Political Ideology and Storytelling Within FFXIV

[Lium]

I haven't read all the comments yet, but from what I've read this is a real interesting thread. As a storyteller, I prefer nuance, but I understand why the game goes the idealized and straightforward route. Good guys are good, bad guys are bad.

I do however, think the Stormblood storyline where the WoL meets with Nanamo about helping the refugees was well done. Nanamo starts off somewhat naive, but after she meets with Godbert she realizes the only way she can help the Ala Mhigan refugees is if it benefits the state economically. Hence, she meets with Lolorito to discuss ways to make this happen, and they all agree that reopening the Saltery and putting the refugees to work as employees is the best way to do it. It revitalizes the local economy in the region, while also benefiting the Uldahn economy.

It shows that the only real way you can make change happen is to follow the coin, and to make sure powerful interests are appeased. It was also a nice moment for Nanamo to show some character growth. Lolorito even comments on that. She was now acting and thinking like a responsible head of state. We can help the refugees, but only if it benefits Uldah.

Now, I know this is a no-brainer. Everyone knows that is how the real-world works. If you want to really make a difference, you have to go after a company's bottom line or a country's economy. Everything else is just lip service. But it was nice to see a version of this sentiment play out in a game that otherwise treats good and evil as absolutes.

As an aside, I was roasted pretty heavily on Reddit for saying that during the cutscene with Emet-Selch when he tells us to "Remember us", I wished there was an option to simply say no. Because I felt like that was a very audacious request after he just spent the entire third act of the expansion insulting us, belittling us, and reconfirming the notion that he doesn't even consider us alive. Oh, and he shoots Graha-Tia. Not to mention, he wants to kill just about everyone on the Source and the First just to bring back his people and his god.

Regardless of his intentions and motives, you don't get to make that request in the end. You lost that right by the sheer merits of your actions. For that, the consequence is not your defeat, but that everything you fought for and ultimately died for, will be forgotten. That is called consequence, which I am very big on. You earn the behavior given to you by others. You forfeit the right of a last request based on what you did before that moment.

A poster on Reddit actually agreed with me, but had a more nuanced approach. He/she would rather have said to Emet-Selch, "I will remember your people, but you are best left forgotten." That's the approach I probably would have taken. And I think that get's to some of the nuance mentioned in this thread that some folks would like to see more of.

[Cleretic]

As an aside, I was roasted pretty heavily on Reddit for saying that during the cutscene with Emet-Selch when he tells us to "Remember us", I wished there was an option to simply say no. Because I felt like that was a very audacious request after he just spent the entire third act of the expansion insulting us, belittling us, and reconfirming the notion that he doesn't even consider us alive. Oh, and he shoots Graha-Tia. Not to mention, he wants to kill just about everyone on the Source and the First just to bring back his people and his god.

Regardless of his intentions and motives, you don't get to make that request in the end. You lost that right by the sheer merits of your actions. For that, the consequence is not your defeat, but that everything you fought for and ultimately died for, will be forgotten. That is called consequence, which I am very big on. You earn the behavior given to you by others. You forfeit the right of a last request based on what you did before that moment.

This is a big part of why I'm pretty down on the WoL's actual political stances (and honestly, the way the story itself gets framed as a result); Emet-Selch is a rancid, genocidal rat-man who has shown no remorse for his actions and has fairly direct lines to pretty much every single 'core storyline' problem in the entire game, as a leader of the Ascians, the Allagans and the Garleans. He is awful, and doesn't deserve the respect we are railroaded into giving him. I've always instead advocated for a '...' response to be available for every single dialog choice, though; it's a really good failsafe option for whenever the writing just doesn't really manage to reach the player (which will always happen to someone, eventually).

And I find the 'remember that we lived' request also a little rich, because... well, inside the story, there are completely incalculable amounts of civilizations that are dead as a direct cause of him; are they not just as worth memorializing, and just don't get to make the request because they don't have immortal ghost wizards to say it? The Scions pledge to remember them, but are they ever going to offer the same to the likes of Mhach, Amdapor and Nym, who got killed by these guys? It also actually hurts a bit on an OOC level, because... well, I play a Duskwight. I have been waiting for the writers to remember Gelmorra for YEARS now, and will probably be waiting for years more. Why does Art Deco Atlantis get to jump the queue?

