What's the point with that quite lackluster story in Endwalker?

[Rulakir]

It's a head scratcher for sure. I must admit, I raised an eyebrow when it was revealed that Venat played a large part in the existence of the Rejoinings as they were often cited by some as an 'unforgivable' act that could not possibly be excused in any way, shape or form.

I do wonder if that stance will soften now that Venat is ultimately the one responsible for their existence...

I've said I didn't think Venat cared about the shards and that she created more than necessary as fodder for the Ascians, but to have that essentially confirmed? I'm still coming to terms with it myself because that was my most pessimistic view of her. He says we're not supposed to view her as a villain, but how could you not? She escalated from being the antagonist of the Ancients to all life on the reflections as well.

Edit: I forgot to mention that Yoshi-P also indicated that Hydaelyn wasn't sundered, only Zodiark, so I've no idea what's going on with that dialog from the Watcher on the moon.

[Theodric]

It would have been nice to be given a 'Blessing of Darkness' from Zodiark to balance things out. Perhaps as a last desperate act before he was taken over by Fandaniel.

I was hoping that our character would be 'depowered' in some way to better allow for a more grounded adventure. Our character already has the Echo, to tap into for all sorts of weird and wonderful plot conveniences so I'm not too sure why we need the Blessing of Light, specifically, to remain.

Especially since it seems counterproductive of the goal of allowing the Sundered to stand upon their own two feet which...was supposedly Venat's goal with the Sundering...?

Meh.

[Kozh]

If morality is subjective, then wouldn’t it be impossible to say that someone is wrong for acting against others?

With all these philosophy debate, I think we inherited the spirit of the Ancients, or at least Sharlayan's students XD

Jokes aside, personally for me, yes morality is subjective. Just like any other things which values are determined by human perception. Unlike us human, animals do not have "right" or "wrong". All they follow are their biological needs and instinct to ensure the survival of their species. I'm not a philosopher, far from it in fact, but if I were to use an example it would be our law system. Law is supposed to represent or based around general consensus of society's morality, but as we know it law can (and did) change over time, and can be different across different culture. What is wrong in one country can be innocent in others. Of course, there are things that the majority of humans can agree upon, yet there will always a minority who thinks otherwise.

To be completely honest, I think even our so called "morality" isn't that much different from animal's tendency to ensure their species survival. One of morality function's is to keep society from falling apart even if the action is against our best interest. In order to make sure of peaceful time, it's important for the people to have their needs (basic and emotional) to be fulfilled, otherwise sooner or later there will be conflicts among society. Might that be the reason why "morality" seems like it is on "our side" and "the right thing to do"? This is just a personal musing though, not really related to the discussion.

Pandaemonium? The Omicron? Ultima? Some other alien race? Whatever the hell we’re gonna be working against for the next 10 years?

We don't even know what really happen in Pandaemonium, except for Hesperos going mad over his devotion to Lahabrea. And considering we only do Pandaemonium because Erich ask Themis to not contact the convocation for their help, I doubt it is something that requires them to use Zodiark.

Omicron was already on their way having existential crisis over being the strongest race, or was at civil war. Plus the only contact we got from them are thousand years later after the sundering, and it's because omega followed midgarsomr to Etheirys, not because the Omicron intentionally going at war with us.

Ultima, as in Ultima the High Seraph? It was summoned by Ajora in order to defeat Mullonde, something that may never happen if Venat didn't sunder the world.

And "whatever the hell we're gonna be working against for the next 10 years" is a feeble argument considering we don't really know what kind of other aliens existed, whether they're violent or no, or if they're that powerful either that the Ancients need to use Zodiark.

And just because they’ve managed so far says nothing about what the future holds. The Ea did just fine for longer, until they didn’t. The Omicron did just fine, until they didn’t. The dragons did perfectly fine, until they didn’t.

I could ask the same for the sundered. After the walking plot-armor that is the WoL (a.k.a us the players) died, hundreds or thousand years later, what stopping them from making the same mistake as the Ea/dragons/omicron? Or the Ancients themselves even. We know from the Allag Empire era that the sundered isn't that much different from the Ancients. They seek prosperity, then they stagnated. Or perhaps they will go in the direction of the second world of "Dead Ends".

