Sundering stuff established in the Q&A

[Veloran]

We know that we didn't change the timeline because nothing has changed in the present.

We have no idea whether or not anything was retroactively changed, the player's perception is too limited to confirm that.

The question itself is about the structure of the time loop. Is it what we would describe as a 'Stable Time Loop', or did the story actually play out twice, with the second iteration of events being identical to the first? The reason why Argos supports this being a 'Stable Time Loop' is because he shouldn't trust you yet if this is your first meeting.

Alternatively, it could be an unstable time loop. Where the loop is always happening but events aren't necessarily the same every time. In that case the timeline we experience may just be one of countless iterations of events.

I think sundering the Aether of a being that is already aetherically thin wouldn’t be the most effective attack, especially when you consider she’s already a hive mind made up of different Meteions.

If we're to believe there's a lower limit of aetherial density beyond which life can't survive, it would be.

Ultimately though, there exists two possibilities, one where we mention at least one other Unsundered and one where only Emet is mentioned.

Those aren't the only two possibilities. For example, WoL could have mentioned Lahabrea and Elidibus, but not elaborated that they too were Unsundered. It's extremely likely that WoL talked about the rejoinings in reference to Emet-Selch and the Ascians, given one of the options when first broaching the subject is talking about the sundered reflections, and Emet's actions on the First attempting to rejoin the shard.

Except he distinguishes between those two as different interpretations. The timeline being the same regardless and Venat working hard to maintain things are separate conceptions of what happened, with him believing the former and not the latter.

The fan-translation you provided and the official translation posted to the liveletter thread aren't the same. Yours,

Q: I don’t really understand why the Warrior of Light messing around in Elpis didn’t create any alternate timelines. What happened?

A: Well, I think the most important thing is that you can come up with your own theories for this one. In my personal interpretation however is that the timelines were always the same. Another interpretation you can have is that maybe Venat worked really hard behind the scenes to ensure the timeline didn’t go awry. Therefore the Warrior of Light was always acting in accordance with this plan of Venat so the timeline that we are aware of didn’t change when we went back to the affected. I personally think that when we went to Mare Lamentorium and we first met Argos and Argos really took to us when we were able to ride it, that's basically the proof that at that point, the timeline is going accordingly. We are adding all these stuff to New Game+ in 6.1 so if you’re interested in this I suggest you replay it and think about these questions when you’re playing it.

the official,

A: First of all, we’ve left that part up to interpretation.

With that said, my personal interpretation is that the past and present were always the part of the same timeline. Although there was still a possibility for the timelines to diverge, the Warrior of Light was unwittingly acting in accordance with Venat’s plans, which unified the past and present. Another interpretation might be that Venat worked really hard behind the scenes to ensure that the timeline wouldn’t go awry.

Seeing how Argos took to us on our first meeting, I’d say that proves that the past and present were already unified.

In both cases, he doesn't establish that a predestined timeline and Venat working to ensure things stayed the same are mutually exclusive. In fact it could be both. But in the official translation, the wording is much more clear on Venat's motives explicitly being to keep the timeline aligned with WoL's future - Even prior to the secondary interpretation of Venat herself being directly responsible for keeping the timeline intact, the first, Yoshida's, establishes that this was her motive. Additionally, there really isn't any point to him including this idea about her if it wasn't in line with Venat's character.

[KizuyaKatogami]

Yknow, I think we both know why he answered that way, and it’s certainly not because he doesn't understand the plot.

I mean it’s quite literally his headcanon. The fact they won’t give us an actual answer and then basically said to not look into things too much kind of shows how convoluted it is lol. Much less how much he probably understands on it considering the massive writing changes that seemed to have gone on.Especially since this is the end of the arc, but they handwaved major plot points and left other crucial things unanswered.Almost like they don’t have an answer and things just happen because they do.

[Tehmon]

Of course Yoshi is going to give vague answers to several lore related questions.

