*Spoilers* Anyone feel joining Emet would have been better

[Kordarion]

Nilroreo didn't say anything insulting to Eara. You're the one who looks bad in this situation.

They didn't say anything bad true, they were however being condescending. Altering someone's post when quoting it and saying fixed it is poor etiquette, as I said all they needed to do was say that it's not that they don't like Venat but they don't like the writing and been civil. Instead they came across as mocking and rude.

Also your response proves my point, all I did was exactly what Nilroreo did, and you see it as the obnoxious trash it is.

Edit: ill admit I should have worded my changed quote better than I did.

instead I should have said:

Changing other peoples quotes rather than refuting them is just rude

[Kordarion]

A little trigger happy there, maybe cool it with the ad hominems? I never insulted anyone. The correction was to explain my position.

No but you were being condescending by changing someone else words rather than refuting them.

Edit: I do apologise for taking it too far, I realised that to late in hindsight.

[Rulakir]

They didn't say anything bad true, they were however being condescending. Altering someone's post when quoting it and saying fixed it is poor etiquette, as I said all they needed to do was say that it's not that they don't like Venat but they don't like the writing and been civil. Instead they came across as mocking and rude.

Also your response proves my point, all I did was exactly what Nilroreo did, and you see it as the obnoxious trash it is.

The two are not even remotely the same. I don't know what to say if you can't see the difference when one involves personal insults and the other does not.

[Kordarion]

The two are not even remotely the same. I don't know what to say if you can't see the difference when one involves personal insults and the other does not.

Yeah in hindsight I did go over the top.

instead I should have said:

Changing other peoples quotes rather than refuting them is just rude

Fixed it :P

Would that have been a better equivalence?

[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.

[Jandor]

That whole 'fixed your post' thing does come across as pretty obnoxious to me, but maybe Nilroreo just sees it a humorous way for people to get their point across.

Different people find different things rude or annoying or whatever. Plenty of people probably find my dumb derailments annoying as hell, it is what it is, live and let live.

[KizuyaKatogami]

but we do know that the people in charge of deciding that had no compunctions about causing genocides for Zodiark's sake. ...rather a lot of them, actually.

Except we do know this. We’re told this in the short story. Even the “tempered” convocation was split on the idea of the sacrifices. They didn’t calm down about it until Elidibus ejected from Zodiark and they saw a soul could come out of Zodiark, so i’m not sure where you’re getting this from.

As for the idea that they would continue sacrificing and sacrificing….we’re told via Hythlodaeus that once the 3rd set was done they planned to resume their duties as stewards of the star, there is nothing indicating they would continue sacrificing. For all we know they could have put Zodiark into Pandaemonium afterwards or put him in the center of the star like Hydaelyn was.

[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.

[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.

[EaraGrace]

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.

And I find Endwalkers narrative beautiful and well written. As goes dark, goes light and all.

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.

Let’s be honest with ourselves. There’s a bit of fun to be had in tense discussion.