*Spoilers* Anyone feel joining Emet would have been better

[Lauront]

Yes, We do. because as it stands now, all we have is conflicting information. The fact that this has been going on for 60+ pages alone is proof that nobody can come to a definitive consensus on anything.

When analyzing a games lore, all you can do is take the information provided by the game at its word and assume it isn't lying to you until new information arises. When Emet says his own methods wouldn't have brought his people this far, we have to trust what he says, not like there's any other choice in the matter. We also have to acknowledge that nobody, NOBODY, including you or me knows what would have happened had Venat actually shared what she knew. We never get to see this story unfold, and thus any claims that it wouldn't have worked out or that the ancients were on a path towards self-destruction is nothing but baseless conjecture. We also don't know if they would've been able to save themselves in that scenario, we just don't know. And that is precisely why I consider Emet's line irrelevant in the grand scheme. Sure, its relevant now that all is said and done, the ascians are all dead, we're literally standing where no man has stood before, so yeah, he's right. Venat sundered the world denying the ancients the opportunity to know. After what she's done, they never had a chance to come this far.

But when you take Emet at his word, you're now forced to assume that it still wouldn't have worked had Venat actually shared her knowledge... except that would be baseless conjecture and we can't know that for sure because again, we never actually saw that happen. We just don't know, and we'll never know, unless we know.

Well articulated and sums up my views on it too.

That was some seriously convoluted writing.

My thoughts after finishing EW. But I don't agree it was convoluted really, so much as the product of what is known from SHB, and supplemented by EW.

Was it noble for the Ancients to sacrifice their souls to save the star and bring new life to it? Absolutely. Emet makes the point that society post-sundering wouldn't have made that same sacrifice. He's probably right; we're unlikely to do so collectively. It would have been fine if they stopped there. But you can't seriously mean to contemplate whether 'stage three' of the plan (i.e. let's trade in non-Ancient souls to Zodiark to free the ones who were previously sacrificed) was a sound one. And the fact that it's still being put forward in their master plan years later raises some serious questions about their value system.

Their master plan was conceived of without knowledge of why Venat did what she did and is very much intended to reverse what they (and even she, to some degree) view as a heinous act perpetrated on their world, whether some wish to refer to it as “genocide”, “omnicide”, whatever. The consequences of it are rather undeniable and the same either way, whatever word is used.

The third stage of sacrifice is conceived without that knowledge she acquired of Meteion’s report, too. And as I said, for me to arrive at the conclusion that it is sound or moral, I’d want further details than we’ve been given (especially concerning what was being sacrificed), and to see whether they’d stick to this plan even after she provided this knowledge or whether they’d abandon it and change course if they saw it’d endanger their star ultimately.

But then my initial post was directed at a poster whose views on their plan are at odds with the canon source materials on that topic, right down to the sequence of events they’re postulating and the way in which they’re handwaving Zodiark away as necessary to Venat’s plan, claiming their plan was idiotic, while failing to acknowledge that they lacked essential pieces of knowledge. Even the third stage cannot be said to be idiotic based on the knowledge they possessed, even if the morals of it could be sketchy depending on what the life to be involved in it was.

I can only speak for myself, but my axe to grind with Endwalker isn't with Venat - I liked her character overall, and don't even per-se object to the idea that the Sundering could have a 'valid' reason; obviously the writers intended for us to feel it did. Rather, my complaint is with the writing and presentation itself. If the sacrifices were intended to be people, why is the script so shy about saying so, absent Emet's single line about sacrificing the 'remaining population of the Source' which is only applied in the present-day scenario and obviously influenced by the context of the conversation around his broader negative feelings towards Sundered life? Why does the script use phrasing like 'a portion of life' instead of just saying what they're killing, especially in the scene at the end of Elpis?

Like many details about Venat's actions and motives, the whole thing is written in a way that feels deliberately fuzzy, and I can't shake the sense that the writers were trying to have their cake and eat it. That they wanted us to sympathize with both the members of the Convocation and Venat, but realized that clearly establishing the nature of what the Ancients wanted to do would make doing so impossible. Either their entire culture comes across as monstrous in a way that clashes with the heroism we're obviously supposed to see in past-Emet and Themis, or Venat comes across as some kinda fanatical environmentalist willing to murder her people to save some cows, clashing with our own mainstream real-world values about non-sentient life.

