Spoiler, Sploilers, and more Spoilers

[Ririta]

snip

You're missing the point. Please forget about the game and think together with me, as this has nothing to do with "accepting her report".

In stories, for people to be fully immersed, the amount of effort that you put into explaining your claims is equal to the size of the claim you make. We, as humans, live in the real world. Which is why so many fantasy games/books/etc spend so much time on exposition, to make everything believable. For example, you don't need to explain why Anna went to the grocery store in your story. You do, however, need to put a considerable effort into explaining why a magician materialized next to her and burned her from the inside out, until nothing but dust remained, with so much heat that the whole atmosphere making the world inhabitable. Where did this magician come from? Why target Anna? Why ruin the whole world in this process? What he even wants? Where his power came from?

Do you understand where I'm getting at?

My argument is that the effort that was put into this idea that "hundreds of alien societies were great and then they all died because bla bla bla no suffering bla bla bla no love for life" was close to zero. In particular I like your own example with the people who thought death was salvation. In a world, with billions of people, there was never, anybody, ever, who thought that begging your god for death was dumb? And even then, how did that world came to be in such a state? Where did Ra'Ha come from? Where did his power come from? Now multiply this by thousands (your own words) of worlds that reached a similar doomed conclusion. And, then, remember this: Venat isn't the standard in her own world. She didn't jump in head first to die for Zodiark; many of them didn't. Hermes was also somebody who didn't agree with passing away once one's duties are fullfilled. In our tiny glimpse of the unsundered world, we've already found two people who don't follow the norm. Yet we are to believe that in so many of those worlds, with billions of people, all of them thought the same?

You see, this conclusion that worlds without suffering can't exist wasn't properly justified and people were taken out of the story that the writer tried to tell. Thus, the idea that the ancient's world would die if Venat tried to actually save it is not believable, which is the source of oh so many complaints.

And finally, about birb girl... Why did the writer feel the need to make such a huge claim, if not to justify Meteion's character? Would you agree that this whole mess wouldn't need to exist if not for her? Ishgard didn't exist for Thordan's sake. The First didn't exist for Emet-Selch's sake. Ala Mhigo didn't exist to justify Zenos, either. All of them would be just as interesting without their villain. Story-telling wise, what purpose does all of those dead worlds serve?

[SnowVix]

I don't quite understand why the time travel is giving so many people annoyances, when what we end up doing is essentially a bootstrap paradox (we give Venat the idea to summon Hydaelyn and sunder the world in response to the idea to sacrifice even more lives, but we only have that idea because Hydaelyn exists and Emet-Selch told us that's what happened, so where did the idea come from in the first place?) or a stable time loop, depending on how you view the particulars. Both of these are nearly as widely-used in time travel stories as a grandfather paradox.

[Lium]

Story-telling wise, what purpose does all of those dead worlds serve?

Despair.

/10char

[Elgeron]

I don't quite understand why the time travel is giving so many people annoyances, when what we end up doing is essentially a bootstrap paradox (we give Venat the idea to summon Hydaelyn and sunder the world in response to the idea to sacrifice even more lives, but we only have that idea because Hydaelyn exists and Emet-Selch told us that's what happened, so where did the idea come from in the first place?) or a stable time loop, depending on how you view the particulars. Both of these are nearly as widely-used in time travel stories as a grandfather paradox.

Because it being common in time traveling stories doesn't make it good suddenly. There is a good reason many dread any form of time traveling added to a story that doesn't focus on it. Usually it ends up being badly done, and the stable time loops also end up creating more plot holes that they cover. It doesn't help that we already had an example of time travel that doesn't carry such burden, which was how G'raha came to our timeline, creating thus two simultaneous time lines coexisting. The writers had to make quite a numerous of contrived choices to support the stable time loop plot point, from amnesia to odd decisions made by characters and it ends up stretching the suspension of disbelief a little too thin. I personally think they could have go at it differently but haven't done so because they tried to cram two expansions worth of plot into a single one and it shows in the way they went about certain things (the whole Garlemaid section, Zodiark early death, the whole time travel shenanigans, the rushed final portion of the game and the odd pace).

To me it seems that Garlemaid would had been the whole of 6.0, with the climax being Zodiark's death and the twist the start of the Final Days, and from then onwards it would have been 7.0, probably with much more time to flesh out everything.

