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

[KizuyaKatogami]

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.

Even the WoL and the Scions are guilty of manipulation. I don’t think it’s exactly as clear cut as being purely evil.

[Ronduwil]

When is this stated? Because as we know with Elidibus, sacrificing to become the heart, they are still them. He was able to leave Zodiark and still converse with people. I don’t see why she would have lost all of her research capabilities.

He wasn't Zodiark. His relationship to Zodiark was akin to that of Minfilia to Hydaelyn. He also wasn't conducting any research, either. He was carrying out the plan that they had decided on before he sacrificed himself.

[KizuyaKatogami]

He wasn't Zodiark. His relationship to Zodiark was akin to that of Minfilia to Hydaelyn. He also wasn't conducting any research, either. He was carrying out the plan that they had decided on before he sacrificed himself.

He was essentially Zodiark. He was Zodiark’s heart. The primal takes aspects and attributes from whoever the heart is. This is told to us via the short story where they were very selective on who would become the heart. A more accurate comparison would be Venat to Hydaelyn. They’re both hearts. They both basically make up the primal, they are the pilot to the vessel. My research comment was about someone stating venat lost all of her research capabilities upon becoming Hydaelyn when we kind of know they retain themselves.

[OhNooo]

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).

I can definitely see the parallels between Thordan and Hydaelyn. Thordan was truly convinced he was righteous and that he would bring peace to his people. Literally right after he transformed and started his monologue about his plans, I already knew we'd end up fighting him. It didn't matter that he had good intentions, our character gave that determined look we get when we're about to throw down lol. The fact that he was using power from a millennium of prayers gained by manipulation of the people who were ignorant to what truly happened in the past was pretty messed up. I guess his reasoning was it was better to have them believe in something than to learn the truth and lose faith, which he ended up using as a power source.

And in the same way it's interesting how all of the WOLs and others who Hydaelyn has "called" to serve her are also ignorant of the truth about what happened in the past and are operating on very limited and skewed information. All of mankind, including us, seem to have been manipulated by a person or group in order to fulfil their own agendas whether they have good intentions or not. Although Hydaelyn saw herself as helping to free mankind in the long run, it came at the cost of betraying her own people and basically "making" a whole new type of human who would be more susceptible to things like manipulation.

The sad part about all of this for me, is the fact that all the sundered had no choice in anything - they are literally the products of this horrible betrayal and are mostly ignorant of the true history of the world they live in. The "chosen" ones among them end up caught in this war between two sides that they never asked to be in. It's actually really messed up.

[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.

[Stepjam]

He wasn't Zodiark. His relationship to Zodiark was akin to that of Minfilia to Hydaelyn. He also wasn't conducting any research, either. He was carrying out the plan that they had decided on before he sacrificed himself.

He is Zodiark just like Venat is Hydaelyn. Without him, Zodiark was basically an empty husk which is why Fandaniel could possess him so easily.

[OhNooo]

Elsewhere, the game highlights that non-consensual acts, even when there is a 'good reason' are unpleasant for the target...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.

This is exactly how I see it too. In my opinion, Venat and her supporters are the same as Hermes - different sides of the same coin in that they decided to judge mankind as if they are the creator of the universe, take away their agency and consent, and decide for everyone how they would live. In Venat's case, it's actually kind of twisted for me because it's like someone giving you the choice between getting r*ped or killed. And then everyone else is like "Well yeah that was morally questionable but it's better than losing your life!" It's a gross violation of a person's autonomy and some things are worse than death in my opinion. I can't imagine it felt good to be torn apart like that, even though the writers don't get into those specifics. But if we were to go by the "stylistic" cutscene of Venat limping around, it looks like it was probably a very painful thing.

Imagine being an ancient and you just lost everyone you care about and are still grieving while trying to hold it together. Meanwhile someone you probably respect a lot is judging you and looking at you with a mix of self-righteousness and pity before basically taking on a role as the judge of the whole planet and deciding how your life will look from now on. Venat and her supporters betrayed their people and then "traded" them in like they were currency for a new group of beings who would maybe or maybe not find an answer to the sound and the only reason it all worked out is because it's an mmo and we can't die so it has to end in our favor.

Anyway, that's my opinion of the whole Venat thing. As far as the story goes for the future expansions...I'm going to be honest and say that I probably won't be invested at all in the future arcs. As several posters have mentioned, it could be better for some players not to look at the story too closely or else you might not enjoy it anymore lol so in my case this probably calls for a casual glance at the new stories but no more analyzing. A lot of it falls apart for me when I delve deeper into EW like I do with books.