1) he is unsure whether some plot points/threads will be revisited in the future content
2) the ancients being as popular as they are, certainly makes it appealing to the writers to hamfist them in somehow in the future
3) he doesn't want to step on too many toes with giving straight-forward answers since fan content, theories and analysis are a good way to keep the game afloat and people talking and actively interacting, thus him only giving his interpretation on lore related questions, without necessarily squashing (popular) fan theories in the process.. of course, there are people who feel they've been personally wronged by the story already, so it might also just be light backtracking

[EaraGrace]

If we're to believe there's a lower limit of aetherial density beyond which life can't survive, it would be.

A limit we can neither test nor definitively say exists as we now have examples from the role quests and in Ultima Thule itself of dynamis beings existing. Not to mention even using aether in Ultima Thule is impossible if Dynamis wielding beings don’t establish the way first.

Those aren't the only two possibilities. For example, WoL could have mentioned Lahabrea and Elidibus, but not elaborated that they too were Unsundered. It's extremely likely that WoL talked about the rejoinings in reference to Emet-Selch and the Ascians, given one of the options when first broaching the subject is talking about the sundered reflections, and Emet's actions on the First attempting to rejoin the shard.

The Rejoinings were for sure mentioned, but in what detail and specificity unknown. The reason I said they’re are two ways to interpret that scene is rooted in the fact that we can either assume that the info we gave is limited to what was directly mentioned in the follow up convo and shown in the flashback images, or we can assume that more was said but can’t definitively say what it was. If it’s the latter, then it is illogical to make any assumption about what was said or not said as we can’t prove or disprove anything. We’d both have to basically guess or try to infer it from other info. Which is I why I put a heavy emphasis on Venats statements post Kairos, it avoids a lot of those problems.

The fan-translation you provided and the official translation posted to the liveletter thread aren't the same. Yours,



the official,

Correction, the Reddit discord transcript is a word for word transcript of Yoshi Ps answer and Kates (the head of the English Localization team) translation. The official one is an abridged version, as we can see when viewing the clip itself.

In both cases, he doesn't establish that a predestined timeline and Venat working to ensure things stayed the same are mutually exclusive. In fact it could be both.

It could be, very true. But I’m responding to a statement that this is 100% the same theory. If you wish to argue that they could be combined then that’s fine, but that’s not what Yoshi P is explicitly saying as he is separating the two in his explanation.

But in the official translation, the wording is much more clear on Venat's motives explicitly being to keep the timeline aligned with WoL's future - Even prior to the secondary interpretation of Venat herself being directly responsible for keeping the timeline intact, the first, Yoshida's, establishes that this was her motive. Additionally, there really isn't any point to him including this idea about her if it wasn't in line with Venat's character.

The translation you posted however still makes the distinction between the WoL acting in accordance with Venats plan while visiting Elpis and Venat making sure the timeline is consistent in its entirety. This is another huge problem with reading this answer as “Yoshi P confirms she’s following the timeline.” The abridged translation makes a distinction between Venat planning our trip to Elpis and Venat planning to follow the timeline that results in us, a distinction that has no purpose if they are one and the same.

So to summarize, my question to those who believe this is him saying Venat followed the timeline is as follows:

If Yoshi P is saying that Venat planned the timeline so that it would follow what we tell her and ensure the conjunction would occur, then why did he distinguish between the interpretation that Venat had designs for our visit to Elpis and the interpretation that Venat acted to make sure the timeline as a whole didn’t go awry?

I mean it’s quite literally his headcanon. The fact they won’t give us an actual answer and then basically said to not look into things too much kind of shows how convoluted it is lol. Much less how much he probably understands on it considering the massive writing changes that seemed to have gone on.Especially since this is the end of the arc, but they handwaved major plot points and left other crucial things unanswered.Almost like they don’t have an answer and things just happen because they do.

Twelve help you if you create a fictional world that people are invested in. Not confirming every detail of laying down explicit answers to questions is as old as fictional universes for good reason.

[Veloran]

A limit we can neither test nor definitively say exists as we now have examples from the role quests and in Ultima Thule itself of dynamis beings existing. Not to mention even using aether in Ultima Thule is impossible if Dynamis wielding beings don’t establish the way first.