[Kozh]

I couldn't believe that either.

Oh no..., are we Assassin's Creed now? Next collab confirmed?

Yoshi-P also compared her to Hermes, something we've been saying all along as well. At the end of the day, she was just another Ancient (ironically with the same lack of respect for life that people criticize every other Ancient for) who abused their power because they could. I can't even say I'm unhappy because at least Yoshi-P admits it (as well as being aware that some people view her as a villain, which I will also take as confirmation that the Japanese audience had the same issues we did). It's just a shame that the narrative depicts her as some kind of 'goddess of goodness'.

I'm actually quite surprised at how open Yoshi-p is regarding his opinion on Venat. It's very clear that he perceives Venat as "morally gray" at best, or "necessary evil" at worst. To even make parallel with alphinaud's criticism of "you don't get to judge humanity on your own" (to Emet back in 5.0) and how this also applies to Venat as well. Though unfortunately that doesn't represented well in the game, with zero characters questioning Her method or intention. I wonder why is that. Is it simply due to not enough time? Or is it because different ideology between Yoshi-p and Ishikawa?

[Vyrerus]

A person acting against the majority is just when the cause is just, wrong when the cause is wrong.

And who or what decides what is just or unjust? Who or what decides what is right and what is wrong? Who or what is the absolute?

Ultimately it is up to everyone as individuals to decide what is right or what is wrong, and then physically enact their will onto reality. You could chest thump all day long about whether a particular act is right or wrong, but unless you can enforce what you think is right then you're just blowing smoke.

Morals are ultimately subjective. You can't show me a single atom of justice. There is no molecular structure for righteousness. There is no physical law in reality that prevents one man from destroying another on a whim.

In our world, in order to judge others, all we need do is make it part of our own individual moral system that our system is superior. Then we judge without second thought. It becomes our imperative to judge them, because we make it so.

You can see these differences firsthand everyday. Look in on a family who is deeply Christian with completely home schooled children. They look down on the world and judge it harshly. Then look to a gaggle of LGBT college graduates rooming together in a large city apartment. They also look down on the world and judge it harshly, but for completely different reasons.

If you were to ask either of these families what was right and wrong, they would have different answers. And then, living in completely different ways, they could each succeed in life reinforcing their personally held beliefs about what is right.

So, again, who or what provides us with an absolute moral system?

[Teraq]

Dude, I thought this was just going to be a Q&A, not a "the devs are going to go and personally confirm every single one of Teraq's worst fears about the story of Endwalker and what it very obviously implied about the Ancients being bad and not deserving a future" session.

I'm pouring one out for the most tragic character in the entire saga, who doomed his entire civilisation and people with a time loop that would influence Venat to take the actions she did, and lived for 12,000 years apparently hiding his amnesia well enough for Emet-Selch to only ponder it circa Stormblood according to the Tales From The Shadows.

Also, I loved that Zenos's dreams actually amounted to nothing and that Fandaniel's musing on Emet-Selch was just "Hmmmm... I guess Emet-Selch fucks". I mean. Obviously, Danny. Look at the guy.

Honestly it's a real shame Final Fantasy XIV's storyline stopped at 5.3. I would have loved to see where it would go from there. Ah well. I guess we will never know.

I could ask the same for the sundered. After the walking plot-armor that is the WoL (a.k.a us the players) died, hundreds or thousand years later, what stopping them from making the same mistake as the Ea/dragons/omicron? Or the Ancients themselves even. We know from the Allag Empire era that the sundered isn't that much different from the Ancients. They seek prosperity, then they stagnated. Or perhaps they will go in the direction of the second world of "Dead Ends".

I'm sorry Kozh, but you can only draw Dead Ends / Ultima Thule parallels with the Ancients. I don't make the rules, all right?
(Also, let's not forget to mention the first world of Dead Ends: Emet explicitly made note that the Sundered were susceptible to disease, after all. I see no reason why such a scenario wouldn't simply start as soon as tomorrow.)

