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

[Lauront]

Yes, I wonder why SE might motivate him to put out such a statement when he is the public face of the game and the man which salvaged it according to the same repetitive puff pieces put out every year since SHB...

Glad I'm not the only one bugged by this. I liked Krile but this absolute faith in a goddess which they actually know nothing about in the end is beyond understandable. She did basically ask Minfillia to die and the girl obliged, and she was pushing Krile to the limit as well.Y'shtola even got worried in Labyrinthos to begin with, but as soon as we find out it's Hydaelyn trying to talk, everything turns all good & do as you wish. None of her manipulations has ever been addressed, it's simply pushed under the carpet. All the scions act with same level of devotion to Hydaelyn as would tempered.
Yet we get the discourse from lopporitts that big bad ascians are the ones that included nasty elements in primal summoning that lead to tempering, the all-loving mother Hydaelyn doesn't do that of course. Once again pushing further the "Hydaelyn good" compared to ascians, once again throwing a bucket of white paint on her and black paint on ascians instead of letting them in the grey area.
It's just yet another great disservice to the story when you get scions acting the way they did, not questioning anything and being extremely accepting of condemnable behaviours from their self-made mother goddess. All in all, I agree they should've had the same treatment as the ascians and have a certain level of tempering to explain their questionable attitude. Either that or the reverse and have none of the two side tempered.

And this was also after 5.4 (?) had Thancred with his line about this marking the end of primals. Apparently not, they're fine now. I don't mind that so much but then they also had the self-same characters, Y'shtola and Krile, evincing mounting scepticism of Hydaelyn, and this is all discarded without second thought, even after her story becomes more and more questionable - for example, the implication that her backup plan would damn the shards, or that she decided to lie about the entire origin of the world to enable her to focus on a decision she made on a very murky basis. Agree with the rest - and in the end, the Ascian tempering is written only so as to explain the actions of some of them 12k years later. Fine, but then why not put that to use with our benevolent mother too, being at the heart of such a primal? She is after all a supreme deity and an all-powerful being, so surely at the least she should've been tempered in a similar manner to the Convocation.

[Kyohei]

And this was also after 5.4 (?) had Thancred with his line about this marking the end of primals. Apparently not, they're fine now. I don't mind that so much but then they also had the self-same characters, Y'shtola and Krile, evincing mounting scepticism of Hydaelyn, and this is all discarded without second thought, even after her story becomes more and more questionable - for example, the implication that her backup plan would damn the shards, or that she decided to lie about the entire origin of the world to enable her to focus on a decision she made on a very murky basis. Agree with the rest - and in the end, the Ascian tempering is written only so as to explain the actions of some of them 12k years later. Fine, but then why not put that to use with our benevolent mother too, being at the heart of such a primal? She is after all a supreme deity and an all-powerful being, so surely at the least she should've been tempered in a similar manner to the Convocation.

Yes that's exactly where I'm coming from, they had doubts on Hydaelyn in the end of ShB, then we start Endwalker with Krile offering herself without restraints. I don't know about others, but if I had doubts about someone I certainly wouldn't let myself freely become their vessel. Like you say, the more we get in Endwalker, the more shady truths we learn about her. Strangely though, instead of getting an even more critical eye while learning said truths, the scions' faith enhances and just become sheeps only able to welcome everything she does. It simply doesn't logically add up.
Hydaelyn certainly felt different than Venat, it would've been natural for her to have been tempered by her own ideals and convictions really. Those were so strong she obliterated her own world, but the story is trying to tell me her mind remains intact? Sorry but can't buy that.

[Skyborne]

What up everyone, it's me getting a second character through MSQ, on my way to fixing the timeline:


I am heartbroken to report she survived with 10% HP.

You tried, at least. Ktsis was my favorite dungeon despite the weird story turn, and the only dungeon I have repeatedly grinded with scenario trusts. Meanwhile, the most relatable character for me:

(kind of telling that these guys are the ones I have seen the most fanart/memes for; the most powerful strawmen ever)

In any case, I've (mostly) made my peace knowing others think similarly, and that the honeymoon period already seems to be fading away for some. The lore forum has also been... enlightening in some respects to others' thought processes and mindsets, and that the story is written more for them than people like myself. I can look forward to the remaining Garleans/Ascians being cut down and choking on their own blood for being stubborn old farts who are clinging to their principles and dreams and won't just, like, move on and Forge Ahead into the Better Tomorrow (if you're a scion or scion-aligned, anyway). Then afterward before the corpses have even gone cold my wol, Graha, and Krile can hit up Starbies and McDolans and laugh together as charming twanging guitar music plays, just like my modern coffee shop/high school AUs.

I am curious though... Emet-Selch, iirc, took top 10 in an overall FF character popularity poll, and #1 in an EW poll, though I wonder how it will look in a year or so with less recency bias. A true underdog character who has suffered, been betrayed, and lost it all, without the benefit of being an eternal comfort/support plushie character. In the meantime, my 600mb ancient/ascian folder shall continue to swell...