[ReynTime]

I don't disagree with the rest of your comments about the crappy last third of Endwalker, Theodric. But Yoshida talks a lot of talks in live letters and interviews that contradicts what he has his team do with the game. This isn't the first time either.

He can talk about gray area of evil x good all he wants, the fact is in Endwalker despite having reasons to question Venat/Hydaelin's "fairness" the game forces us to treat her as this benevolent motherly beacon of hope, and that will always skew the reception in favor of the black and white conclusions the plot gives.

I don't like it either. It makes me have no hope at all they can deliver any sub-plot as grounded as the city-states questlines from 1.0, internal struggles and crisis of city-states or anything trying to be as mature as Matsuno's writing. Unless the lead writing takes a dramatic shift they're clearly happy with the Naruto Shippuuden tier depth they got going. Underestimating the viewer's intelligence.

[KizuyaKatogami]

This is exactly how I see it too. In my opinion, Venat and her supporters are the same as Hermes - different sides of the same coin in that they decided to judge mankind as if they are the creator of the universe, take away their agency and consent, and decide for everyone how they would live. In Venat's case, it's actually kind of twisted for me because it's like someone giving you the choice between getting r*ped or killed. And then everyone else is like "Well yeah that was morally questionable but it's better than losing your life!" It's a gross violation of a person's autonomy and some things are worse than death in my opinion. I can't imagine it felt good to be torn apart like that, even though the writers don't get into those specifics. But if we were to go by the "stylistic" cutscene of Venat limping around, it looks like it was probably a very painful thing.

Imagine being an ancient and you just lost everyone you care about and are still grieving while trying to hold it together. Meanwhile someone you probably respect a lot is judging you and looking at you with a mix of self-righteousness and pity before basically taking on a role as the judge of the whole planet and deciding how your life will look from now on. Venat and her supporters betrayed their people and then "traded" them in like they were currency for a new group of beings who would maybe or maybe not find an answer to the sound and the only reason it all worked out is because it's an mmo and we can't die so it has to end in our favor.

Anyway, that's my opinion of the whole Venat thing. As far as the story goes for the future expansions...I'm going to be honest and say that I probably won't be invested at all in the future arcs. As several posters have mentioned, it could be better for some players not to look at the story too closely or else you might not enjoy it anymore lol so in my case this probably calls for a casual glance at the new stories but no more analyzing. A lot of it falls apart for me when I delve deeper into EW like I do with books.

It’s really interesting to me because before, when seeing the name Venat i didn’t think they were actually going to go through with making a 1:1 rendition of the same named character from 12, but in the end they really are mirrors of each other. Both go against their own people. Both side with the human type race and thinks what they’re doing is for the betterment of them, but in FF12 Venat’s case, what she did actually ended up being bad for humanity. Her actions and manipulation resulted in magic slowly being taken away from the world. This is essentially what the sundering was. It’s crazy though how in 12 it’s a pretty clear cut, she isn’t good, but in 14 they try and paint her as this benevolent hero. It’s why i can’t really take any of these themes seriously. If the writers consider what she did worthy of being called a hero…i don’t trust them to be trying to preach about any themes lol.

[OhNooo]

It’s crazy though how in 12 it’s a pretty clear cut, she isn’t good, but in 14 they try and paint her as this benevolent hero. It’s why i can’t really take any of these themes seriously. If the writers consider what she did worthy of being called a hero…i don’t trust them to be trying to preach about any themes lol.

I need to play FF12. Currently I just started on FF9 which is the only other FF series besides XIV that I've done. Eventually I'm hoping to get to the others. But yeah, I've heard others mention the Venat in FF12 and I wonder if they intended to go in that direction but then changed it? To be honest, it looks to me like they really didn't have a clear plan on how to end the arc. When you compare the elements of the story from the beginning to EW (such as their portrayal of the Ascians among other things), it looks like they were just writing for each individual expansion and then building upon that as the years went by.

At least in the previous expansions I felt like the writers were displaying their work for the player to come up with their own interpretations. EW is the first time I felt like they were really pushing for a point of view and were trying to *tell* me how to interpret the story and I'm not a fan of that. I wanted more...show not tell? And instead, I felt like I got way more tell - "life is meaningless but push through suffering and have hope! Hope hope hope. Did I mention don't give up and have hope?"