Endwalker's story had me, but lost me. Ethical issues especially (spoilers)

[Rosenstrauch]

Why do people still keep insisting that if you change the past, you erase the future? We know for a fact that this isn't the case. It's not called a split timeline because one is erased, it's called that because they both continue to exist at the same time.

EDIT: So folks know what I'm referring to: https://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodes.../sidestory_08/

tl;dr: Eighth Era timeline, the one G'raha allegedly erased, was not erased at all. The timeline split, and now there's two of them. One where the people of the Eighth Era continue to live on, and one their future never came to pass. They exist simultaneously, neither merging nor negating the other's existence. I can not stress this enough. Nobody was erased from existence because G'raha changed the past, and nobody would be erased from existence if we set the people of the Unsundered World upon a different path. Best case scenario, we make like Future Trunks and dip back into our own timeline. Worst case scenario, we're stranded there—in which case things get very bad for the people who were counting on our return.

[Rinoa]

The present day wasn't a hypothetical child you 'could have had' though. It exists, you came from it, those peole are there waiting for you to come back. Going back in time and changing the past to make them not exist is as good as killing them.

Killing them because you won't come back? perhaps. Killing them because you left the timeline? No. I could argue that their timeline never ends, because when would it end? Would it end when you were born? when you decided to go back in time? when you went back in time? or when you were already back in time and stopped the future? The question is when their story would end, and I think it's reasonable to say that their future would continue on being written to its natural conclusion even if we change history. Similar to what we saw in the backstory to shadowbringers. The eorzean timeline exists fully written as does every other possible timeline. So the real shame is that there would no longer be a WoL in the Eorzean timeline.

That brings up the worry of how our character will guard the world if she still grows old and dies. But I guess that's a worry for fourty years down the road.

[Anonymoose]

Why do people still keep insisting that if you change the past, you erase the future? We know for a fact that this isn't the case. It's not called a split timeline because one is erased, it's called that because they both continue to exist at the same time.

Using causality loops and split timelines in the same game without explaining either of them directly was discontent waiting to happen. Now we've got one massive causality loop attached to one side of a Y-shaped timeline spawned from Rift shenanigans, and within the stem of that Y is another resolved causality loop for Alexander. Until Oda and Ishikawa walk everyone through all that in a PowerPoint, people are going to keep telling each other their unconfirmed opinions about how it works are wrong.

I hate time shenanigans for exactly this reason. I was impressed how well Alexander handled the illusion of time from a 3D perspective when its contents are edited from a 4D perspective and now... whatever this is... haunts me.

What's everyone gonna do if it's just applied phlebotinum? The Rift last time, dynamis this time, don't think too hard about it?

/shudders

[HyoMinPark]

The present day wasn't a hypothetical child you 'could have had' though. It exists, you came from it, those peole are there waiting for you to come back. Going back in time and changing the past to make them not exist is as good as killing them.

I agree with this. Changing the past and unraveling your future is counterproductive to what our character stands for. The story has revolved around us helping and saving and changing our world. Having our character go back to Elpis and opt to save the Ancients and their society seems counterproductive to everything we have done and stood for. And it would completely undo what G’raha did in ShB—which was done entirely to prevent the Eighth Umbral Calamity and save our life.

Unraveling our future unravels us and all that we love. As you said, Rinoa—

I would not support the WoL damning all Eorzeans to death so that a future race could survive.

But that would be what would happen should our character strive to save a past civilization. Saving the Ancients would damn our future.

Why do people still keep insisting that if you change the past, you erase the future? We know for a fact that this isn't the case. It's not called a split timeline because one is erased, it's called that because they both continue to exist at the same time.

To be honest, I’m not a huge fan of time travel tropes (despite enjoying Doctor Who from time to time) because they become very messy very quickly.

Edit: I’ll have to go back and revisit the ShB timeline stuff, but the trailer itself does advocate “unwriting history” and “rewriting it”. Which would carry an implication of unraveling one timeline for the sake of preserving another. At least, in my interpretation. The lore for time travel in this game is immensely “don’t think too hard about it” right now; given how there’s very little clarification on split timelines or if one timeline suddenly ceased to be versus existing independently.

[Rinoa]

Oh, btw, Anonymoose, I forgot to say this earlier, but I do agree, the characters can be self-consistent, and they most likely will reveal them to have been going about this very self-consistently. My issue really just hinges upon the issues I see in their motives, and how at that moment I think a good friend wouldn't have allowed them to all get locked into the view that they had to fight to decide for everybody else. It feels like I visited Elpis, and my character thought "Gee, you guys sure have a nightmare coming, sure glad it's not my world" as if she didn't care. (jokingly exadurated of course)

[Brightamethyst]

It's not called a split timeline because one is erased, it's called that because they both continue to exist at the same time.

Right, but they don't exist together. The ratio of people "saved" vs "killed" is unchanged. Splitting the timeline would save a lot of people but effectively kill an equivalent number who will now never exist.

[Rulakir]

You're not alone in your feelings. Venat is a divisive character who's been debated here at length. I could never in good conscience do what she did and, like you, my WoL would not have been complicit in it. I felt like I did back in ARR, a lobotomized tool being led by NPCs assuring me I was doing the right thing while my WoL nods and goes along with it. I'm never once given an option to express disapproval, instead I'm strong-armed into this 12k year BFF relationship with Venat/Hydaelyn which was extremely uncomfortable given my feelings about her and what she did. I felt like, as a player, I'd lost agency and connection to my character (it wasn't my WoL anymore) and it was not a good experience.

