*Spoilers* Anyone feel joining Emet would have been better

[Cleretic]

I think people have started to overhype Emet's 'agreement' with Venat in that scene. He says that his plan wouldn't have taken humanity to Ultima Thule. He also says that he still disagrees with Hydaelyn and that he stands by his actions.

Honestly, the thing is that there's two arguments being had, and it's never entirely clear which one any one person is having.

1. If Hydaelyn was factually wrong, that her plan was flawed and bad and she should've gone back to the drawing board.

2. If Hydaelyn was morally wrong, that her plan made her perform an evil act that cannot be forgiven.

...except that, in truth, point 1 is not actually in contention according to the story itself. It's made clear in no uncertain terms that her plan worked and no others would have, and that scene with Emet is part of that. The argument of 'was she right to do it' is the intended and still open point of debate, and is an interesting one when taken as it's supposed to be, but because of a number of people--to be completely frank--not actually reading the story they said they finished, or just flat-out trying to pick fights, it gets difficult to have that discussion because it's not clear when we're having it versus when we're dealing with someone who's decided they can outsmart the story itself.

I'm tired, in all honesty. I love talking lore, but over the past month-and-a-half a lot of 'talking lore' has been focused on a single part of the story and people not really getting it. I really want us all to just... move on, but it isn't exactly happening very fast.

[Lurina]

Honestly, the thing is that there's two arguments being had, and it's never entirely clear which one any one person is having.

1. If Hydaelyn was factually wrong, that her plan was flawed and bad and she should've gone back to the drawing board.

2. If Hydaelyn was morally wrong, that her plan made her perform an evil act that cannot be forgiven.

I'm not sure how this connects with my post, because I wasn't arguing either of these. I was just saying that your read of Emet saying her plan "was better" was reductive, because the opinion he expresses is that it was effective at its specific goal but still unacceptable to him. This is completely distinct from any commentary on other characters or the story itself.

I guess you might've seen it before the edit and got the wrong idea; sorry about that if so.

[RyuDragnier]

I'm tired, in all honesty. I love talking lore, but over the past month-and-a-half a lot of 'talking lore' has been focused on a single part of the story and people not really getting it. I really want us all to just... move on, but it isn't exactly happening very fast.

Which may be part of why Yoshi-P is doing those interviews on story interpretations. He may be attempting to set the record straight so we can all move onto a different topic of focus. Because I agree, it's been getting really tiring. There's loads of other things we can talk about, but we keep ending up on this one subject across multiple threads.

[KizuyaKatogami]

Which may be part of why Yoshi-P is doing those interviews on story interpretations. He may be attempting to set the record straight so we can all move onto a different topic of focus. Because I agree, it's been getting really tiring. There's loads of other things we can talk about, but we keep ending up on this one subject across multiple threads.

Tbf, theres nothing forcing people who are tired of this topic to keep commenting on it, but people do. It's their own decision. If theyre truly tired they can step away and take a break or go to other posts. It's like people who enter threads that are very clearly showing some criticisms for the story and getting offended and complaining about criticism. Just leave the thread lol. But yes i agree, im curious to see how yoshi p explains some things as there are many unanswered questions.

This has been pointed out before multiple times by several different people, but genocide is a hate crime with intent to systematically destroy part or whole of a group of people who have been targeted on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, nationality, and so on. The root 'genos' in this case doesn't simply mean 'people', but rather 'a people', such as in a racial group. The reason why it shouldn't be thrown around flippantly to 'spice up an argument' is because while you personally might be privileged enough to live a life unaffected by persecution, not everyone reading your posts might be so fortunate. I understand that in most cases this comes from a place of ignorance rather than malice. Still, I'd personally prefer if you didn't misuse the word, or try to justify your misappropriation of it after the fact.

What you consider to be 'right' as far as the story is concerned is largely up to you, be it the Ascians, Venat, or some middle ground between the two. No amount of in-game lore can answer that question for you, and you don't need a consensus, moral argument, or even a rationale to rubber stamp your opinion.

I'd just like to say, again, that none of this was ever an issue before when it was used for the ascian side of things, or when people continuously called garleans nazi's. It seems its only now become a problem because it affects a character some people like. I think theres different definitions of words that vary all around the world, so its difficult to dictate specific versions that can or cant be said. However, i dont thin we should really be policing it so long as it isnt something harmful directed to another player here, i think using the term in question to describe specific acts in the game is fine as the definition varies, nazi on the other hand is far less bendable, and i think thats far more insulting than whats being said here. But like i said, how convenient no one brought it up as an issue before when it was issued against antagonists.

Time to drop a scalding hot take.

Mankind showed it didn't have the intelligence or the wisdom to wield creation magic responsibly when one sad boi researcher proved capable of launching an experimental universe threatening hive mind side project into the depths of space in order to satisfy his own curiosity. Venat was right to sunder the world, Etheirys was a ticking time bomb, ready to blow up and take the rest of the Universe with it at a moments notice.

Its a good thing the devs themselves kind of stated the sundering was a bad thing then.You can argue this about any society really. Everyone is a ticking time bomb. The sundered world isnt any different, in fact in a way its kind of worse. Once the source goes, so too will the shards follow and be doomed due to other peoples mistakes.