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

[TheRod]

Well no, it didn't. It confirmed it could be if they continued on that path. Not "regardless of the outcome" (e.g. they were given the actual reasons behind her concerns.)

I understand your appreciation towards the Ancients as a whole, I truly do. And I also do get that due the nature of what happened in 6.0 patch, it could be not satisfying when we nurture affection for portions of the story and we don't see it fully rewarded in a way we felt a total sense accomplishment or a good, gratifying, ending (and I think early yesterday, before the LL, there was even an interview with Ishikawa pointing that - you'll naturally end up displeasing someone during a closing chapter). Speculation if would they find clarification of their ways further down, if "a" told, if "b" stood quiet, if "x" happened, if "y" didn't, if "z" did, etc... I'll just agree to disagree. This stance I basically hold more strict.

I wish the game had options, for example like in Witcher III where you have like a multitude of endings and you can select what better pleases - curiously, that was also part of the aforementioned interview (Ishikawa, alongside Yoshida) yesterday, but it was also said it's complicated to process everything, even though they would like to have, of course.

[Teraq]

I have similar sentiments on the above. IMO he at least acknowledges she is controversial in a similar sense that SHB (i.e. 12k years post-Sundering) Emet is - a man changed by the factors you mentioned. And while he attributes this to a characteristic of the ancients, we can point to various other antagonists - sundered, no less - who act in a similar manner, so in my view that isn't a particularly compelling way of looking at it. However, I'm glad that they recognise this about her. I think you'd have to be attempting to gaslight not to do that, so there is that too.

Yeah, I wasn't sure what he was going on about with the comment on Ancients in general, here. Did he mean that taking measures like a little genociding and history-wiping here and there because humanity failed a test was something a single Ancient was just likely to do? Oh, those Ancients!

I mean, if anything, the other Ancients we do kind of know, in context of their world as it used to be, took important decisions as a group of fourteen, presumably diverse, representatives, who debated things, could agree or disagree and even had a dedicated mediator.

[Lauront]

I understand your appreciation towards the Ancients as a whole, I truly do. And I also do get that due the nature of what happened in 6.0 patch, it could be not satisfying when we nurture affection for portions of the story and we don't see it fully rewarded in a way we felt a total sense accomplishment or a good, gratifying, ending (and I think early yesterday, before the LL, there was even an interview with Ishikawa pointing that - you'll naturally end up displeasing someone during a closing chapter). Speculation if would they find clarification of their ways further down, if "a" told, if "b" stood quiet, if "x" happened, if "y" didn't, if "z" did, etc... I'll just agree to disagree. This stance I basically hold more strict.

I don't think it comes down to strictness. There is simply nothing in their answer addressing that scenario as things stand and I think it is relevant to be able to offer the party you're attempting to convince more than just mere musings about suffering.

I wish the game had options, for example like in Witcher III where you have like a multitude of endings and you can select what better pleases - curiously, that was also part of the aforementioned interview (Ishikawa, alongside Yoshida) yesterday, but it was also said it's complicated to process everything, even though they would like to have, of course.

I agree on that front.

Yeah, I wasn't sure what he was going on about with the comment on Ancients in general, here. Did he mean that taking measures like a little genociding and history-wiping here and there because humanity failed a test was something a single Ancient was just likely to do? Oh, those Ancients!

I mean, if anything, the other Ancients we do kind of know, in context of their world as it used to be, took important decisions as a group of fourteen, presumably diverse, representatives, who debated things, could agree or disagree and even had a dedicated mediator.

Exactly. They were used to using debate and reaching consensus to arrive at decisions. The very structure of the Convocation was set up this way. Of course they're not entirely human beings, as they have some very different traits to us, but on this front I thought his argument fell short.

[AnotherPerson]

Are you really gonna try that hard to rationalize something in the lore after tonight's live letter? You're probably trying to fill gaps the writers didn't even consider or dropped plot points.

It all feels pointless now. Next patch they'll retcon or create new rules for memories just to fit with the writer's whims on that particular day.

