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

[Lauront]

Venat in FFXII was a villain as well in my eyes. Now that I think about it, I suppose they weren't all that different. Both had a misguided ideology they felt would benefit mankind more than the status quo and were Hell bent on seeing it done regardless of the amount of bloodshed it caused.



I hated that as well. Meanwhile, after the Hydaelyn trial we get Alisaie saying, "No! This can't be happening!" and I'm like "Ding dong, the witch is dead." :P

I read in Japan it's made more clear that Emet is a hero, supposedly the lyrics of the song are "one hero brings shadow, one hero brings light". I think player viewpoints depend a lot on who they sympathized with and I found the Ancients more sympathetic than the sundered, particularly the Scions who are all rather privileged. Ultima Thule fell flat for me not because of the fake out deaths, but because except for G'raha and Estinien none of them had experienced despair on a relatable level for me. The Ancients were (and still are) the original victims, who endured an apocalypse, survived it, only to be split apart and forever live as shadows of their former selves.

I think it's clear in the EN version as well but it's tucked away more, e.g. in the trial blurb:

Hearken unto a requiem for a hero fallen. A man who lived a thousand thousand of our lives clinging desperately to faint hope, never shirking his sworn duty to his long-lost brethren. A man who stood proud and did avow his true name on the threshold of the battle that would see him fall to his rival─the light to quench his shadow. Borrowing liberally from the funereal rites of the Night's Blessed, the minstreling wanderer weaves an elegy in that hero's honor─the tragic-yet-triumphant tale of a man and a battle that ne'er shall be forgotten.

Nonetheless, they don't shy away from calling him a "villain" etc. in interviews, even as they claim it's down to perspective (i.e. who is "right" is down to whose side stands to benefit etc.) so if she's meant to be judged in the same light as SHB Emet, would they refer to her as such as well? There's a disconnect in a lot of what is said, both with Emet-Selch and Elidibus, and how the characters themselves behave after, as well as the degree of pushback they get - Venat/Hydaelyn gets next to none. With Emet-Selch, quite understandably all the Scions stand against him, and with Elidibus you're even repeating some of Emet's lines. Whereas with her, there's just this tacit acceptance of everything she's said and done - I guess because they weren't the ones directly impacted by it, and Emet apparently had already resigned himself to passing on by Ultima Thule.

Overall, nearly everything about it annoyed me, including the lack of curiosity in our character about their ancient self, plus the persistent vacant stares when addressed by Emet-Selch and Hyth (although at least there's an apology to Elidibus), as well as Y'shtola's brain going AWOL.