Moral Inconsistency Question: the Echo (Spoilers within)

[Altanas]

I thought perhaps the writers had given a nod that it was unacceptable. The hint is in the quest title and subject matter of the quest, revolving around a crime.

The quest involves people leaving items in an open area under the gaze of the wood for all to see. The quest giver remarks how do you know a thief (read:criminal) when you see one.

The bandits in the quest are clearly organised in their activity and intend to steal in order to give to the poor. That is not "Disorganised". Raya-O-Senna remarks they are not reckless or wicked so as to commit grave sins against the Tweleveswood. The bandits in the quest got their come uppance for the criminal aspect of their activities however (they got their asses handed to them).

So who are the criminals the quest log is on about? And what was disorganised? Who is reckless and who is wicked?

The player finds Raya and I would say recklessly uses the Echo. This is the "disorganised" aspect. It may also be viewed as wicked as Raya did not consent and it is akin to rape. This would be the criminal aspect. It links to the quest giver who remarked how would you know a criminal when you see one - you can't, it could be anyone. It also links to the concept of leaving items under the gaze of the wood for all to see, as the "rape" is done in the open.

The writers cover up any Echo Loopholes by putting in the Journal summary for that quest that "The power of the Echo suddenly seizes you" so it looks like the player really has no option to use the echo.

However Raya does say she will not forget this intrusion, and so, we the player, have not had our come uppance... yet (but to complete the theme raised by this quest, it is crucial that the player has their come uppance eventually - it is crucial for two reasons, first it must mirror what happened to the bandits, second because we just effectively raped someone)

I would say therefore we the players do not have a moral choice to make, we cannot control the Echo, it happens by itself. However, that means we in turn are viewed as criminals, despicable and hated by those who dont walk the path of the twelve.

As an aside, Raya-O-Senna also says she has been led down a wrong path. While that doesnt seem to add to the subject at hand, it seems a coincidence the words wrong and path are used together, when we know of the distinct concepts of the echo and path of the twelve.

[Fensfield]

<Above>

Okay.. that is an awesome set of ideas o.o

I'd be tempted to call it a bit far fetched but you raise really, really good points and I do want to believe you, and it's a good enough argument as to make me think it's possible.

My only counterpoint, is the fact that this is an optional quest, not a mainline one. Does that mean there's an entire optional plot thread coming up..? That'd be wonderful, but it does strike me as a little curious that the developers would do that in content that's doomed to be removed with v2.0. If anything, it's the optional nature of the quest that lends the most reason for me to worry that the incident won't be followed up.

... Although that does lead me to the somewhat interesting thought that, like all temporary content, it'll leave us with Lodestone history entries. It would be a bit of a laugh if people that unlocked that particular thread got stuck with an 'Abused the Echo' entry for the rest of their careers in game >.> .. Although that is never going to happen, obviously.

[Jinrya-Geki]

Who is Raya-o-senna?

Is this Gridania's Grand Company missions?

[Fensfield]

Who is Raya-o-senna?

Is this Gridania's Grand Company missions?

Raya-O-Senna is a padjal; one of Kan-E-Senna(the Gridanian company leader)'s younger siblings.

And, yes, it is.. sort of. 'Disorganized Crime' is one of the sidequests telling how the Order of the Twin Adder was restored, although it isn't actually a quest for the order. 'Fade to White' is one of the original main scenario quests for the Waking Sands.

[Eldaena]

I would say therefore we the players do not have a moral choice to make, we cannot control the Echo, it happens by itself. However, that means we in turn are viewed as criminals, despicable and hated by those who dont walk the path of the twelve.

This was what I was going to say. I almost feel like we don't have control over the echo, from the first point of it's introduction. I'm also not sure if anyone else notices this, but in the opening movie for the game I'm pretty sure the character uses the echo as well, but he didn't have control over it either. It just kind of happens, and you can interact with the past. What I think this ties to is adventurers with the power of the echo (even though it mentions there being other possible powers as well) are also linked by some kind of event which allowed them to gain that power. What that event is and it's meaning though are still pretty obscure. (Though particularly in the beginning for all players we see that shining light with rays coming down, which looks familiar to the opening movie where we see the "dragon" <maybe Bahamut> fighting with the Garlean ship, leading to an explosion with what appear to be primals shooting out across the land.) For all we know, we could be under the control of a higher power (primals or deities perhaps) when the echo is being used, and we are actually some kind of puppet or medium. Or we are being forced into the echo situation (because the influence wants something to be changed), but our characters decide what to do with that once the echo has lead them to the past, etc.

[Fensfield]

I would say therefore we the players do not have a moral choice to make, we cannot control the Echo, it happens by itself. However, that means we in turn are viewed as criminals, despicable and hated by those who dont walk the path of the twelve.

This was what I was going to say. I almost feel like we don't have control over the echo, from the first point of it's introduction.

That's a thought.. I hadn't considered that vision in the introduction might be the Echo or something similar, but now that you mention, that's pretty likely, isn't it? That being said.. I have to say, I'm not completely sure it's true that we don't have control over the Echo and when it triggers.

I see where you pick up that impression - during the first part of the main scenario, our characters are reflexively Echo'ing people all over the place without even realising they're doing it (hell, it's even made hard for the player to realise except with hindsight).

However, invariably and whichever starting line you follow, just before the city storylines unite into the main scenario under the Waking Sands, our characters go through an awakening event that leads to their being advised to go to the Path of the Twelve and meet with Minfilia. This is where we start getting asked if we want to use the Echo on characters, and the occurrences from this point on do suggest that the Awakening turned the Echo into a wilful action on our characters' part.