[Teraq]

If anything, doing the side quests in Elpis doesn't help seeing them as "unable" to learn, grow and change quite the contrary...Most of them were eager to see and try news ways of doing things and thinking. What they needed wasn't obliteration but matter to grow from. Things grow with and according to the soil it's given, not from nothingness. Presented as they were, if they had knowledge of not only what caused the final days but how many civilisations ended, there's no doubt they would have re-evaluated their ways.
[...]
Somehow, instead of leaving a feeling of hope as intended, Endwalker struck me with fatalism.

This is 100% how I felt like. When summarising the story to a friend (before deep-diving into ridiculous detail, because of course I did), I went with "this is a story about hope versus annihilation, but only if you're the right people, because as it happens, hope simply isn't for everyone". The Ancients simply couldn't win: either they were too perfect and were obviously, ineluctably going to end up like Ostrakon Strawmanos at some indefinite point in the far future, and therefore were naturally deserving of being literally erased from history because uhhhh yea; or they just plain weren't perfect enough because some of them were sad sometimes, treatment of sentient beings in that one research facility could be improved somewhat and Pandaemonium happened, therefore their world was totally shit and obviously not worth being brought back, haha, GOTCHA MR "we were so much better" EMET-SELCH!

And speaking of Pandaemonium, I find it interesting that the probably-terrible events that transpired there were witnessed by the guy who then went on to save the planet regardless, struggle for 12,000 years to bring his people back and was prepared to toil alone for however many more out of sheer determination at the cost of his own self. Venat really could have taken a lesson or two about hope from her counterpart. And no, I'm not stepping down from this Elidibus soapbox unless someone forcibly drags me down from it.

I'm hesitant to be angry at the writers because I still think there's a possibility Ishikawa was pressured to change the story. I can't be mad at her if it turns out it's someone at corporate who would've gotten their knickers in a twist if Hydaelyn was portrayed as anything but good. Or, gods help us, if it was the ethics committee who had a problem with it. I'm reminded of when the writer of AoT wanted to kill Sasha and his editor was so distraught over it that he let her survive what was supposed to be a fatal encounter.

I realize there was almost certainly shenanigans going on backstage with regards to the story being cut short. But as much as I like a lot of the elements she's brought into the story, there's a number of things that irk me about Ishikawa. Her apparent reluctance to have any real consequences for the heroes is one thing, but my biggest peeve is how it seems she plays favorites with characters. Some of them are obviously her babies and boy, does it show. I suppose it's only natural for a writer of a sprawling storyline like this to prefer writing the characters they've introduced. Nowhere was it as egregious as with Fandaniel, in part because Emet-Selch kind of was lightning in a bottle and Fandaniel was always going to be worse, but let's be frank, the constant spotlight on Emet also pissed me off.

IMO this really contributed to Endwalker feeling awkward to me because it largely felt like its own enclosed storyline, with its own concepts and central characters, rather than the wrapping-up-everything finale I thought it was supposed to be. On their own, I found Dynamis, Meteion and even Fandaniel, janky as I found his character to be, pretty interesting ... as their own plot line. Similarly, the ending credits artwork featuring only the Ancients that appear in Elpis works ... when considering Endwalker its own self-contained thing. But the moment you tell me this is the epic conclusion to a 10-year story arc and that Zodiark died for this is when my soul starts leaving my body.

Also, coming from the ASOIAF fandom and having watched (with hardly concealed glee, I'll admit) Game of Thrones blow up from a relative distance, I never want to read the words subverted expectations anymore.

Yes that's exactly where I'm coming from, they had doubts on Hydaelyn in the end of ShB, then we start Endwalker with Krile offering herself without restraints. I don't know about others, but if I had doubts about someone I certainly wouldn't let myself freely become their vessel. Like you say, the more we get in Endwalker, the more shady truths we learn about her. Strangely though, instead of getting an even more critical eye while learning said truths, the scions' faith enhances and just become sheeps only able to welcome everything she does. It simply doesn't logically add up.
Hydaelyn certainly felt different than Venat, it would've been natural for her to have been tempered by her own ideals and convictions really. Those were so strong she obliterated her own world, but the story is trying to tell me her mind remains intact? Sorry but can't buy that.

lol the apparent lack of consequences from Hydaelyn being a Primal at all is hhNNNNGGGggg. No tempering, no memory loss, no bias. So much for the ominousness of that reveal back then!

[Lauront]

This is 100% how I felt like. When summarising the story to a friend (before deep-diving into ridiculous detail, because of course I did), I went with "this is a story about hope versus annihilation, but only if you're the right people, because as it happens, hope simply isn't for everyone". The Ancients simply couldn't win: either they were too perfect and were obviously, ineluctably going to end up like Ostrakon Strawmanos at some indefinite point in the far future, and therefore were naturally deserving of being literally erased from history because uhhhh yea; or they just plain weren't perfect enough because some of them were sad sometimes, treatment of sentient beings in that one research facility could be improved somewhat and Pandaemonium happened, therefore their world was totally shit and obviously not worth being brought back, haha, GOTCHA MR "we were so much better" EMET-SELCH!