We actually have no idea if those were "Dynamis beings" nor even if aether doesn't exist in Ultima Thule. Y'shtola says as much, but we know for a fact her perception is limited.

The reason I said they’re are two ways to interpret that scene is rooted in the fact that we can either assume that the info we gave is limited to what was directly mentioned in the follow up convo and shown in the flashback images, or we can assume that more was said but can’t definitively say what it was. If it’s the latter, then it is illogical to make any assumption about what was said or not said as we can’t prove or disprove anything. We’d both have to basically guess or try to infer it from other info.

I think given Yoshida's answers it's perfectly reasonable to infer and interpret based on what we know.

Correction, the Reddit discord transcript is a word for word transcript of Yoshi Ps answer and Kates (the head of the English Localization team) translation. The official one is an abridged version, as we can see when viewing the clip itself.

And yet the official one is the one they chose to post. Given the translation during the LL was spoken off the cuff and the one posted to the forums was written later, that's the one with more validity.

It could be, very true. But I’m responding to a statement that this is 100% the same theory. If you wish to argue that they could be combined then that’s fine, but that’s not what Yoshi P is explicitly saying as he is separating the two in his explanation.

But they're not well separated. "Another interpretation" doesn't necessarily mean incompatibility with the previous one.

The translation you posted however still makes the distinction between the WoL acting in accordance with Venats plan while visiting Elpis and Venat making sure the timeline is consistent in its entirety. This is another huge problem with reading this answer as “Yoshi P confirms she’s following the timeline.” The abridged translation makes a distinction between Venat planning our trip to Elpis and Venat planning to follow the timeline that results in us, a distinction that has no purpose if they are one and the same.

Neither answer specifies that it's referring only to events in Elpis. The question refers to Elpis yes, but when Yoshida responds he talks about the timelines in totality. And again, Venat's motive is given no matter which interpretation Yoshida is suggesting. Given he's willing to say here that's what she wanted, given her lines about fulfilling the conjunction between past and future in the game, and given the reveal that she intentionally allowed for Emet-Selch's survival, I don't know why you're still trying to deny her intentions. Well, I know why, but the how of it has become increasingly infeasible.

[KizuyaKatogami]

Of course Yoshi is going to give vague answers to several lore related questions.

1) he is unsure whether some plot points/threads will be revisited in the future content
2) the ancients being as popular as they are, certainly makes it appealing to the writers to hamfist them in somehow in the future
3) he doesn't want to step on too many toes with giving straight-forward answers since fan content, theories and analysis are a good way to keep the game afloat and people talking and actively interacting, thus him only giving his interpretation on lore related questions, without necessarily squashing (popular) fan theories in the process.. of course, there are people who feel they've been personally wronged by the story already, so it might also just be light backtracking

Except for numerous points he was shocked people even looked that deep into it, like what Azem was doing, how the unsundered escaped etc basically saying not to look too deep into the story….the story that is deep with lore. This is the end of the arc. They’ve stated as much.

Twelve help you if you create a fictional world that people are invested in. Not confirming every detail of laying down explicit answers to questions is as old as fictional universes for good reason.

You act like i’m bringing up mundane things. I think explaining explicitly how the time travel works is important, especially considering they’ve used it twice now. Otherwise we get things like the twinning which…what exactly was the point of that exactly? If we were just going to resort to time travel using the tower in the future anyways. But when he says things like oh i didn’t expect people to be interested in what Azem was doing…Really? Come on now. This was the expansion to end the 10 year arc and we’re still left with more questions than answers. There’s a difference between leaving small tidbits open ended and completely leaving out crucial information.

[EaraGrace]

We actually have no idea if those were "Dynamis beings" nor even if aether doesn't exist in Ultima Thule. Y'shtola says as much, but we know for a fact her perception is limited.

We know they were born of dynamis, as they did not exist until Thancreds sacrifice.

