed the point of the play.

It's a crude tool that ignores the many and varied themes and conclusions that Shakespeare was looking for. As are most 'rules' of this ilk that use sweeping statements to make even more sweeping generalisations about the specific story. In the end these just come down to our personal likes and dislikes. I don't find Zenos boring, but he is no Emet-Selch. However the idea of having someone at the helm who has no complicated agenda, someone who is a complete wildcard, someone who may do ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING next because it happens to appeal to him suddenly, I really don't get how that's boring

[TankHunter678]

-snip-

One person's "selfless act" is another person's torture. A person being kept alive to be sliced apart only to be healed so they can be sliced apart some more is neither selfless or benevolent. Only when directed towards the common good does it become possible to be identified as such. When directed towards personal pleasures it ceases to be selfless and instead becomes malevolent. A healer charging into a battle to see how much blood they can see shed by the people they keep alive is saving no one, they are breaking people for their own amusement. Even they themselves are no exception from their twisted desire.

A philanthropist giving money to someone can be seen by some as a selfless act, but you have to take into account who is receiving that money and what they do with it. A philanthropist giving money to a somnus addict is actively helping destroy a life quite likely for their own amusement. Not so selfless anymore. Just look at how "selfless" Teleji Adeleji was.

For any character if the only thing that matters is a good fight then they will become like Zenos. Even worse if they have the power to prolong that good fight for as long as possible. Give Zenos the power of healing magic and he would keep us alive endlessly for the sake of fighting an endless good fight. He only feels alive when in that good fight. The common good ceases to be a concern in the face of personal pleasures. Then the problem becomes the source of that rush. This is why Zenos is a contrast/shadow to the WoL/D because the only thing that can challenge him and the only thing that can challenge us are entities on the level of gods and ancient masters of martial arts. If we only cared about a good fight like Zenos we would be seeking those things that give us the rush and the feeling of being alive. Some could try to construe us fighting primals as "selfless" until it becomes a case of us actively pushing Beast Tribes to summon more primals so we can have our good fight and satiate our desire to feel alive.