*Spoilers* Anyone feel joining Emet would have been better

[Lurina]

Ysayle is actually a great example, as she has a similar presentation to Venat. She commits morally ambiguous acts for a good reason and despite the ambiguity that game doesn’t focus on her moral failings, and instead all parties, even those violently opposed to her, give her praise.

And that statement want “refuted” at all, Y’shtola simply observes a reason for her actions. Hell Hydaelyn immediately follows Y’shtolas statement with the “there was no kindness nor justice in the bloodshed I wrought” line. So no, the narrative never errs from including that point.

If you read the quest log annotation for Ysayle, her minion dialogue, or the reactions the characters have to her throughout the story and upon her death, she couldn't be more different to Venat. All of them are neutral or acknowledge that, even though she ultimately did something heroic, she was a complicated character. They do not straight up tell you she is a hero. I understand that if you were comfortable with the story of EW to begin with you might not have gone trawling around looking for this stuff to check whether or not you've gone crazy for disliking it, but it really does feel like night and day.

As for Y'shtola, I didn't mean her comment in the cutscene, but rather what she says if you speak with her afterwards. She says (paraphrasing) that though Venat might have thought of herself as cruel person, she just couldn't see how much good she'd truly done for the world. Again, in terms of what the story wants you to feel, it comes across as about as subtle as a sack of bricks.

I find myself feeling similarly. I think some people just don’t like Venat. And I think some people like Venat. It seems like that’s all this truly comes down to.

I've said this before, but I earnestly don't dislike Venat's character in isolation. She's very charming in Elpis, and if you ignore the framing of the game, you can read the Sundering as a coldly utilitarian act, or as an fallible ideological decision that framed strength and embracing suffering as pivotal to the expense of all else - I could go on.

The issue isn't with her, it's with the game itself. My strong impression is that it doesn't want me to think she's interesting or analyze her actions critically, it wants me to love her and think of her as a savior and also my mom. I find that really uncomfortable.

[Pofruin]

The issue isn't with her, it's with the game itself. My strong impression is that it doesn't want me to think she's interesting or analyze her actions critically, it wants me to love her and think of her as a savior and also my mom. And that's weird.

Where is the issue then? That game shows her as what she specifically IS (mom and savior) for each and every character present when meeting her?

Does the fact that your progenitor Diety is not Unfallable, Omniscient, doesn't share your moral values, has committed atrocities, was Duplicious and Hasardous to You yourself and was generaly pshychopatically autoritarian somehow change the fact that she WAS in fact responsible for your creation and focused every effort in continued survival of you and yours?

There is so much Zenoism going around here. Where people judge the story from their own personal moral towers, without adjusting for POW of the characters present. Can you give good reason Why Alisae or Yshtola would not feel at least somewhat grateful to Hydelyn?

[Lurina]

Where is the issue then? That game shows her as what she specifically IS (mom and savior) for each and every character present when meeting her?

Does the fact that your progenitor Diety is not Unfallable, Omniscient, doesn't share your moral values, has committed atrocities, was Duplicious and Hasardous to You yourself and was generaly pshychopatically autoritarian somehow change the fact that she WAS in fact responsible for your creation and focused every effort in continued survival of you and yours?

There is so much Zenoism going around here. Where people judge the story from their own personal moral towers, without adjusting for POW of the characters present. Can you give good reason Why Alisae or Yshtola would not feel at least somewhat grateful to Hydelyn?

I'm not sure I see where you're coming from regarding her being the player character's mom and savior - the Loporrits excepted, she didn't create any of the modern races. They're either sundered Ancients, their creations, or creations of Zodiark. And the fact her actions "created" the world as it is now doesn't establish any intrinsically maternal relationship. The world we live in today would not exist in a remotely recognizable form if it weren't for Augustus Caesar creating the foundation for western civilization, but I have to admit I don't harbor any real paternal feelings for him, nor do I see why anyone inherently would. Lots of things good and bad have happened over the course of history that I wouldn't exist without; at least 6 of my great-grandparents were directly involved in a fascist regime. This doesn't mean I don't judge them for those actions, and I don't see why the people of Etheirys would think differently.

