What's the point with that quite lackluster story in Endwalker?

[Theodric]

And the thing is how in FFXIV manipulators have always been seen as the most evil beings, from the syndicate in Ul'dah to Thordan to Varis to Vauthry and Emet-Selch, even when they have good intention (Thordan for example).

It seems to me like Hydaelyn's character, if it were allowed to write itself, would want to be evil... something that we want to kill to free humanity of scheming gods. But it's not allowed to. Ergo so many people giving her the weird look.

I wouldn't personally consider Lolorito, Thordan, Varis, Vauthry or Emet-Selch to be 'evil'.

What is 'good' and 'evil' is a matter of perspective, as acknowledged by Yoshi-P himself:

The current state of global affairs is incredibly complex and simple two-dimensional theories of good/bad from ancient times can no longer quantify this world we live in. As such, a large factor [that contributed to the selection of these themes] is that I thought I could cultivate new values and a new sense of realisation within myself by changing perspective and carefully considering the other party’s arguments in regard to a given event. Half of the time these things are born from one’s intuition and flashes of inspiration. I guessed as much but it really is hard to explain.

Source: https://www.impulsegamer.com/naoki-y...vs-lore-story/

The problem is, we have an established goal and clear reasoning behind the actions of the likes of Varis, Lolorito and Emet-Selch. We're not left wondering who or what they actually care about and when they do partake of shadier actions, the game doesn't seek to obscure that fact.

Yet not only is Hydaelyn conveniently immune to all the downsides that ordinarily come with being a Primal, she actively and repeatedly lies about the circumstances surrounding the Sundering, downplays the role that Zodiark played in keeping the people of Etheirys safe and chose to wipe out her own race and civilisation.

Elsewhere, the game highlights that non-consensual acts, even when there is a 'good reason' are unpleasant for the target. When Mitron sought to force Gaia to become Lohgrif or when the Rejoinings were successful...the consequences were acknowledged.

Equally, the same can be said of the Sundering. It wasn't a consensual act. Venat's followers were the minority within the Ancient world. She admits herself that there was no kindness or justice in the act - and yet there are still some, unfortunately, seeking to pretend as if the Sundering is some big, heroic thing that was all sunshine and rainbows.

Personally I only take issue with the insistence by some that everybody has to like and agree with Venat's actions. In actuality, nobody is obligated to - and I also think it's acceptable for people to consider the writing surrounding Venat to be dubious because it leans on far too many weirdly contrived scenarios and plot devices. What's interesting to me is that some of the same people praising her endlessly insisted in the lead up to Endwalker that it would be 'silly' if Hydaelyn turned out to be secretly evil. That's fair, but if such a view is held then I don't see why it's a problem for others to find 'time travel' and 'the power of friendship' to be equally stale tropes.