[AnotherPerson]

I've said I didn't think Venat cared about the shards and that she created more than necessary as fodder for the Ascians, but to have that essentially confirmed? I'm still coming to terms with it myself because that was my most pessimistic view of her. He says we're not supposed to view her as a villain, but how could you not? She escalated from being the antagonist of the Ancients to all life on the reflections as well.

Edit: I forgot to mention that Yoshi-P also indicated that Hydaelyn wasn't sundered, only Zodiark, so I've no idea what's going on with that dialog from the Watcher on the moon.

I can't. That's because I know Venat is the former Azem, but she might as well be the current Azem since Emet says she still carries on with her work after leaving office. She works closely with the people in her travels and in the field. For many lifetimes beyond ours. Beyond most ancients - since retiring the Convocation means you did everything you think you could have done, which generally takes years upon years since ancients can live forever.

And her conclusion after watching all that was that: No the ancients did not have the ability to contend with Meteion in their current state. This is the conclusion of someone who worked with and understood people more than what we can imagine.

As an Ancient and as Azem, she is duty bound to save the Star, but most importantly, the lives of the star. But for the result to save the lives be a sundering for an attempt to beat Meteion? To slowly power them back up via calamities of the rejoining? All the while knowing she will die in the process? That must have meant she really saw no other option for the Ancients, even with the lifetimes of built up belief that mankind (and by extension the Ancients) can find their way forward. Not unless she makes one.

What she did may have been evil, but it was a necessary evil. She forced people to suffer, and she knew it was not going to be good. But she did it anyway, so people could defeat Meteion in a place where emotions dictate reality - where only having aether will be useless. The vast entirety of the Ancients had failed Meteion's test the moment they gave into despair and created a blasphemy just from the song of oblivion - which is just a weakened version of pulsing dynamis from across the ends of the Universe. There was no way they could've even enter Ultima Thule without immediately suffocating in a place where emotions dictate reality with their current emotional resolve while keeping their aetheric manipulation intact. This also applies to Zodiark, as he is a being composed entirely of aether and the will of the Ancients who surrendered to Despair to return back to their 'paradise'.

[Teraq]

This thread is a metaphor for the storyline, because it's just going in circles, achieving a time loop of despair roughly every X week.

Can I blame it on Dynamis?

(Dynamis and Meteion)

I don't think any one here ever even implied Ancients themselves could just waltz into Ultima Thule. That is, after all, the single consistant rule of this game of Calvinball: Ancients can't play because we needed at least one reason to justify Venat's genocide.

[Rosenstrauch]

Dude, I thought this was just going to be a Q&A, not a "the devs are going to go and personally confirm every single one of Teraq's worst fears about the story of Endwalker

That about sums it up for me. This Q&A has swiftly become FFXIV's Burning of Teldrassil—the event that convinces me I don't want to keep paying to play this game. And it's a shame, too. I really did enjoy Endwalker's story.

[Theodric]

I suppose, more than anything, I'm just disappointed that we're basically meant to not think too deeply on...quite a lot of elements related to the story. That's a pretty stark contrast to what drew me into the world of Etheirys back in the days of ARR and HW.

I also liked the gritty realism. It was closer in style to FFVI, FFVII, FFXII and FFIX which had consequences in spades and many moments where the protagonists genuinely failed in a way that led to lasting aftereffects.

So much of the story in FFXIV, however, seems to involve gifting the Sundered every possible advantage to ensure their victory but then condemning every other faction for not having access to the same set of highly contrived tools.

If nothing else, I think it's pretty telling that both WoW and FFXIV are arguably suffering from similar problems in regards to propping up a specific and very controversial character at the expense of every other faction and character in their respective games.

At least in Venat's case, the writers actually opted to kill her off. We'll see it if sticks since they've said characters were dead before only to have them pop up again in the future.

The next Live Letter will cover 6.1 in a bit more depth and give us some insight into the next story arc. I'm reluctant to get too invested though. There's just too much of a risk that I'll come to like a particular character only to see them given a less than satisfactory conclusion.