But, well, yes, all instances of the Echo prior to the Waking Sands are definitely out of our characters' control, your right about that. And I certainly agree that were the Echo to go through a minor retcon as something completely out of our control (or, hell, if I'm just plain wrong and your theories are right) that would solve a lot of the issues lead me to raise this topic in the first place. .. Shame though it'd be and dislike doing that sort of thing though I may. -.-

[Urthdigger]

Just to kind of play the other side of this. . .

Couldn't you consider rape one of the biggest invasions of privacy? I mean, most people see it as an act of violence and power, but you could also look at it as a violation of..well yourself. I think I would certainly be violated in that scenario.

This is oretty interesting though. I would love to see the morality of using the Echo come up later on in the story in some aspect.

Saying an invasion of privacy is akin to rape is like saying that hitting someone is akin to murder. Yes, rape is a grave invasion of privacy, but that doesn't mean that this invasion of privacy, using the echo, is as heinous as rape. I view it more along the lines of wiretapping someone's phone or going through their mail: Disrespectful and most certainly illegal, but not something that would utterly traumatize someone like rape does.

[Fensfield]

Saying an invasion of privacy is akin to rape is like saying that hitting someone is akin to murder. Yes, rape is a grave invasion of privacy, but that doesn't mean that this invasion of privacy, using the echo, is as heinous as rape. I view it more along the lines of wiretapping someone's phone or going through their mail: Disrespectful and most certainly illegal, but not something that would utterly traumatize someone like rape does.

You force your way into someone's brain (soul even, if the descriptions are to be believed) and impose yourself on their memories. You aren't just watching their memories; using the Echo puts you in that memory in order for you to experience it, and thus changes the memory invaded to fit the actions of the character using the Echo. Even just as an observer, the memory is still changed if the Echo'd person sees or hears you - that's how some are able to tell it's being used on them; they remember noticing the Echo'er at the time and, if they know about the Echo, make the logical jump needed to guess what's going on.

Obviously I'm not equating all instances of using the Echo to rape, even without a person's explicit consent. There would be degrees of severity dependent on whether the user was as discrete as possible, whether it was used with malevolent intent, or indeed whether their actions within the memory itself were malevolent.

The nature of the memory invaded would make a difference as well. Poor Raya-O' for instance - our characters turned what must have been a memory of a potent (and likely rare, if suggestions about Kan-E's wandering habits are true) moment with her elder sister into a memory of discovering someone invading their privacy. I can't imagine a way that could ever be undone, and worse, she'll always know as well - of course she'd want the revenge she threatened. Even someone using the Echo to try and undo it would just change the memory further. Hell, thinking about it like that, even consenting uses of the Echo become a flicker uncomfortable and definitely require the user to be discrete, and delicate.

But all the same, forcing your way into someone's mind and imposing yourself on their memories is very arguably a violation, and a fair bit worse than poking through someone's mail. .. Though I do agree that one cannot argue that every invasion of privacy is akin to such a violation, obviously.

[faris]

I see using the echo as the same as going inside someone's house in other FF games (and other RPGs, like Zelda) and opening all the chests inside / stealing whatever's there. Yeah, it's not nice. But it's one of those things that are commonly acceptable in video games which you wouldn't do in real life.

Raya-O did a funny by telling you off about it -- when earlier in the storyline I think the only NPCs that even know you've used the echo are Thancred in Calamity Cometh and Y'shtola in Never the twain shall meet. (Possibly Papalymo and Yda, but I haven't done Gridania's storyline on alt characters.) Both react with shock, but they know what you did thar.

If anything, I think the only serious motivation in Raya-O knowing, the same as Thancred and Y'shtola knowing is to show the player in subtle ways that the Padjal and the Sharlayans are a cut above other NPCs which probably know waaaaay more about it than other folk. (I believe that Thancred, Yda, Papalymo and Y'shtola have the echo anyway, hence their presence.) I don't see it as an inconsistency at all that Raya-O flipped.

[Fensfield]

I see using the echo as the same as going inside someone's house in other FF games (and other RPGs, like Zelda) and opening all the chests inside / stealing whatever's there. Yeah, it's not nice. But it's one of those things that are commonly acceptable in video games which you wouldn't do in real life ..

Sorry to keep popping all these replies in, but I guess I made my last post a bit late to be seen x.x

But I'd point out: as I said above, there's one more difference for Raya-O' beside your other examples that really justifies her being so furious - the memory invaded (and changed to remember noticing the character there) was an important one of her getting to see her Elder sister. We didn't just.. startle her a bit as with the tattoo'd ones while they were nattering with someone inconsequential, and see a moment was supposed to be private. Our character may well have permanently spoiled a moderately important memory.

.. That said, good point on the Kleptomaniac Hero comparison. But.. I don't find it inconsistent that Raya-O-Senna 'flipped' either - rather, that it seemed.. somewhat trivialised, but more than that, it arguably holds to ransom the reward for an already completed quest behind doing something previously established as horrible. Maybe inconsistent wasn't quite the right word?

I guess in the end, my original post might actually be summed up as asking if the writers were aware of how the game systems were interacting with their writing in 'Disorganized Crime', and looking for (however unlikely) a reassurance that they weren't trivialising it, either by immediate presentation or a lack of consequences down the line.