*Spoilers* Anyone feel joining Emet would have been better

[Jandor]

And if no one notices, no crime, right? Brilliant. All our would-be villain needs to do is make sure they don't notice it. If their lifespan happens to reduce to the point that they die in say 5-10 years, become more susceptible to disease, or they lose the power to manipulate aether altogether, as hypothetical consequences, as long as they don't notice it, no harm, no foul. All the better if someone wipes their memory of it. A veritable mercy.

Do the people on the First live shorter lives? Are the Garleans better at using magic now they're 7 times rejoined?

[KariTheFox]

So by this point, in order to defend the act of sundering, we've come to...

I think what we've come to is a point where people are mostly just shitposting because this discussion has become so circular and toxic, what is the point in doing anything else.

One side believes the sundering was justified and there is sufficent textual evidence to support this. The other does not, how many more pages are we going to dedicate to coming to this conclusion over and over again?

[Lauront]

Then we just need to hit the appropriate level of sundering to achieve that goal, right? Sunder them to the right degree to 1) cut their lifespans 2) diminish their physical forms 3) strip their ability to manipulate aether altogether (much like the loss of creation magicks, only taken further) etc, so that everyone gets to experience the joy of the gifts that the sundering quite factually bestowed upon the ancients.

Then present that level of sundering as a necessity for *insert lofty goal*. They can be reassured that whatever is happening to them, even if very different life forms come out the other end of it, it is absolutely not a genocide, that other alternatives were looked at but unfortunately circumstances mean the would-be sunderer won't be pursuing those options and that this is really the best way forward for everyone concerned and hey, there's more life!

I think what we've come to is a point where people are mostly just shitposting because this discussion has become so circular and toxic, what is the point in doing anything else.

One side believes the sundering was justified and there is sufficent textual evidence to support this. The other does not, how many more pages are we going to dedicate to coming to this conclusion over and over again?

Good. Now put the sundered in the position where the ancients are, and let us see how long this purported "justification" would hold up in their eyes. As a consolation prize? It's not a genocide according to my interpretation of the UN definition of the term.

I am not even referring to the justification as such. Just the logic of trying to pretend this had anything but the goal of eradicating them and somehow did not result in their end.

[KizuyaKatogami]

I think what we've come to is a point where people are mostly just shitposting because this discussion has become so circular and toxic, what is the point in doing anything else.

One side believes the sundering was justified and there is sufficent textual evidence to support this. The other does not, how many more pages are we going to dedicate to coming to this conclusion over and over again?

There is also sufficient textual evidence that supports the opposite. So it would appear we are at a crossroads.

[redheadturk]

I stated that both were genocide and both were wrong. I am much more inclined to excuse the Rejoinings to some extent because they were a reaction to Venat's initial genocide. Did the people still exist? Yeah, maybe, but with a much reduced aether capacity and lifespan. A slow murder is still a murder, and the destruction of a culture is still genocide even if some of the people survive.

[MikkoAkure]

There is also sufficient textual evidence that supports the opposite. So it would appear we are at a crossroads.

If the writers wanted it to be truly debatable whether Venat was right doing what she did, then the game's story wouldn't have ended while patting her on the back.

WoL would have confronted her instead of becoming buddies. Emet-Selch wouldn't have saved us against Elidibus which ultimately doomed the Ascian plan, nor would he have admitted she was right at the end of game. At least to me, they didn't try to make WoL's or anyone else's support of Hydaelyn subjective.

In my perspective, the writers and lore masters unambiguously supported the idea of Hydaelyn's overall benevolence and that she was a portrayed as a troubled figure in a tight position who did what she thought she had to do and everyone else in-the-know in-game including our own character agreed. Considering she and the rest of the characters came out of the writers' heads, I'd have to say that they know the characters better than we do and that she is treated that way by the game for a reason.

[Theodric]

I stated that both were genocide and both were wrong. I am much more inclined to excuse the Rejoinings to some extent because they were a reaction to Venat's initial genocide. Did the people still exist? Yeah, maybe, but with a much reduced aether capacity and lifespan. A slow murder is still a murder, and the destruction of a culture is still genocide even if some of the people survive.