Remember that Venat was just some lady, not an actual goddess. The story hammers in ad infinitum that Primals aren't really divine.

But all of this is really beside the point. Even if we dismiss the characters reactions, the quest journal has no relationship to Hydaelyn, and it still stans her pretty hard. At a certain point, it feels clear to me that what you're seeing is the perspective of the writers.

The reason why I asked for a citation was because I knew that it wasn't supported by the in-game text. You knew this as well. The reason why the lore discussion in these forums gets progressively more distorted with each retelling is because people like sprinkling in partial truths on their fiction.

It only creates that impression if you single out that section of the quote. While I admitted in my reply to you it is a little ambiguous about the "pre-existing" creatures, the final line draws a clear distinction between humanity and the new life. If the Ancients intended to sacrifice other members of their own species, there would not be a tension about whether to hand over the world to that new life or not.

And you're one to talk about distortion. You still haven't answered why you thought I wanted Emet to succeed.

I disagree entirely. The game made clear that I should make up my own mind.

That's fine. Like I said, it feels like you played a different game to me, but everyone has experiences with media that. As Heinlein said, man is not a rational animal, he is a rationalizing animal; people have an emotional response and work backwards.

I did say "might not", though, so I think you might've got a little mad at me in that first paragraph for nothing. If you really did go back and review a bunch of the older journal dialogue and arrived at the same conclusion, then fair enough, I guess.

[Jandor]

The world we live in today would not exist in a remotely recognizable form if it weren't for Augustus Caesar creating the foundation for western civilization, but I have to admit I don't harbor any real paternal feelings for him, nor do I see why anyone inherently would.

I don't know, Lurina. I've been having some very odd visions lately...

[Lurina]

I don't know, Lurina. I've been having some very odd visions lately...

That's the wrong Caesar! This joke image isn't historically accurate all!

[Jandor]

That's the wrong Caesar! This joke image isn't historically accurate all!

I blame it on all the reckless time traveling we've been getting up to.

[Rannie]

I blame it on all the reckless time traveling we've been getting up to.

Not blaming it on Spiggy-Selch?

[EaraGrace]

That's fine. Like I said, it feels like you played a different game to me, but everyone has experiences with media that. As Heinlein said, man is not a rational animal, he is a rationalizing animal; people have an emotional response and work backwards.

I did say "might not", though, so I think you might've got a little mad at me in that first paragraph for nothing. If you really did go back and review a bunch of the older journal dialogue and arrived at the same conclusion, then fair enough, I guess.

I was frustrated with that sentiment, but not angry by any means. It’s just an unfortunately common argument that’s cropped up and I think it adds nothing to this discussion. If we wish to agree that both perspectives are valid, and that people didn’t like or did like the story for subjective reasons, I find that more than agreeable.

Fixed it for you

Case in point. You’re more than within your rights to dislike the writing. Going further, and yes attempting to say that the writing was objectively bad or wrong is not.

[Pofruin]

Case in point. You’re more than within your rights to dislike the writing. Going further, and yes attempting to say that the writing was objectively bad or wrong is not.

Considering that worse crime Art can do is fail to get a reaction AND we are sitting at page 100 of discussion about it, it's safe to say that writing is superb in EW.

I would rather argue that EW was way too ambitious for its own good and cut too deep to the point it touched on fundamental values of people. This caused message and the values becoming irreconcilable thus causing considerable distress to people playing it.

[HappyHubris]

Considering that worse crime Art can do is fail to get a reaction AND we are sitting at page 100 of discussion about it, it's safe to say that writing is superb in EW.

I mean, a lot of people wrote a lot of words about the 8th season of Game of Thrones or Batman vs Superman, but I wouldn't call them "superb."