And as an aside, I do like that scene with Nanamo and Godbert, too. Because... well, yeah, it is pretty terrible, but it isn't outright saying 'capitalism is the only right way to elevate the oppressed, despite capitalism being what oppressed them' like how a number of people seem to read it. It's basically saying 'this system is terrible, but it's possible to force it to produce good'.

[SentioftheHoukai]

This is a big part of why I'm pretty down on the WoL's actual political stances (and honestly, the way the story itself gets framed as a result); Emet-Selch is a rancid, genocidal rat-man who has shown no remorse for his actions and has fairly direct lines to pretty much every single 'core storyline' problem in the entire game, as a leader of the Ascians, the Allagans and the Garleans. He is awful, and doesn't deserve the respect we are railroaded into giving him. I've always instead advocated for a '...' response to be available for every single dialog choice, though; it's a really good failsafe option for whenever the writing just doesn't really manage to reach the player (which will always happen to someone, eventually).

And I find the 'remember that we lived' request also a little rich, because... well, inside the story, there are completely incalculable amounts of civilizations that are dead as a direct cause of him; are they not just as worth memorializing, and just don't get to make the request because they don't have immortal ghost wizards to say it? The Scions pledge to remember them, but are they ever going to offer the same to the likes of Mhach, Amdapor and Nym, who got killed by these guys? It also actually hurts a bit on an OOC level, because... well, I play a Duskwight. I have been waiting for the writers to remember Gelmorra for YEARS now, and will probably be waiting for years more. Why does Art Deco Atlantis get to jump the queue?

And as an aside, I do like that scene with Nanamo and Godbert, too. Because... well, yeah, it is pretty terrible, but it isn't outright saying 'capitalism is the only right way to elevate the oppressed, despite capitalism being what oppressed them' like how a number of people seem to read it. It's basically saying 'this system is terrible, but it's possible to force it to produce good'.

Well, you can also offer to try and "redeem" Fandaniel too. You can say as much to Estinien, and if not you'll remember him. I suppose it's to encourage those who'd rather roleplay the messianic archetype, you know the ultra-shounen "forgive everyone, even the vilest of villains" type. Which I grant wouldn't jive well with the marginalized revenge seeker you've created. Besides, remembering him needn't mean honoring him or anything so trite. Isn't one of the virtues of recorded history to be able to remember the worst of us and go "Hey, remember this awful guy? Let's strive to be better than him." Word of mouth isn't reliable, tainted by bias as it often is passed down the grapevine so remembering Emet serves a purpose once we're dead.

[SentioftheHoukai]

As an aside, I was roasted pretty heavily on Reddit for saying that during the cutscene with Emet-Selch when he tells us to "Remember us", I wished there was an option to simply say no. Because I felt like that was a very audacious request after he just spent the entire third act of the expansion insulting us, belittling us, and reconfirming the notion that he doesn't even consider us alive. Oh, and he shoots Graha-Tia. Not to mention, he wants to kill just about everyone on the Source and the First just to bring back his people and his god.

Regardless of his intentions and motives, you don't get to make that request in the end. You lost that right by the sheer merits of your actions. For that, the consequence is not your defeat, but that everything you fought for and ultimately died for, will be forgotten. That is called consequence, which I am very big on. You earn the behavior given to you by others. You forfeit the right of a last request based on what you did before that moment.

A poster on Reddit actually agreed with me, but had a more nuanced approach. He/she would rather have said to Emet-Selch, "I will remember your people, but you are best left forgotten." That's the approach I probably would have taken. And I think that get's to some of the nuance mentioned in this thread that some folks would like to see more of.

A fair point, but is that a decision that we are so deserving of making? He asked US to remember him, not proselytize Eorzea-wide "Hey you guys!! Ascians existed and they have a sad backstory!!" Us alone remembering him isn't too much to ask, I don't think. Doubly so if we make sure to remember his atrocities as well, to keep perspective. In the end, we are only human and selfishness is a great factor in what defines us. Our conflict with Emet boils down to, in my opinion a conflict of ideals. Neither could survive while the other yet lived, only one's hopes and dreams could come to fruition such was the sad reality. It's just as well, really for we mortal creatures will ever prioritize our own wants over the wants of others. Rarely would one take up a blade in defense of a complete stranger.