And yet the official one is the one they chose to post. Given the translation during the LL was spoken off the cuff and the one posted to the forums was written later, that's the one with more validity.

All the answers in that post are abridged and are missing details. A good example is the question on class balance, where the confirmation of a change to Living Dead appears in the full answer Yoshi P gave, but not the abridged one.

But they're not well separated. "Another interpretation" doesn't necessarily mean incompatibility with the previous one.

You’re misunderstanding. I’m not saying they are incompatible, just that they were separated for a reason. If I say the answer to a math problem is 7 and then follow that by saying another answer people could get is 10, I’m not saying that they are incompatible than the other (some problems can have more than one result). I am simply saying my answer is one thing, and another answer exists that’s different.

Neither answer specifies that it's referring only to events in Elpis. The question refers to Elpis yes, but when Yoshida responds he talks about the timelines in totality. And again, Venat's motive is given no matter which interpretation Yoshida is suggesting. Given he's willing to say here that's what she wanted, given her lines about fulfilling the conjunction between past and future in the game, and given the reveal that she intentionally allowed for Emet-Selch's survival, I don't know why you're still trying to deny her intentions. Well, I know why, but the how of it has become increasingly infeasible.

And what lines about the conjunction? The ones where she doesn’t accept it’s happening until after we get back from Elpis? Or where she states “she won’t take anything for granted as I walk my path?”

Hell here’s a translation of her conversation with us before we leave Elpis combining all four language versions.



Explain how your theory survives the line “I will take nothing for granted and nothing at face value, not even your story.”

Add in the fact she only intended to save Emet and even that was left to chance,

Add in the efforts to stop the Rejoinings,

Add in this line,



And add in this one where she states she intended to stop the Flood if she could, an event that was needed for the timelines to match,



I think it’s clear.

And seriously miss me with the arrogant “I know why you’re defending her hardy har har.” I’m genuinely trying to engage in discussion despite our previous conversations, and all that happens is I get my intentions questioned. If you think I’m just some blind simp then stop wasting both of our times.

You act like i’m bringing up mundane things. I think explaining explicitly how the time travel works is important, especially considering they’ve used it twice now. Otherwise we get things like the twinning which…what exactly was the point of that exactly? If we were just going to resort to time travel using the tower in the future anyways. But when he says things like oh i didn’t expect people to be interested in what Azem was doing…Really? Come on now. This was the expansion to end the 10 year arc and we’re still left with more questions than answers. There’s a difference between leaving small tidbits open ended and completely leaving out crucial information.

I know wayyyyy more about where things stand after SHB and EW. In Stormblood when I first started playing we knew nothing compared to today, and while I would like a few more answers for sure, the vast majority of the questions I needed answered have been.

[KizuyaKatogami]

I know wayyyyy more about where things stand after SHB and EW. In Stormblood when I first started playing we knew nothing compared to today, and while I would like a few more answers for sure, the vast majority of the questions I needed answered have been.

And that’s good for you, but for me, when they advertise something as the end of the 10 year arc or whatever they want to call it, i expect the important questions that have been raised in that arc…to be answered. Not to either be ignored or handwaved in an outside of game QnA. That’s just unprofessional and extremely lazy imo. But what is kind of insulting is him basically saying don’t look too deep into things, in a game that they preach about being more about the story than anything else. It just comes off as hypocritical if anything.

[EaraGrace]

And that’s good for you, but for me, when they advertise something as the end of the 10 year arc or whatever they want to call it, i expect the important questions that have been raised in that arc…to be answered. Not to either be ignored or handwaved in an outside of game QnA. That’s just unprofessional and extremely lazy imo. But what is kind of insulting is him basically saying don’t look too deep into things, in a game that they preach about being more about the story than anything else. It just comes off as hypocritical if anything.

Could you post the full quote you’re referring to from Yoshi P

[KizuyaKatogami]

Could you post the full quote you’re referring to from Yoshi P

I don’t have it on hand. If you’re interested im sure you’d be able to find it. Doesn’t really denounce what i said either way lol