I write for a living, and I know when you've written yourself into a corner, it's incredibly tempting to keep things abstract in the hopes that the reader will kinda 'find their own answer' based on the vibes of the story. If everything is clearly defined, it's impossible for both Emet and Venat at the time to have been acting in a way we'd broadly consider moral or heroic. However, if the situation is abstracted and left to our imaginations, that becomes possible - either through not thinking about it, or simply interpreting the story differently based on which character we were more invested in to begin with.

I agree with Rulakir and you on this. I think they were concerned about the risk where even if they were to limit it to animals, monsters and plants or, say, familiars (i.e. let’s say the star began dumping souls into these post-restoration en masse, be it because they engineered this or for other reasons), it’d serve as an obstacle to building empathy for either faction of ancients in some people, and that was not their goal. Because it would be straightforward with all the plot elements laid out in SHB and EW to specify what it was and do it in such a way that it is neither ancient nor sundered but something that could potentially approximate either of them with a lot of handholding by the ancients, particularly since she only really seems to think this "new life" should inherit the star so as to avoid a repeat of their doom. Then you have a reason as to why the ancients wouldn’t see this as equivalent to their own kind, whose souls were caught inside Zodiark. But obviously being this specific has the risk of some losing sympathy with either side as you note, thus better to gloss over it in their view.

Something you often see with long-running franchises, especially MMOs, is that people will express their reactions to what they see as bad writing not primarily as distaste for the writers, but instead towards specific characters or factions within the narrative. If you're married to a story in a long term way where you can't just say "lol, this was bad, goodbye" (such as it being part of an online game you play with all your friends for other reasons), the only way you can 'resolve' feelings of discomfort or disquiet with it is to redirect them towards something in-universe.

Like, take this whole Venat/Sundering thing. If you point your frustration where it belongs - towards the choices and beliefs of the Oda, Ishikawa and Yoshida, for whom the characters and setting elements are just devices - then the whole universe of FFXIV is fundamentally something you can't agree with, and the only way to express that disagreement is to quit the game.

I am suspending judgement on it for now. We’ll see what they follow up with later. I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. If it's left deliberately vague, then those questions will forever remain and that's the end of that as far as I'm concerned. If I don't like the answers given? I'll review my options and maybe do something like what OhNooo mentioned until another MMO comes along.

As for FFXIV, I didn't have a problem with it until EW. I've only been playing a few months, for what it's worth, so my POV is from having gone through all of the MSQ relatively recently. I don't know how much of a difference that makes since I know long time players who share my thoughts.

^This. I had some concerns over the potential direction of EW after SHB, and with some aspects of SHB, but nothing that fundamentally put me off it, particularly given the post-release commentary by Yoshi on the story matters.

And I’m disputing ignoring that scene. If you wish to argue the specifics then do so, but that scene did occur and thus we must consider it in these discussions, especially when discussing the events it portrays.

It occurs as a stylised fast-forward presentation of all that would take place. There are many details which it omits, which you can easily determine by going through the compilation of sources on this topic from SHB.

Not as clear as your saying it is.

But a single statement in the EN version from him that is even vaguer is sufficient for you to arrive at the view that he thought his people couldn’t’ve found a way to drive back Meteion? I see.

The fact that the wording is narrower and even more playful doesn’t help that sweeping use of the statement. My point is precisely that it makes it even vaguer.

Lots of symbolism laced in that.

Mayhap there is. It’s still a narrower statement than the EN version and it is still him wishing to grant her a compliment. But I’m certainly not convinced that that statement suffices to make the point some of you are trying to extrapolate from it.

And second, once again what did Venat gain from Sundering her world? Why would her judgment, with Emet agreeing, be incorrect?

I’m afraid this is where you lose me. We know why she sundered the world. We also know that this plan was a plan that’d accomplish defeating Meteion. Emet had made his peace with his loss. He also does not abdicate his principles, and as ever, his primary interest is the star’s continuation. Agreeing to leave matters at this rather than continue to prosecute a fight he’s already lost would be futile and he was intent to honour his word following his test. What this statement does not suffice to confirm is, had things played out differently, that the sundering couldn't've been avoided altogether.

That quote is from before Ktisis. You don’t think her judgement may change once the full truth was laid bear? And many =/ all. The world would be divided, and as Venat says this would lead to their destruction.