Indeed - meanwhile, Amon, being his own sundered version of Hermes's soul, still decries man's wickedness (and I mean given how much worse the sundered behave in many respects, this is not surprising), so if we were to adopt the logic that they deserved to be destroyed for what are, in my view, comparatively mild imperfections, where would that leave the sundered, or just about any other civilisation? Only the dragons, based on the little we're told of them, the Ea and the people of the Plenty appeared to have reached similar levels of advancement, and I am sure even these civilisations would've engaged in some activities certain quarters would chastise them for - much as we saw the darker side of the dragons during the Dragonsong War. It's why I don't think they ever quite pitched it as those blemishes meaning they deserved their fate, even if some quarters of the fanbase read it that way... it quite swiftly morphs into an insane standard, which we humans would be damned by, too.

And speaking of Pandaemonium, I find it interesting that the probably-terrible events that transpired there were witnessed by the guy who then went on to save the planet regardless, struggle for 12,000 years to bring his people back and was prepared to toil alone for however many more out of sheer determination at the cost of his own self. Venat really could have taken a lesson or two about hope from her counterpart. And no, I'm not stepping down from this Elidibus soapbox unless someone forcibly drags me down from it.

Precisely. That is how one actually lives out the credo "nothing is impossible".

[Rulakir]

In any case, I've (mostly) made my peace knowing others think similarly, and that the honeymoon period already seems to be fading away for some. The lore forum has also been... enlightening in some respects to others' thought processes and mindsets, and that the story is written more for them than people like myself.

I'm not sure I'll make peace unless the new story is good. I'll at least know not to get attached to any future sympathetic antagonists. -_- I believe how people view Venat and her actions largely depend on individual values. I wish the topic weren't so controversial because I'd love to know if there's any correlation with political leaning. I have my theories about that, but I don't want to start a fiery debate. :P

I realize there was almost certainly shenanigans going on backstage with regards to the story being cut short. But as much as I like a lot of the elements she's brought into the story, there's a number of things that irk me about Ishikawa. Her apparent reluctance to have any real consequences for the heroes is one thing, but my biggest peeve is how it seems she plays favorites with characters.

I can't stop thinking about the fact that the woman who gets attached to her characters, who gets upset when they're killed, who uses any excuse to bring them back, is the same one who wrote Venat as being permanently gone. Granted, Hydaelyn wasn't of her creation, but Venat was. Things that make you go "hmm".

[KizuyaKatogami]

I'm not sure I'll make peace unless the new story is good. I'll at least know not to get attached to any future sympathetic antagonists. -_- I believe how people view Venat and her actions largely depend on individual values. I wish the topic weren't so controversial because I'd love to know if there's any correlation with political leaning. I have my theories about that, but I don't want to start a fiery debate. :P



I can't stop thinking about the fact that the woman who gets attached to her characters, who gets upset when they're killed, who uses any excuse to bring them back, is the same one who wrote Venat as being permanently gone. Granted, Hydaelyn wasn't of her creation, but Venat was. Things that make you go "hmm".

I question the same thing in regards to your latter comment. Apparently Hermes and Meteion are her favorite characters yet she basically dooms hermes to a fate worse than death or so it seems where he’s endlessly reincarnated in a world he wants nothing to do with.

[Teraq]

I question the same thing in regards to your latter comment. Apparently Hermes and Meteion are her favorite characters yet she basically dooms hermes to a fate worse than death or so it seems where he’s endlessly reincarnated in a world he wants nothing to do with.

You do have the option of telling him "next time we'll look for your answer together" (paraphrasing) (which I actually picked, because I'm a sap regardless of how much I rant against Hermes). I don't think he's doomed to always end up being a misanthropic little s...camp, because that would go against what I feel is the narrative of "each sundered reincarnation is their own person", but he's probably predisposed to it, sort of like familial history of psychiatric illness.

[Rulakir]

I question the same thing in regards to your latter comment. Apparently Hermes and Meteion are her favorite characters yet she basically dooms hermes to a fate worse than death or so it seems where he’s endlessly reincarnated in a world he wants nothing to do with.

Yeah, but he can come back in some way or another. There are probably shards of Fandaniel on the other reflections, they just won't be the Amon version we got. Venat is like the writer said, "I'm so done with you I'm going to ensure there's no way you come back unless we do more time travel shenanigans," which is pretty hardcore considering what we know of Ishikawa. One might assume that the Venat we got in EW is not the one she wanted to write.

[Caurcas]

On the topic of political leaning and how that effects character perception I'd wager collectivist would steer toward the Ancients, and individualist would steer towards Venat.