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

[Jaywalker]

-----

Honestly the whole thread has gotten too dramatic. 100% why I stopped posting in it overall. Think your point on criticism and objectivity versus subjectivity is very interesting and important though, so making one exception.

Far as I've seen, at best storytelling is semi-objective/semi-subjective. Certain pieces are measurable and can be discussed as facts (ex. grammar or certain cause/effect chains backed up with concrete evidence) but these are both extremely simple premises and need to be qualified by the nature of the work with what it aims to accomplish.

For instance, if someone is writing a story in 100% perfect grammar down to dialogue, it might actually come across as less realistic and immersive than a story where characters occasionally use slang and improper grammar. This is because real people tend not to use perfect grammar all the time.

When people argue storytelling is 100% subjective, it can be used as an attempt to shield from criticism and excuse stagnation as a creator. It also sets up a framework where people get bitter that a masterpiece succeeded while something amateur failed, arguing there is no difference because it's all just based on subjective feelings.

However. The idea that fiction is completely objective is ridiculous and requires the denial that every single person on this planet has biases and prejudices keeping them from true objectivity. Especially when it comes to crafts that are shaped by subjective human beings in the first place, and that people like to push the boundaries of what can be done successfully. Gotta simplify way too much to apply the same rules to every single story.

There's a middle ground for this stuff. The more extreme and absolute arguments get, the more they tend to lose sight of relevant information and oversimplify imo. No doubt there will be people who disagree.

Unrelated, I think LineageRazor made a point on the Bechdel Test being used as a way to simply see how often two women talking about something other than a man happens, without judgment attached. Hamlet versus Hamlette frequency iirc. Since I was so vocal before about being against the Bechdel Test with how it's usually employed, I just want to say that was a super solid argument and did change my mind on there being no good use.

[LineageRazor]

There's nothing objectively bad about the writing here. It is entirely subjective. We've known for a long time that Zenos was going to have a confrontation of some kind in Garlemald. His periodic cameos throughout SB showed him making his way there. Some theorized that he'd seek out the WoL, some theorized that he'd seek out his old body. The latter turned out to be correct. The foreshadowing was there, and the story followed through. That's clean writing.

What would happen at that confrontation was up in the air. Zenos literally cutting short his father's plans was not on many folks' radar, but the fact that it was unexpected does not make it bad. Literature has many examples of characters with complicated plans and motivations that end abruptly and without resolution - in fact, this very game has already had another great example with Nanamo's assassination. Most players thought it was an amazing and interesting story development, and had SE followed through, the story Ul'dah's escalating unrest in the face of their lost champion could have been very intense. Many were disappointed when SE basically said "Just kidding, LOL" later on - now THAT, I might call bad writing - but the "shocking swerve" of Nanamo's ambitions suddenly being derailed was not, itself, bad.

The story of "How Garlemald Falls Apart With or Without Zenos At the Helm" could turn out to be just as engaging as the story of "How Varis Leads the World to Ruin With a Half-Baked Plan to Beat the Ascians At Their Own Game". We won't know until it is written - but the fact that Varis's plans came to a sudden, violent end is not an example of objectively bad storytelling. (Indeed, if it can even be argued that "objectively bad storytelling" is not an inherently contradictory phrase.)

[Edax]

What would happen at that confrontation was up in the air. Zenos literally cutting short his father's plans was not on many folks' radar, but the fact that it was unexpected does not make it bad. Literature has many examples of characters with complicated plans and motivations that end abruptly and without resolution - in fact, this very game has already had another great example with Nanamo's assassination. Most players thought it was an amazing and interesting story development, and had SE followed through, the story Ul'dah's escalating unrest in the face of their lost champion could have been very intense. Many were disappointed when SE basically said "Just kidding, LOL" later on - now THAT, I might call bad writing - but the "shocking swerve" of Nanamo's ambitions suddenly being derailed was not, itself, bad.

I suppose the difference here is that Nanamo's ambitions were not related to the main story. Abdicating the throne and giving Ul'dah to people really had nothing to do with the Light/Dark conflict, so it was merely a plot tangent that was getting derailed. Varis' plan was the Rejoining, so it was central to the main story, derailing that storyline has different consequences to the story structure. I might have even have been able to say the end of 5.0 was the end of the main storyline if not for the Elidibus on the moon plotting to keep that storyline going. So the main storyline running from way back to 2.0 has not yet reached it's destination when it was derailed by Zenos.

