Patch 5.4 Trailer, Predictions, and Hints

[Kesey]

Implicitly is not explicitly - by definition it is the opposite.

You cannot claim it to be explicitly stated unless they have outright said it will happen, and to my knowledge, they have not.

And as I wrote the first time I asked, the Ascians' plans in ARR seem off compared to everything that has happened since.

I don't know if the quotes in ARR are re-interpretable or not, but I don't think there's been talk of Zodiark's imminent awakening since we started talking about shards and rejoinings.

And again, if not stopping the Eighth Calamity will directly allow Zodiark's revival, that's a stake worth mentioning above and beyond just preventing earthly destruction in the Source. Why the focus on the post-apocalypse being "man fighting his fellow man" as the worst thing that happened if the dark god is unleashed?

Fine I'm wrong. But if Zodiark's imminent awakening isn't in the cards, why don't the Ascians--who live forever--just wait for the WOL to die and then continue onward and outwards? Why should Emet even tip his hand in Shadowbringers, bring us closer to the revelations needed and hope to destroy us unless the thing he desired most--summoning Zodiark to resurrect his old society--was so close? Why didn't Lahabrea not wait after the Ultima weapon was destroyed so he could continue his work unabated?

So for all the work you did to try and cut down my theory, in a theory thread in a lore section of a forum, all because evidence is implicit instead of explicit. But hey lets delegitimize my theory because the evidence is implicit and requires one more step to read between the lines.

All the Ascian villains act desperately because they are so close to getting that rejoining, its one more step and they get everything they ever wanted. Whether Zodiark restores Ancient civilization or just destroys the world. There ARR plan isn't off, its on target. The only difference between now and then is the level of detail. The urgency hasn't stopped, which is why they haven't stopped.

[Kesey]

Well, the Bad Future apparently continued onward as per Tales from the Shadow's An Umpromised Tomorrow.

An Eighth Umbral Calamity would not actually be the an instant win for the Ascians' grand plans; it would just (probably) kill us and leave the world we know in ruin. "Just."

Yeah, but implicit analysis of that story isn't that those people were lead by Midgardsormr to resettle this star, but another star entirely, because he already has traveled between stars before, and since it was never clarified what exactly was his deal with Hydaelyn was when the dragons came to the star originally (like is protect the star the actual earth or the people who live on that earth?).

But as other have pointed out to me implicit evidence isn't good enough, even though Midgardsormr claims he'll deliver new knowledge and wisdom to a team of engineers and other survivors who just built a time machine (and an implicit reading says space travel could be new knowledge and wisdom to them) and the narrator says "And so our journey begins anew," but again that just says they took that journey explicitly and implicitly doesn't say the location. And that would make the 8th rejoining an instant win for Ascians. But of course I'm wrong, so lets not consider this interpretation at all.

[LineageRazor]

On the topic of Zodiark and Hydaelyn and aether drain, bear in mind that Zodiark (and probably Hydaelyn, too) have something that sets them apart from the Aether-guzzling Primals we know: mass sacrifice of godlike beings to summon and empower them. The writers have AMPLE room to say that that initial sacrifice alone was enough to keep Zodiark running for as long as the plot demands without any additional aether drain, prayers, or sacrifice. This works for Hydaelyn, as well, though her sacrifice pool was likely a lot smaller - and this worked out conveniently to paint her as a being who is running low on fuel (and therefore needs the help of the player character, increasing the player character's importance), and also to help empahsize her inherent goodness (in that she's reluctant to absorb more aether to sustain herself).

There's plenty of reason to suspect, too, that the Ascians deliberately designed contemporary Primals to behave as they do, draining aether simply by existing. They were to be tools of chaos and destruction, and there's no guarantee that mortals, with their nigh-nonexistent aether pools, would be able to keep the things running. Far more efficient to give the Primals an ability to fill up their own tanks. Do Zodiark and Hydaelyn have this ability, as well? Possibly, but for them it may be voluntary, rather than involuntary.