I agree that many =/= all. Much like I’d say not all sundered need to be in a position to drive Meteion back, when a vastly smaller squad sufficed to protect all those at home. Though for someone who says nothing is impossible, I’d like to see her attempt a full explanation of all the facts concerned with all the methods at her disposal and the ancients to be given a chance to see how they might adapt to deal with the situation and not with mere platitudes thrown at them at a time of intense suffering, with their world dying beneath them and the majority of their people gone to prevent this. By the point she sundered them she'd given up on them. So why oh why not try reasoning with them before it got to that point? The story introduced barriers to this and I understand why, but it is also why I don't think they were given a proper opportunity to deal with the facts of what confronted them.

However, with neither Emet-Selch nor Hythlodaeus exactly wilting away like lilies at the revelation of the truth, and with a civilisation already divided on the matter of the third stage of sacrifices (until they eventually became convinced it was the way forward), and demonstrably capable of adapting to new observations as per Elpis sidequests, I am not convinced that they wouldn’t’ve undertaken the necessary measures to deal with Meteion and continue as a civilisation if they received the full story. The unsundered Ascians fought to restore their civilisation for almost 12k years, with Elidibus willing to even go beyond this. They did not lack a fighting spirit. You are free to disagree on these points. However, we’re not going to see eye to eye on it unless the writers introduce something that comes closer to confirming it.

I fail to see how we don’t have a canon statement on what they would’ve done. The game beats you over the head with the message that they would’ve broken. Would you need Ishikawa to say it to confirm that fact?

That is what it will take, yes. And until such time, if it ever comes, we're probably going to remain at an impasse on this.

Thats fine. But what's "best" is ultimately up to the individual. Venat isn't perfect and isn't the arbiter of right and wrong. She made a decision that ultimately led to the ancients being driven into a corner and drove them to desperate measures. She did what she did for another era that was no closer to figuring out the truth of what the final days truly were. There are several instances where characters are shown committing questionable acts in pursuit of some goal they deemed necessary.

In another post, I brought up that G'raha and the ironworks of his timeline theorized that averting the 8UC in our timeline would've erased all inhabitants of his. This includes everyone on Etheirys, all its remaining sundered shards, and any aliens that still may exist across the universe at the time if there are any. Despite this, they still went along with this mission because to them, a world in which the WoL survives was preferable to their own broken world, and thus was worth the sacrifice.

Everyone is ultimately entitled to their opinion on what is right or wrong. If you deem the sacrifice of innocent lives to be an act of evil, then that's fine. I don't care and don't take it too personally when someone voices their opinion on a certain group and the atrocities they might have committed. I also don't care enough to take a hard stance on who's actions are more or less just. At the end of the day, they're just actions and I'm just here to see a story unfold.
What I do care about however is when the story itself is incapable of taking an unbiased stance and deeming the actions of our characters as more morally justifiable than the acts of the Ascians. The ancients determine that exchanging the lives of all life forms on their star for those initially devoured by Zodiark was worth it, and they're vilified for it. Fine, that's only fair. G'raha basically threatens to erase an entire timelines worth of people without consent, and unsurprisingly... nobody cares! But don't get me wrong, I get it lol! G'raha is our friend, and he did what he did to save us, so of course we let him off the hook. Why on earth would we ever vilify someone who was on our side, we're supposed to be the good guys! When Hydaelyn decided to cripple the world leading to untold suffering for 10K years, what she did was not a kindness and it pained her to have to go through with it. She feels bad about it so its ok guys, let's not give her a hard time.

Yep, I’d say this summarises my views on it as well. It's more the certainty with which people are assuming that particular things are the case, when they're vague at best, that I am getting at. The post-Elpis cutscene is a quick way to summarise stuff people may not be aware of, glossing over things that may be obstructive to the story conclusion that they'd like, but it does not overwrite or invalidate the more in-depth, older source material on the topic, which is the only material addressing the topic of the third stage of sacrifices proposed.

What part of aether dense beings have absolutely no hope of facing a being who controls dynamis are people having a hard time understanding.

The part that is brought into question by facilities like Ktisis Hyperboreia allowing them to temporarily suppress their powers and thus potentially interact more readily with dynamis. The part that is brought into question by Elidibus drawing on the power of prayer in SoS to empower himself as a primal. The part that is brought into question that the ancients could either devise aether-thinned familiars or even sunder a subset of their own to prepare to track down and hunt Meteion and forgo the third stage of sacrifices. But a few possibilities they could’ve conceived of in the 12k+ years Zodiark bought them. Nothing is impossible, so they can figure it out.