The story of "How Garlemald Falls Apart With or Without Zenos At the Helm" could be good, but getting to this story was not clean writing.

As much as I love the Heavensward story, even that was derailment of the main story. Light/Dark stopped being a thing and the Ascians turned into extras hanging out in the background. The Zenos story might be good when judged as a self-contained story, but it is nonetheless going to be part of the MSQ that's been running since 2.0. What will make it difficult to judge Zeno's story like a separate episode is that he was already the antagonist from Stormblood.

[QT_Melon]

To be fair, I don't think that's valid about Nanamo since we didn't really even know about the LIGHT and DARK being the main conflict till much later - I mean as the REAL story. It could have been about Uldah and it succumbing to Garlean influence for all we knew back then. Our main focus was the dragonsong war. All the hydaelyn stuff was dripped in the background, and the Ascians were still Kingdom Hearts rejects that spoke mysteriously.

[Cilia]

There is no one thing the game's narrative is supposed to be about, and although the Ascians are the villains of the main myth arc so far, they often act through proxies. Naturally, not every antagonist is going to be aligned with their goals; in fact the only non-Ascian antagonist interested in aiding them was Varis (albeit for his own agenda).

Each expansion has its own story arc, with the Zodiark / Hydaelyn myth arc connecting them all together. Just because the antagonist of one story arc isn't connected to or concerned with the myth arc doesn't mean they're poorly written; Nidhogg was completely apart from the Zodiark / Hydaelyn myth arc, but that doesn't mean he was poorly written.

Zenos serves primarily as the PC's foil: a character that is the complete opposite yet equal to them. The PC possesses a natural Echo and uses it to slay primals, while Zenos' is artificial and is used to merge with primals. The PC uses their immense power to end conflicts, while Zenos uses his political clout to start them. The PC masters multiple disciplines, while Zenos sits at the pinnacle of just one. Some measure of the PC's strength comes from their eightfold (ninefold after Shadowbringers) rejoined soul, while Zenos is (to the best of our knowledge) just freakishly powerful. The PC is a normal person who blew into a city-state with nothing but the clothes on their back and a ruddy weapon in their hand, while Zenos was born into utmost privilege and collects only the finest armaments.

Yet, both stand at the center of world-shaking events and cross swords to shape the future.

If the PC chooses to accept Zenos after his rant in the Royal Menagerie, however, he essentially becomes their shadow: all of the dark, negative things about themselves they won't (or can't) admit. In simplest terms, it becomes an admission that you're just using the noble causes of the Eorzeans (etc.) as an excuse to chase a combat high, just like Zenos does with the Empire. (One can argue that this isn't true of their PC's characterization, but remember that PCs are just projections of the player's will on the game world...)

Something to remember: XIV has a continuous, ongoing narrative. Plot hooks for future events may be set up years in advance, as was the case with the Warriors of Darkness and the Flood of Light - they were first hinted at back in the ending of 3.0 and had a little action in 3.1 and 3.4, but didn't really take center stage until 5.0. While Zenos was the main antagonist of the Stormblood arc (which itself had nothing to do with the myth arc beyond proxies), surviving despite his best efforts means he can just return to antagonize us again, and may or may not play into story themes moving forward. There's nothing poorly written about that, either - it was established back in 2.2 that the Echo can be used to cheat death.

It's perfectly understandable to not like Zenos and/or be uninterested in the themes behind his character, but that doesn't mean he's poorly written (I found Heavensward's themes pretty trite, even if the writing was still good). Just because he has no stake in the myth arc doesn't mean Zenos is poorly written either (Yotsuyu has no stake in the myth arc, but I hold her to be one of the best written antagonists in the game thus far for her thought-provoking actions in 4.3). Not everyone is going to like him, and that's fine, but trying to tout personal taste in antagonists as an objective measure of writing quality is (again) just self-aggrandizement. (Or: Who gave anyone authority to determine what objectively constitutes quality writing?)

[Ayuhra]

My only hope is Zenos is fleshed out a bit. I don't dislike him as a plot device but I, like a few others it seems, am not super into him as a character.

It will be somewhat jarring, for example, swapping to Zenos from Emet-Selch who is actually very well rounded and interesting as a character.

Zenos has time for more character building.

[Edax]

(Who gave anyone authority to determine what objectively constitutes quality writing?)