All this is conjecture, but I think it fits the facts we know pretty well!

[Jandor]

But as other have pointed out to me implicit evidence isn't good enough, even though Midgardsormr claims he'll deliver new knowledge and wisdom to a team of engineers and other survivors who just built a time machine (and an implicit reading says space travel could be new knowledge and wisdom to them) and the narrator says "And so our journey begins anew," but again that just says they took that journey explicitly and implicitly doesn't say the location. And that would make the 8th rejoining an instant win for Ascians. But of course I'm wrong, so lets not consider this interpretation at all.

Journey doesn't just mean physically moving from one place to another, it's often used figuratively to describe moving from one step to another.

"And so our journey begins anew" implies that Midgardsormr is leading them into the 8th Astral era, not space.

This is why implicit evidence isn't really good enough by the way, not to describe something as a "known fact" anyway, because what you think the end of that story suggested and what I think it suggested could not be more different.

[Iscah]

implicit

If you alone can recognise the "implicit" facts of the story through deep analysis, then either the writers did a poor job of implying it or you're seeing things that they didn't intend to imply.

For An Unpromised Tomorrow, we had an entire discussion about the story when it was first released and I don't think anyone even raised the possibility of it meaning they'd be abandoning their world for a new one. Reading it again now, I still can't see anything to imply that.

It might be within the bounds of speculation or plausibility, but it's certainly not the only possibility or stated in a way that you must conclude that is the intended outcome.

the narrator says "And so our journey begins anew," but again that just says they took that journey explicitly and implicitly doesn't say the location.

Here's some implicit location-setting for you, then:

“Tell me, child of man. What dost thou see at dream’s end?”

“I see...”

In my mind’s eye, I glimpsed a world where the Eighth Umbral Calamity had never come to pass, where Eorzea’s champion bestrode the realm, unbroken. But just as suddenly, I saw that this was G’raha Tia’s future, and not ours. Yet the skills we had honed to make that dream a reality were still ours to employ... Another image flashed before me.

“I see a world pulled back from the brink.”

This time, Midgardsormr’s booming laughter was unmistakable.

“Very well. Under my protection shalt thou and thine rebuild, gaining newfound knowledge and the wisdom to wield it. Thus shall the children of man usher in a new Astral Era.”

They are going to pull their world back from the brink, not abandon it. They are going to rebuild.

There is nothing there to imply they are imagining the restoration of some other broken world instead of the one they're already in.

Additionally, there is no reason to assume that Midgardsormr knows anything useful about space travel, given that he apparently just flew from one world to another with no need for a spacecraft.

(On a grammar note, I'm also not certain that you can "implicitly not say" something. If something is implicit it is inherently unsaid.)

Edit to add: Further on picky grammar/word use, while I may be wrong, I would not call the statement that they "began their journey anew" an explicit statement. It is clearly a metaphorical one, and I don't think you use "explicitly" in conjunction with that. If someone didn't understand it was a metaphor and asked the author about it, they might need to explicitly state that the characters are not actually travelling somewhere else.

Fine I'm wrong. But if Zodiark's imminent awakening isn't in the cards, why don't the Ascians--who live forever--just wait for the WOL to die and then continue onward and outwards? Why should Emet even tip his hand in Shadowbringers, bring us closer to the revelations needed and hope to destroy us unless the thing he desired most--summoning Zodiark to resurrect his old society--was so close? Why didn't Lahabrea not wait after the Ultima weapon was destroyed so he could continue his work unabated?

I don't recall Lahabrea wanting the Ultima Weapon destroyed. He wanted to wake up the Heart of Sabik at its core and then tried to use it to destroy us.

As for Emet-Selch, I don't have the quote but I'm sure at one point he did talk about being immortal and failure being a minor setback so they just need to wait around for their next eventual chance to try again. In any case, the really important thing for him in the First right now is to get it back to the brink of a flood state again, ready to rejoin, and he seems to think that letting the WoL turn into a sin eater is what will get it there. That's what he's expecting to happen, and he's rather surprised and disappointed that we didn't.