What else was I going to do while I was distraught on how healers got treated in the Liveletter? Live in Copium when the healer question was even reworded and then dismissed by "Just go play Ultimates" - when this doesn't apply to majority of the playerbase? Nah, I'll find something else to occupy my time. At least I still enjoy the story's narrative.

Besides, I always at least invested myself more in the MSQ lore than most. There are times I missed stuff that was mentioned before in an obscure location, so there are hints and pieces of lore all over that actually make sense when I add other stuff together. Doing that lets me figure out what the original intent the developers were originally trying to go in storybuilding. It was mostly consistent throughout the expansions, or answered at a later point in time.

Perhaps they will retcon it, or perhaps they'll add onto what they built on from before. I can't say for sure, but at least it gives me an idea on what direction the story could go towards.

Zenos might be dead, but he was still Enshrouded. Reaper lore indicates the Avatar will most likely possess and takeover Zenos' body. Whether that would be relevant to one day Fixing the Void in the Thirteenth through the Void Quests has yet to be seen, but at least I won't be blindsided when it happens.

[TheRod]

I don't think it comes down to strictness. There is simply nothing in their answer addressing that scenario as things stand and I think it is relevant to be able to offer the party you're attempting to convince more than just mere musings about suffering.

Oh, pardon if my wording wasn't correct or too clear (or if I misunderstood, again, sorry) - but the "strict" in that part was refering to myself.

I agree on that front.

Soon™

[Teraq]

Zenos might be dead, but he was still Enshrouded. Reaper lore indicates the Avatar will most likely possess and takeover Zenos' body. Whether that would be relevant to one day Fixing the Void in the Thirteenth through the Void Quests has yet to be seen, but at least I won't be blindsided when it happens.

Indeed, he was also quite shy about answering that Zenos avatar/RPR lore question...

[Lauront]

Oh, pardon if my wording wasn't correct or too clear (or if I misunderstood, again, sorry) - but the "strict" in that part was refering to myself.

Ah I see, yes that will come down to a difference in personal approach.

[TaleraRistain]

https://www.gamesradar.com/final-fan...ory-interview/

I'd be careful passing that around. I've seen a lot of activity from people who regularly translate interviews who are saying that's very badly mistranslated and is leading to a lot of misinformation.

[Teraq]

At least it confirms that the thrust of her concerns is the Plenty and the repeat of their doom, and less so the morality of these vague third stage sacrifices.

By the way, I wish you the best of luck in repeating this exact same argument over and over again when people want to debate Ancient morality for the next 10 years to come. Now you've got a new source to quote from!

(And don't forget to mention YoshiP confirmed the mortal human races only started existing after the Sundering and we have no reason to believe there were any "lesser"/non-Ancient humans before the Sundering. Yes, they really did intend to sacrifice just chickens and trees lol, and perhaps they were divided over it BECAUSE THEY DID CARE ABOUT THE CHICKENS AND THE TREES! so much for that argument.)

[Lauront]

By the way, I wish you the best of luck in repeating this exact same argument over and over again when people want to debate Ancient morality for the next 10 years to come. Now you've got a new source to quote from!

Oh I doubt I even have the wherewithal to do it for that long. The only reason I am doing so now is because there's more interest in that aspect of the story and I'd rather nip any misapprehensions over that issue in the bud while it's still early. The amount of sources on this point is voluminous which is part of the problem and why the EW cutscene is inadequate on its own.

(And don't forget to mention YoshiP confirmed the mortal human races only started existing after the Sundering and we have no reason to believe there were any "lesser"/non-Ancient humans before the Sundering. Yes, they really did intend to sacrifice just chickens and trees lol, and perhaps they were divided over it BECAUSE THEY DID CARE ABOUT THE CHICKENS AND THE TREES! so much for that argument.)

I'd say that further attenuates the whole argument, yes, but it also stems from the fact that the JP version ties it back to the new life seeded by Zodiark - that strongly hints at creations (which we know he could realise quite readily from the fight), which generally speaking to qualify as life (=gain a soul), will be animals/plants. There may be exceptional familiars who her faction thought could potentially gain souls and thus be guided in such a manner, but admittedly that's speculation on my part.