FFXIV is just FFTA from the other perspective

[Cilia]

To get more to the point, the theme of XIV thus far has not been one of accepting a harsh reality / truth over comfortable lies. It's mostly been about letting go of the past and moving forward, despite the pain that can bring; every antagonist is driven, on some level, by a past slight they refuse to let go of or forgive, while the main motivation of the protagonists is to create a better future for everyone.

One need look no further than Emet-Selch / Hades to see this; he is the culmination and (to a degree) final boss of the Hydaelyn / Zodiark conflict arc, driven entirely by his desire to recreate the past. He is called out on this by the protagonists at the climax of Shadowbringers and doesn't offer a rebuttal.

[Elladie]

But ironically it's fine for G'raha Tia to do the same thing as the Ascians, right? Fine to wipe out all the current people as if they never existed in order to save the old people from a few hundred years ago, right? The point being made is that we base our moral judgement on the side of the argument that we represent.

If someone can present me with a convincing explanation of how G'raha Tia's actions are different from the Ascians, I'll be happy to accept it. I don't think anyone is disputing the necessity of putting an end to the Ascian machinations - much though I enjoyed the ShB story, I didn't expect us not to kill Hades - but some of us do think the moral hypocrisy is pretty bad. I believe that's the point the OP is making, and that's the point I'm agreeing with him on.

[YianKutku]

But ironically it's fine for G'raha Tia to do the same thing as the Ascians, right? Fine to wipe out all the current people as if they never existed in order to save the old people from a few hundred years ago, right? The point being made is that we base our moral judgement on the side of the argument that we represent.

If someone can present me with a convincing explanation of how G'raha Tia's actions are different from the Ascians, I'll be happy to accept it. I don't think anyone is disputing the necessity of putting an end to the Ascian machinations - much though I enjoyed the ShB story, I didn't expect us not to kill Hades - but some of us do think the moral hypocrisy is pretty bad. I believe that's the point the OP is making, and that's the point I'm agreeing with him on.

G'raha Tia was willing (and planning) to sacrifice himself. Emet-Selch was not.

[Eggpop]

But ironically it's fine for G'raha Tia to do the same thing as the Ascians, right? Fine to wipe out all the current people as if they never existed in order to save the old people from a few hundred years ago, right? The point being made is that we base our moral judgement on the side of the argument that we represent.

If someone can present me with a convincing explanation of how G'raha Tia's actions are different from the Ascians, I'll be happy to accept it. I don't think anyone is disputing the necessity of putting an end to the Ascian machinations - much though I enjoyed the ShB story, I didn't expect us not to kill Hades - but some of us do think the moral hypocrisy is pretty bad. I believe that's the point the OP is making, and that's the point I'm agreeing with him on.

The Ascians were killing people of 14 worlds unwilling to die. G'raha Tia was carrying out the wishes of people in one world that were willing to sacrifice their existence for a future they'll never see. It was meant to pararell the Ancients that sacrificed their aether to summon Zodiark, that yes, even the shattered people were willing to save their world in contrast to Emet's low opinion on them.

Aka, post 8th calamity people spent generations turning a theory that will literally wipe out their lives into reality, and had G'raha Tia carry it out because he was the only one that can. G'raha Tia was awoken after the people decided to carry out this plan. He acknowledges the immense sacrifices it carries. The Ascians doesn't think of the lives lost on the same level.

[Elladie]

The Ascians were killing people of 14 worlds unwilling to die. G'raha Tia was carrying out the wishes of people in one world that were willing to sacrifice their existence for a future they'll never see. It was meant to pararell the Ancients that sacrificed their aether to summon Zodiark, that yes, even the shattered people were willing to save their world in contrast to Emet's low opinion on them.

Aka, post 8th calamity people spent generations turning a theory that will literally wipe out their lives into reality, and had G'raha Tia carry it out because he was the only one that can. G'raha Tia was awoken after the people decided to carry out this plan. He acknowledges the immense sacrifices it carries. The Ascians doesn't think of the lives lost on the same level.

In fact this is not true. If you read the OMG short story, it's made very clear that large numbers of people did NOT support G'raha Tia and the Ironworks. In fact they went so far as to attack the Ironworks to try to prevent it happening.

Yes, it's true we don't know that the other timeline was wiped out. But that is the consequence that G'raha Tia expected. He thought he would die and was very surprised he didn't. He thought it was a noble sacrifice he was making, but a lot of the people who thought he was dooming them to stop existing absolutely did not agree. Life was a big struggle for them, but they still wanted to live.

[Eggpop]

The story also said that, while a vast majority left Ironworks due to the implication of Cid's plan, they were also met with unanimous support from those who remained, and were able to recruit survivors of many different species when they presented their plan as a way to save WoL. Obviously, not everyone was ok with sacrificing their future and their children's future for the sake of saving the world, but enough did since this plan was actually kept alive for generations until its success. Putting morality and the sheer difference in causality aside, you can't equate the genocide of 7 doomed worlds who didn't even know what their sacrifices were meant for, and a portion of people from 1 world who knew the consequences and still carried out their plan to change the past.

The story never made G'raha Tia and Ironwork's plan 'ok'. They made a clear implication of its consequences. I don't find it ok either. But the key difference is that Ironwork's sacrifice lean towards the preservation of the remaining worlds, while the Ascians will eventually wipe them all out, including the future native lives on the Source. How are these two the same?