Also, I don't see why he would only keep trying if he thought he was close to achieving the final rejoining. Even if it's only the eighth of thirteen, they still have one half of the trigger ready (Black Rose ready to unleash on the Source) and are close to achieving the other (re-priming the First). Letting it slip away might not be a permanent loss but it's still a setback and a waste of the work they put into getting there - work that has already cost the lives of several of the group, at that. If he thinks he can salvage it, and in a plan that kills the WoL no less, why wouldn't he try?

So for all the work you did to try and cut down my theory, in a theory thread in a lore section of a forum, all because evidence is implicit instead of explicit. But hey lets delegitimize my theory because the evidence is implicit and requires one more step to read between the lines.

Welcome to the lore forum. I "cut down your theory" because you were claiming you had explicit proof when you didn't, and I still haven't seen undeniable implicit proof either.

As I wrote in another topic not long ago, if I have it wrong, I want to know so I can correct my own understanding. But I'm not being shown proof of that.

If anything, the fact you're claiming that An Unpromised Future "implicitly" ends with them building a spaceship and leaving the planet, that makes me very sceptical of anything else you claim is implicitly stated because in that example, it simply isn't.

And I'm wary of relying on proof based on the Ascians' portrayed motives in ARR, not because I want to prove you wrong or deny what you claim, but because I've already observed that it seems at odds with the current situation. When I rewatch scenes from ARR it simply doesn't add up with what we now know they were supposedly working towards all along. They talk like they're allied to the Void in a simple dichotomy of the human world watched over by Hydaelyn versus the dark world of the Void and an aim to return all to Darkness. The BLM quests seem to lean into this apparently-abandoned version of the cosmology as well.

[Cilia]

Remember, kiddos: we do not start with a conclusion and look for evidence to support it, we look at the evidence and draw conclusions from it. Things are false until they are proven true, not the other way around.

There is no evidence the Ascians only need the Eighth Rejoining / Umbral Calamity to come to pass for an instant victory. There is also no evidence Midgardsormr intends to lead the survivors of the Bad Future to settle a new planet. There is evidence the Eighth Rejoining will not give the Ascians an instant win, and there is no evidence Midgardsormr intends to lead the survivors thereof to settle a new planet. (Put in less flowery words he's basically saying he'll protect them as they rebuild.)

Things are false until they are proven true. That's science, kiddos!

(Why are / were the Ascians so desperate to trigger the Eighth Calamity? Well, they weren't desperate per sé... but the Source was still in good shape after the Seventh so there was no reason to delay, and they've wanted to off the PC since s/he became a thorn in their side during A Realm Reborn. Seems good enough reason to me.)

[Kesey]

Things are false until they are proven true. That's science, kiddos!

Since the game story is a work of fiction, a literature analysis--which allows for implicit evidence and reading between the lines--is more valid than a scientific one. The story is a work of art, so what is said and what not is said, obvious choices made by the writers, are decisions they explicitly make when crafting the story. So to disallow a speculation or theory, in a speculation or theory thread, in a lore forum about a fictional work because the evidence is implicit doesn't really do justice to the story--story that I want to believe we all care about, which is how we got here in the first place.

I'm worried that this kind of closed minded thinking about literature analysis has lead to the "Red Door" memes. For those who don't know, "a red door represents anger," which is implicitly read from a text, and for those who are frustrated by that level of thinking react with "but what if the door was just red," because it's easier to just stick to explicit evidence. I want to believe this is a symptom of our education system's move away from a humanities education in favor of a stem focused education, but sometimes I fear it is just laziness and closed mindedness that won't see the forest for the trees.