Now there's an issue of can I continue to RP a WoL that so fundamentally differs from my moral values? This is a concern of mine not only going forward into new storylines, but in their handling of Azem as well. Hydaelyn may have ended up being a hero in the WoL's timeline, but she's still an antagonist to the Ancients. Nothing changed there, in fact, it's even worse because she didn't lose her memories like the others and did it all by choice knowing the outcome. However, the narrative does not treat her as if she's done anything wrong. She may acknowledge what she did "wasn't a kindness", but there's no regret on her part, there's not a single NPC who admonishes her for what she's done, and the WoL is accepting of all of it. The whole thing was problematic. Like, you've witnessed a horrific crime and everyone is telling you it was for the best. Honestly, between her and Hermes I felt legitimately gaslit by EW. Both acted despicably and both are defended and praised. It was bizarre.

I think the writers had a challenge figuring out a way to justify an unjustifiable act and even with the heavy handed storytelling still didn't manage it. I also think they had a romanticized idea of the story coming 'full circle' to the extent that the writing felt contrived to make that happen. Going through Elpis, I desperately wanted to tell them the truth so they could save themselves, I felt so much relief when we finally did, and then the post-dungeon happened. I realized that not only were we not going to be able to save anyone, but now my character is an accomplice to their fates for having said anything. As if the situation weren't bad enough, making me responsible for it by sharing knowledge with Venat who did not use it well felt awful. I never got over the ending of Elpis, it soured the rest of the expansion for me and has made me doubtful for the future.

[Rosenstrauch]

Using causality loops and split timelines in the same game without explaining either of them directly was discontent waiting to happen. Now we've got one massive causality loop attached to one side of a Y-shaped timeline spawned from Rift shenanigans, and within the stem of that Y is another resolved causality loop for Alexander. Until Oda and Ishikawa walk everyone through all that in a PowerPoint, people are going to keep telling each other their unconfirmed opinions about how it works are wrong.

I hate time shenanigans for exactly this reason. I was impressed how well Alexander handled the illusion of time from a 3D perspective when its contents are edited from a 4D perspective and now... whatever this is... haunts me.

What's everyone gonna do if it's just applied phlebotinum? The Rift last time, dynamis this time, don't think too hard about it?/shudders

"Don't think too hard about it" is probably the best we're going to get. Of all the myriad ways time travel stories can go pear-shaped, I feel like FFXIV ended up dipping its toes into at least some of them with the whole... "causality loop dependent on a split timeline to even exist" thing. Maybe that'll be the next big threat: We've gone and screwed up time so badly that we've got Lavos/the Time Devourer on our hands now.

[Rinoa]

Unraveling our future unravels us and all that we love. As you said, Rinoa—

But that would be what would happen should our character strive to save a past civilization. Saving the Ancients would damn our future.

Unfortunately you read me out of context, and assume that changing the past will murder them all. I wouldn't support my WoL definitively killing everybody for something else. Changing history has no evidence so far that it would stop their stories from being written. It doesn't seem to be the same in this universe as putting a sword through their hearts. I could see that time travel differs based upon what type of magic is being used, but until that is addressed, my character would see the possibility of having two peaceful timelines from this currently split timeline.


All down to ethics really, not a time travel issue. All has to do with us not doing enough to help the ancients.

[HyoMinPark]

Unfortunately you read me out of context, and assume that changing the past will murder them all. I wouldn't support my WoL definitively killing everybody for something else. Changing history has no evidence so far that it would stop their stories from being written. It doesn't seem to be the same in this universe as putting a sword through their hearts. I could see that time travel differs based upon what type of magic is being used, but until that is addressed, my character would see the possibility of having two peaceful timelines from this currently split timeline.


All down to ethics really, not a time travel issue. All has to do with us not doing enough to help the ancients.

I disagree. ShB highlighted the idea of going back in time to prevent—or unwrite—a bleak future. With that implication in mind, it can also stand to reason that going back and unwriting the demise of the Ancients would result in our future subsequently being unwritten.

The only difference in your statement and what I said is that you’re taking about killing our people to ensure the survival of a future race. But the same logic can apply to saving the Ancients and effectively killing our own. There are no clear guidelines for how time travel functions in this universe, so we are left with surmising it ourselves.

Ethically, the WoL would strive to save our civilization. They can lament the death of another, but I still don’t believe it falls in line with what we stand for to put copious amounts of energy into saving a past that we know will cease to be before striving to save our future.


EDIT: so as to not use another daily post

I consider the idea of the grandfather paradox when I consider time travel. The past shapes the future—it stands to reason that changing said past changes the future. You can’t ignore basic cause and effect. If we go back to Elpis and save the Ancients, our future is changed forever because their demise shaped us and our world. If one wants to argue parallel universes, then they can. But I’m of the personal opinion that the concept of parallel universes exists as a means to ignore the consequences of messing with the past. What better way to do so than to say “but everyone lived happily ever after in their own timeline so it’s fine!” But that’s just my personal opinion when it comes to time travel.