Anyone willing to discuss the quality of a work has the authority using facts. There's no one here that can take that authority away.

Just because he has no stake in the myth arc doesn't mean Zenos is poorly written either (Yotsuyu has no stake in the myth arc, but I hold her to be one of the best written antagonists in the game thus far for her thought-provoking actions in 4.3).

No one granted you authority to say that Yotsuyu was "best written" because nobody needed to grant you authority. We're all allowed to discuss quality, it's not all about your personal tastes.

To be fair, I don't think that's valid about Nanamo since we didn't really even know about the LIGHT and DARK being the main conflict till much later - I mean as the REAL story. It could have been about Uldah and it succumbing to Garlean influence for all we knew back then. Our main focus was the dragonsong war. All the hydaelyn stuff was dripped in the background, and the Ascians were still Kingdom Hearts rejects that spoke mysteriously.

Amusingly, I did refer to the Ascians as Kingdom Hearts rejects too back in AAR, but Lahabrea does give away his evil plans long before Nanamo drinks away at the end of the AAR filler.

[QT_Melon]

Oh I know we were aware of Ascians before the end of ARR because we're beaten over the head with the MSQ (we can't skip cutscenes). I'm saying that however, the amount we're given didn't seem to really come to pay off UNTIL Shadowbringers or at least till the end of Stormblood. And given Elidibus and changing dialog. Elidibus actually was discussing BALANCE of Dark and Light. Hydaelyn's account of the world is a bit different than revealed storyline in Shadowbringers. So because of that slow drip of story the idea that Nanamo's storyline wasn't in direct relation to the main one was something we figure out only AFTER the fact. It could have been but we just didn't know at the time since there is a lot of stories to our world to begin with.

The current storyline is something of the "origin story" arc. Kind of like JoJo's Bizarre Adventures just not told in chronological order - we started off in FFXIV's Stardust Crusaders and just started learning about the Battle Tendency arc and possibly Phantom Blood

[Edax]

Oh I know we were aware of Ascians before the end of ARR because we're beaten over the head with the MSQ (we can't skip cutscenes). I'm saying that however, the amount we're given didn't seem to really come to pay off UNTIL Shadowbringers or at least till the end of Stormblood. And given Elidibus and changing dialog. Elidibus actually was discussing BALANCE of Dark and Light. Hydaelyn's account of the world is a bit different than revealed storyline in Shadowbringers. So because of that slow drip of story the idea that Nanamo's storyline wasn't in direct relation to the main one was something we figure out only AFTER the fact. It could have been but we just didn't know at the time since there is a lot of stories to our world to begin with.

The current storyline is something of the "origin story" arc. Kind of like JoJo's Bizarre Adventures just not told in chronological order - we started off in FFXIV's Stardust Crusaders and just started learning about the Battle Tendency arc and possibly Phantom Blood

I guess I can see your point given just how much pointless filler was stuffed into the AAR MSQ. I kind of struggle to remember what happened in between Pretorium and the start of Heavensward. We meet a bunch of characters that don't do anything, Alphinaud funds a paramilitary force, Minfilia get's kidnapped by Ascians, a Scion is introduced and then killed off, Lady Iceheart is a problem, something about a Garlean spy, Tataru makes us go make tea and Nanamo wants to abdicate. It is a hot mess.

I do agree that the Ascians were underdeveloped until Shadowbringers. I do however find it disappointing that once the Ascians were developed, the story focus immediately moved away from them. Zenos already had an entire expansion to be developed but instead the Ascians ended up more development in a single expansion with Emet getting an entire city made just for his character development. Now that I finally understood the Ascians, I was left wanting to know more. This is subjective but the only thing I want to know about Zenos is how to permanently remove him from the story.

[QT_Melon]

Did it move away from them? I mean it just seems another part of the patch cycle. Set up a future event after the current one may be done. We still don't know EXACTLY what direction this will go? Keep in mind in an interview with Yoshi P - it was mentioned that we're gonna be hitting certain turmoil (as it was described in interview) for patches following.

What exactly is the turmoil? Is it really Zenos, Elidibus? Our eldest Primals? I mean we know it may involve all of them or some of them. While I get that Zenos will be it going forward, we don't know exactly how so I'm going to be "waiting and seeing" before passing judgement.

Hell I thought the Ascians weren't that great till recently.