Yeah, were it not for the Sundering there would be no need for the Rejoinings.

Ultimately my view has always been that although it makes sense for the Sundered to do everything possible to ensure they are not wiped out without their consent, so too does it make sense for the Unsundered to take the same approach. The continued survival of one's self, one's loved ones and one's species is deeply ingrained into most beings in the form of the 'fight or flight' response and other similar instincts.

[KizuyaKatogami]

If the writers wanted it to be truly debatable whether Venat was right doing what she did, then the game's story wouldn't have ended while patting her on the back.

WoL would have confronted her instead of becoming buddies. Emet-Selch wouldn't have saved us against Elidibus which ultimately doomed the Ascian plan, nor would he have admitted she was right at the end of game. At least to me, they didn't try to make WoL's or anyone else's support of Hydaelyn subjective.

In my perspective, the writers and lore masters unambiguously supported the idea of Hydaelyn's overall benevolence and that she was a portrayed as a troubled figure in a tight position who did what she thought she had to do and everyone else in-the-know in-game including our own character agreed. Considering she and the rest of the characters came out of the writers' heads, I'd have to say that they know the characters better than we do and that she is treated that way by the game for a reason.

I mean for all we know the higher ups could’ve had a say in the story. We have seen other characters who have performed far more pure benevolent acts than Venat and got 0 recognition so there isn’t much to say regarding that, and there are many things pointing to the fact that what Venat did wasn’t the right nor good course of action. With even the devs stating before that the sundering has never been regarded as a good thing and is a bad thing as a matter of perspective. If they didn’t want it to be debatable then they wouldn’t have left so many plot holes around Venat’s entire plan that can easily be surfaced. It’s either they wanted it to be debated or they just half assed the writing. Up to anyones interpretation really. Considering though that the devs themselves have stated that neither side is good nor bad and they’re both gray, i will argue that their stance on her benevolence and title of a hero is poor writing. Especially if they aren’t going to place that same emphasis to the opposing side. Then again i think many people now have realized the weak points in the story and it seems even people who enjoyed the story have realized this as well, as many people are now saying not to look to deep into it or to stop talking bad about Venat. Clearly the writing wasn’t done well enough to answer these debatable questions and statements.

[Rulakir]

Given that Yoshi-P is doing a special edition live letter where he "mentions there'll be interviews soon explaining interpretations of the story of Endwalker", it does make me wonder if the Japanese audience has been having similar discussions.

[Lurina]

If the writers wanted it to be truly debatable whether Venat was right doing what she did, then the game's story wouldn't have ended while patting her on the back.

WoL would have confronted her instead of becoming buddies. Emet-Selch wouldn't have saved us against Elidibus which ultimately doomed the Ascian plan, nor would he have admitted she was right at the end of game. At least to me, they didn't try to make WoL's or anyone else's support of Hydaelyn subjective.

In my perspective, the writers and lore masters unambiguously supported the idea of Hydaelyn's overall benevolence and that she was a portrayed as a troubled figure in a tight position who did what she thought she had to do and everyone else in-the-know in-game including our own character agreed. Considering she and the rest of the characters came out of the writers' heads, I'd have to say that they know the characters better than we do and that she is treated that way by the game for a reason.

Well, implicitly, people are posting and keeping the conversation going here in the hope that the writing team will see it and react in some way - Yoshi-P has talked in multiple interviews about how they try and write a story that won't leave people feeling weird and that they do read feedback, after all. Even if the overall thrust doesn't change, which is fine, it wouldn't be the first time they've expanded on something or shifted the framing for that reason. They discussed how the positive feedback towards Emet influenced his depiction in Endwalker just recently, for example, and he just said the other day that there are going to be several articles by the team discussing people's interpretations of the story, which I don't think has ever happened before in such explicit terms.

While I think it's normally be a bit tacky to expect a writer or team of writers to shift direction based on ones opinion, this is an MMO, which cultivates a constant financial and emotional investment in a way many other mediums don't. So I don't think it's wrong for people to put their feelings of dissonance with the narrative out there.

Of course, it's also possible something is already planned that will solve a lot of these issues and has been since the start, and we'll all look like a bunch of over-reacting dorks in a few months. But that's just how it goes.