[Cilia]

Since the game story is a work of fiction, a literature analysis--which allows for implicit evidence and reading between the lines--is more valid than a scientific one. The story is a work of art, so what is said and what not is said, obvious choices made by the writers, are decisions they explicitly make when crafting the story. So to disallow a speculation or theory, in a speculation or theory thread, in a lore forum about a fictional work because the evidence is implicit doesn't really do justice to the story--story that I want to believe we all care about, which is how we got here in the first place.

I'm worried that this kind of closed minded thinking about literature analysis has lead to the "Red Door" memes. For those who don't know, "a red door represents anger," which is implicitly read from a text, and for those who are frustrated by that level of thinking react with "but what if the door was just red," because it's easier to just stick to explicit evidence. I want to believe this is a symptom of our education system's move away from a humanities education in favor of a stem focused education, but sometimes I fear it is just laziness and closed mindedness that won't see the forest for the trees.

Condescension aside...

The problem is there are explicit statements going against your speculative theories (hypotheses, to use the proper term). In "An Unpromised Tomorrow" it's shown that 100+ years after the Eighth Umbral Calamity Zodiark still has not broken free of his lunar prison and Midgardsormr explicitly states he is going to protect the survivors as they usher in a new Astral Era; nowhere has it been said or implied the Eighth Calamity is the endgame, nor has it been suggested Midgardsormr intends to ferry those selfsame survivors to a new planet.

The issue with literary analysis is that without the author's input it's nothing more than speculation and/or interpretation. A "red door" may represent anger, something else, or nothing at all. Lacking context it's utterly meaningless, and without author commentary there's no way to know whether or not there's a deeper meaning to be had. One can read into just about anything looking for a deeper meaning; that said there's no way to know if there really is one, or if there is whether or not the author intended for one to be there.

I'm fully capable of appreciating a story rife with symbolism (Borderlands 3's MSQ is crap, but the Moxxi's Heist of the Handsome Jackpot DLC is excellent from a storytelling perspective because of how much more attention is paid to characterization and symbolism without being "in your face" about it like Psycho Krieg and the Fantastic Fustercluck) but you're looking for deeper meanings that are explicitly contradicted by details and dialogue in canon material. You're going to need a much more convincing argument than "You're supposed to use literary analysis, not scientific analysis" delivered with a patronizing attitude to convince people.

But then again I'm just a humble factory worker with an Associate's Degree in psychology; literary analysis is... what's the term my acquaintance used... "outside my lane," so my opinion on the subject isn't relevant.

[Iscah]

For something to be implicit, the story has to imply that it happens.

There is nothing to imply that they are going to build a spaceship or that Midgardsormr will encourage them to do so, even if they conceivably might possess the skills and knowledge to construct it.

On the contrary, it is implied that they must be staying where they are, because they plan to "pull their world back from the brink" and by saying they're going to rebuild it's implicit that they are staying around and not going somewhere else.

It is not explicitly stated that they are staying on this planet, but that's because it's the sort of basic assumed thing you don't need to establish. It would hold up the story awkwardly, like casually mentioning that there weren't any elephants in the crowd when the story has nothing to do with elephants in the first place.

If the story isn't supposed to be about the possibility of space travel, bringing it up just to dismiss it would be strange.

On the other hand, if the writer wanted it to be about Midgardsormr planning to lead them to another world in space, it doesn't make sense to leave that fact "between the lines". Something in the dialogue should mention it, even obliquely - looking to the stars, or a new world, a place beyond this ruined one. None of that literary language is there to establish the idea.

[Jandor]

So to disallow a speculation or theory, in a speculation or theory thread, in a lore forum about a fictional work because the evidence is implicit doesn't really do justice to the story--story that I want to believe we all care about, which is how we got here in the first place.

Dude, no one has an issue with you sharing your thoughts, theories and speculation on the lore forum.

Firstly though: you weren't presenting them as your thoughts, theories and speculation though, you were presenting them as if they were incontrovertible fact.

Secondly: you can't expect that you will present your thoughts and everyone will just immediately agree with them. People will have their own theories and speculation that are different to yours, they'll want to know how you arrived at your conclusions, they'll basically want to discuss things.