[Raven2014]

You're missing the point. Please forget about the game and think together with me, as this has nothing to do with "accepting her report".

Not as much as you do. I already told you, when I first finished the story my thought is the same as yours. It is after doing my THINKING that I arrived as the points I'm making now.

In stories, for people to be fully immersed, the amount of effort that you put into explaining your claims is equal to the size of the claim you make. We, as humans, live in the real world.

Correction: for SOME people, maybe. I guess I should count my blessing that I possess something called suspension of disbelief that allow me a great variety of fiction works. Drawing a parity with real life is absolutely not a requirement for me to be immersed. In fact, I welcome any writing that can stand up and make me feel immerse while challenge the norm.

to make everything believable.

That is false. Also, I play real life everyday, it sucks, I dont want them to be in my game. Let me ask something ... how often you read romantic fiction work? I read them a lot, and they are all beautiful (since I like to go with the happy ending type). Are they realistic? No. And frankly, even the one with a bad ending would still be far from realistic or there wouldn't be room for drama. In real life, Not even one out 10 people would have a romantic sotry worth telling, and among those who those I can't help but want to run away covering my ears the moment they start talking about. So why would I want to read a book about it?



To quote Estinien: I see the world for what it is, you see the world the way you want to see. In this case, I can rephrase it into : I see the world the way the writer meant it, you see the world the way you want it to be. That's why I can reconcile with the story and you can not


Edit:

Story-telling wise, what purpose does all of those dead worlds serve?

To establish the "framework" of the story? See, this is what I think the point you're missing. You kept asking "what guarantee does it have for the world to always head toward ruin in real life", but this isn't real life. Hell, I hope in real life the pursuit toward perfection would not lead to ruin. But it does here, the idea is in the FF14's universe (not OUR universe) any civilization pursuit singular perfection will eventually head to ruin, whether that's realistic in real life or not is irrelevant. Like I said, the dead world Ra'ha is probably the alternative future for the Ancient if they managed to avoid the Final Day. Thus it is used for the story to justify why Venat come to her decision.


And if you reject the framework of the story itself, of course you'll have trouble accept anything else. It'll be like if you reject a culture, you will not accept any of its local value simply because it doesn't match your own.

[Wyakin]

I like this thread, it’s full of pure negativity and
People who take it way too seriously. Play game, enjoy story, timey wimey stuff. Happy days

[van_arn]

The whole time travel plotline with Elpis is kind of stupid.

We have a loop of events, that by all rights shouldn't occur... The main reason why we end up going there is because of things set in motion by our own interactions with Venat in the past.

I’m starting to think the time loop is intentional. Hydaelyn mentions our times are linked, as well of the whole “platinum” theme with Azem’s sun being bound to Hydaelyn’s moon.

[Theodric]

It's rather strange to criticise people investing heavily in the story when it has been a story driven experience for nearly a decade now. Certainly, the game has persistently shown an unwillingness to push the focus elsewhere with PvE and PvP content being an afterthought on many fronts. Especially the latter.

[Lium]

On Elidibus and Limit Breaks.

[SnowVix]

Because it being common in time traveling stories doesn't make it good suddenly. There is a good reason many dread any form of time traveling added to a story that doesn't focus on it. Usually it ends up being badly done, and the stable time loops also end up creating more plot holes that they cover. It doesn't help that we already had an example of time travel that doesn't carry such burden, which was how G'raha came to our timeline, creating thus two simultaneous time lines coexisting. The writers had to make quite a numerous of contrived choices to support the stable time loop plot point, from amnesia to odd decisions made by characters and it ends up stretching the suspension of disbelief a little too thin. I personally think they could have go at it differently but haven't done so because they tried to cram two expansions worth of plot into a single one and it shows in the way they went about certain things (the whole Garlemaid section, Zodiark early death, the whole time travel shenanigans, the rushed final portion of the game and the odd pace).

To me it seems that Garlemaid would had been the whole of 6.0, with the climax being Zodiark's death and the twist the start of the Final Days, and from then onwards it would have been 7.0, probably with much more time to flesh out everything.

That would have been soul-crushingly despair-inducing and would have actually worn out the pathos. The "odd pacing" of putting in bits of comedy between the slamming your feelings is to give you time to breathe. It's like the downtempo matches on a wrestling card so you're not completely worn out by the time the main event happens.