Would you be ok with a good rival figure for 7.0+?(6.0 spoilers)

[Vyrerus]

You aren't kidding. I hated Jowy and always viewed him as a traitor. I'm definitely not interested in that type of 'rival'.

I still don't really understand his shift towards what he did. When I was a kid, I simply blamed the Rune.

[AnimaAnimus]

I would love another crazy, but sympathetic villain like Yotsuyu. Now take her chaotic nature and turn her into a villain turned companion or companion turned villain and we would be in for a crazy ride.

And they really need to start keeping the good villains like Emet, Ysayle and Yotsuyu around and not quickly displace them for cringy, shallow, anime villains like Zenos or Asahi. Same goes for the companions. I have had about enough of Y'shtola's snobbery and Graha's fawning. We need more grounded companions like Ardbert or for your fellow 1.0 players, Louisoix, someone quiet and sincere like Arenvald or someone silly but not too much like Godbert.

[Lyth]

The reason why adventuring parties tend to have similar views in the long run is because they naturally part company when they don't align. Characters with opposing ideologies either out themselves in a edgy betrayal or simply leave because your affection score is too low. By the time you're at the final boss, everyone is on the same page out of habit and necessity. If you want to use FF6 as an example, it's probably the original entry which properly established the 'one-liner we learnt from our friends on our journey together' trope ('I kupo all my friends!'). You're going to get that 'adventuring family' vibe from pretty much any group that sticks together long enough, and 10 years is a long time.

I do think that if you want a good villain, you have to invest in them, which means introducing them early and giving them plenty of character development, as well as creating motivation for a grudge. I don't think that it's impossible to find someone suitably challenging given that there's so little of the world that we've seen, but repeated showdowns tend to diminish their impact. I think that you have to pull a bit of a reverse Zenos and make the player want that fight to happen while denying them that satisfaction.

I think some really good base material that we have at the moment is Azem's reflection on the Thirteenth. Their death was what created the Void in the first place, and there's probably a lot of pent up resentment around that.

[Fenral]

Griffith did nothing wrong, okay. (Bad example: in the original Berserk manga, Griffith's betrayal is actually a foregone conclusion. The entire Golden Age flashback is then there so you can fall for him while also being on pins and needles over when he's finally going to turn, what event will be the betrayal that sends Guts down the path of revenge. And there is none: he took the ideals embraced by his followers and went all the way to the edge with them. In another story, he'd be the hero.)

That would be a really hard character to pull off in any Final Fantasy, though, not just XIV. Hermes really comes close, but there's ambiguity over where Hermes ends and Amon begins, not to mention Elpis is only a few EXP levels worth of content, rather than 10 volumes of manga.

[Cleretic]

The reason why adventuring parties tend to have similar views in the long run is because they naturally part company when they don't align. Characters with opposing ideologies either out themselves in a edgy betrayal or simply leave because your affection score is too low. By the time you're at the final boss, everyone is on the same page out of habit and necessity. If you want to use FF6 as an example, it's probably the original entry which properly established the 'one-liner we learnt from our friends on our journey together' trope ('I kupo all my friends!'). You're going to get that 'adventuring family' vibe from pretty much any group that sticks together long enough, and 10 years is a long time.

I do think that if you want a good villain, you have to invest in them, which means introducing them early and giving them plenty of character development, as well as creating motivation for a grudge. I don't think that it's impossible to find someone suitably challenging given that there's so little of the world that we've seen, but repeated showdowns tend to diminish their impact. I think that you have to pull a bit of a reverse Zenos and make the player want that fight to happen while denying them that satisfaction.

I think some really good base material that we have at the moment is Azem's reflection on the Thirteenth. Their death was what created the Void in the first place, and there's probably a lot of pent up resentment around that.

Do you have any proof about that 'Azem's shard caused the Thirteenth'? Because that sounds like something I would've heard SUPER clearly if it were real, and I've never heard anything even remotely resembling it before.

One thing I do think was a bit of a missed opportunity with Endwalker is the new influences in the Scions, though. Estinien is a very different person to the rest of the Scions, it would've been really good to see that be played on more, and G'raha had potential, but neither of them really did anything big on that. Which, granted, would've been hard to fit in anyway since Endwalker was VERY plot-dense, but it's still a missed opportunity.

[Lyth]

Do you have any proof about that 'Azem's shard caused the Thirteenth'? Because that sounds like something I would've heard SUPER clearly if it were real, and I've never heard anything even remotely resembling it before.

EE Vol 1, p.213, entry on Igeyorhm.
'In the Thirteenth, Igeyorhm's power proved too much for the inexperienced Bringer of Light and their one-sided battles eventually resulted in a Flood of Darkness consuming the entire world and rendering it a nigh-empty void.'

It sounds like the reverse story of the events on the First, with the Warrior of Light acting as the catalyst for the Flood instead of the corresponding Ascian (i.e. Mitron). So if there's an 'Eden' equivalent on the Thirteenth at the top of the Void hierarchy, I wouldn't be surprised if it was a fairly irritated dark Azem.

[Absimiliard]

I believe I would prefer we don't get a replacement Zenos. Their last attempt at replacing Zenos with a new rival gave us easily the worst, most annoying character to date: Ran'jit.

Now facing off against an errant shard of Azem, on the other hand... that could indeed be interesting. Extra points if it ends with the WoL reabsorbing said shard to become 9/14ths rejoined.

[Cleretic]

EE Vol 1, p.213, entry on Igeyorhm.
'In the Thirteenth, Igeyorhm's power proved too much for the inexperienced Bringer of Light and their one-sided battles eventually resulted in a Flood of Darkness consuming the entire world and rendering it a nigh-empty void.'

It sounds like the reverse story of the events on the First, with the Warrior of Light acting as the catalyst for the Flood instead of the corresponding Ascian (i.e. Mitron). So if there's an 'Eden' equivalent on the Thirteenth at the top of the Void hierarchy, I wouldn't be surprised if it was a fairly irritated dark Azem.

I'm fairly sure that the 'Bringer of Light' was Unukalhai, actually, although I can't check his whole story right now. He doesn't seem all too resentful, or monstrous. Mostly just short.

[Hysorn]

Depends on who. I definitely don't want another Zenos, his obsession with our characters got boring in StB. If it's a healthy rival, someone that somehow has enough power to compare with the WARRIOR OF F***ING LIGHT, sure.

[Lyth]

Unukalhai may have had the Echo, but I don't think that either Unukalhai or Cylva were officially designated as being Azem's counterpart on the Thirteenth. The impression that I had was that they were simply two heroes who survived the Flood of Darkness.