*Spoilers* Anyone feel joining Emet would have been better

[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."

[Lurina]

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.

I think it's probably folly to try and separate subjectivity and objectivity when it comes to art. For something practical, you can judge it by how well it performs its role; a shovel is good or bad depending on how well it shovels. But writing can only be measured by how consistently it manages to entertain and compel, and all rules of its construction are ultimately guidelines in pursuit of that goal that can be situationally broken. If stories are ultimately 'good' or 'bad', or something inbetween, just comes down to cultural and subcultural consensus. All standards of 'objective' are subjective, and in high literature, are usually re-evaluated a few generations down the line.

I think Endwalker is an awkwardly-written story. This is my subjective interpretation according to my objective standards, themselves informed by personal and educational background.