I'm not religious myself and although this isn't the place for a deep debate on the subject, it could be proposed that a lot of real world religions strip away freedom and agency from believers who in turn then sometimes seek to spread teachings which do the same to other people.
Another factor, specifically for Venat is that her behaviour is very similar to munchausen by proxy. Yet in the case of the Sundered she isn't even their mother to begin with - only masquerading as such and declaring that everyone on Etheirys is now suddenly her 'children' based on a non-consensual act of forcing them to be more to her liking.
I don't necessarily have a problem with the 'mother goddess' motif in general, so much as in the context of Venat. As I mentioned in prior posts, I don't think her reasons for inflicting genocide upon her own people were particularly strong. She deduced, with no guarantee that it was the correct judgement, that the Ancients would eventually suffer a similar fate to the inhabitants of the planets mentioned in Meteion's report. However, even if we concede that such might have been true...she had information that allowed her to know of the impending approach of the Final Days as well as Meteion's existence. She insisted on withholding both pieces of key information from her people despite it clearly being something that would have helped the Ancients respond accordingly. They did, after all, have a society based around research and debate.
In terms of the player character, the lack of an ability to express our disagreement with what she did is also rather strange. That a significant chunk of the most recent Live Letter was focused on 'clarifying' elements of the story suggests to me that quite a lot of people found the premise of the expansion to be rather bizarre in places. I also get the impression that Venat wasn't nearly as universally loved as the development team were led to believe which likely caught them off guard.
If nothing else, I think the writers dropped the ball in regards to handling the controversial subject of genocide. I don't agree that there was a 'good reason' for the genocide of the Ancients and I thought it was pretty weird that the Scions are so lukewarm in their reactions to Venat. It's entirely possible for someone to directly or indirectly benefit from an act as horrific as the Sundering but still find the act to be utterly reprehensible. The story seems to pick and choose which morals and themes it wishes to embrace at any given time instead of maintaining a sense of consistency.
Ultimately I think Venat was done a major disservice. I found her to be likeable during the Elpis portion of the story - right up until the infamous 'thou shall walk' cutscene which, conveniently, involved exaggerated caricatures of the Ancients and reduced the complex reasoning outlined in Shadowbringers and Elpis to eyebrow raising parody. The other jarring element is making her responsible for sparing the three Unsundered and viewing the Rejoinings as a 'necessity' for her plan to work. I think it takes away the agency of many different characters and factions.

Reply With Quote






