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

[PawPaw]

Or.....teleport. Which they do constantly throughout that dungeon....

Yeah, lol. There's time for a monologue, a sad wave and a smile but no time to gtfo.

IIRC there was some sort of dampening magic in the facility that rendered everyone besides Hermes weaker hence why they couldn't just teleport out. I think. I would have to go back and verify this again.

I think you're correct, I vaguely remember something about them not being at peak strength in there but I can't remember the reason for it. Still, if they could use their powers enough to beat all of those monsters and Hermes as well as summon familiars, I'm sure Emet could have managed something. I guess it just doesn't make for good drama though.

[Rulakir]

Late to the party, but the sacrifices were not a factor for Venat, in fact, she consumed the souls of her own followers to become Hydaelyn which is more than what Zodiark did. According to the LL Q&A, her motivations were a combination of believing the Ancients would always be their own downfall and believing them incapable of defeating Meteion without the ability to manipulate dynamis. The problem is that, much like Hermes, these were solvable problems had she bothered to discuss her concerns. Instead, she formed a rebellion, lead a coup, usurped Zodiark as the 'will of the star', and perpetrated a cultural genocide so none but those who escaped the sundering could oppose her.

Additionally, this was all done with no guarantee of success as by the time the she meets the WoL we have no idea what we're up against or how to stop it, so her choice becomes a gamble of astronomical proportions (not to mention putting Etheirys at risk of other world ending fates). The argument that she must maintain the time loop not only removes all agency of her character, but of everyone else as well. You can't excuse Venat for 'playing the part' and still claim that everyone else had free will. Going back to one of Ardbert's iconic lines, "We did everything right, everything that was asked of us, and still—still it came to this!" Exactly. Given that Venat knew how the unsundered would react to the sundering also makes her an accomplice to every rejoining. The fact that we have no evidence she was willing or able to assist the shards, including her backup plan being to abandon them entirely, is also particularly damning and makes them seem to be little more than collateral damage to her goal.

Given all these factors, the single only time you can express anything negative to Venat is on the boat where you can say you can't trust her. This is long before Elpis. Even then, you have Krile so enchanted by Hydaelyn she offers up her body to her while we're still supposed to be in skepticism mode knowing she's a primal but not what her intentions are. There is also a noticeable shift in everything that is a result of the sundering being attributed to the Final Days and everything that is a result of Zodiark being attributed to Hydaelyn. Y'shtola even says in Thavnair (after the moon so the Scions knew better) that Hydaelyn forestalled the Final Days by sundering Zodiark, none of which is true. What I found particularly shocking is the sundering made people exponentially more susceptible to the Song of Oblivion not only in terms of chain reactions forming, but in the destruction of souls. It's ironic that there's so much debate surrounding the unmaking of soulless creations in Elpis, but Venat is consistently shown to have no care when it comes to people's souls.

Contrast this with Emet, who you are only ever able to address as a hostile entity throughout 5.0. He is also routinely condemned by the Scions regardless of whether or not they sympathize with his motivations. As examples, Y'shtola calls him out for murdering millions and Alphinaud says (see image), but conveniently no one has a negative word for Venat about anything she's done, on the contrary, her choices are defended and excused while the WoL's dialog options towards her are wholly positive. This also reflects poorly on the Scions because it makes them appear hypocritical and self-serving. There's a reason why many felt EW was the epitome of "rules for thee, but not for me".



This next part is subjective, but I did not find anything sympathetic or relatable about Venat. Emet wanting to right the wrong of the sundering was understandable. Venat having potentially life saving information and withholding it was abhorrent to me. Her deciding on behalf of all of Etheirys that she knew best based on unfounded beliefs and flawed logic I found unconscionable. Quoting Brinne: "The fury of one friend in particular over the montage sequence was based around how it was contorting itself to uplift the struggles of Venat as a tragic individual, asking us to focus on her perspective and how much the Sundering was hurting her, and used everyone she had killed and subjected to suffering as narrative accessories for her noble torment." I felt the same and found it repugnant.

When people say they don't understand why someone would hate Venat, I likewise can't understand why anyone would like her. As far as I'm concerned, she is one of the two primary antagonists in the history of the world's lore next to Hermes. The people of Etheirys, both unsundered and sundered, were her victims in a multitude of ways. I'm also baffled why anyone when faced with the person who ended their original existence would be trusting because this time she's on your side. It ignores that Venat had no loyalty to anyone or anything but her ideals and would've acted against the WoL & Scions if it would have furthered her goal.

[KageTokage]

I feel like the Echo is something that they simply cannot allow us to consciously utilize because it's a potentially "storybreaking" power because of how it trivializes the acquisition of information when many plots shoulder on gaining knowledge of a situation; particularly with its ability to read environmental aether to see events that have happened even years prior.

It already has significantly altered how events unfolded on multiple occasions by giving us knowledge no others would've had access to but at the same time has not triggered in situations where it would've been completely game-changing. The whole Crystal Braves plot could've fallen to pieces if it had ever decided to trigger around someone who was in on the scheme as an obvious example.

Being able to actively control it would just raise constant questions of "Why not just use the Echo?" (Which was already discussed at length as far as how it makes a lot of the Elpis plot seem silly).

[AziraSyuren]

Late to the party, but the sacrifices were not a factor for Venat, in fact, she consumed the souls of her own followers to become Hydaelyn which is more than what Zodiark did. According to the LL Q&A, her motivations were a combination of believing the Ancients would always be their own downfall and believing them incapable of defeating Meteion without the ability to manipulate dynamis. The problem is that, much like Hermes, these were solvable problems had she bothered to discuss her concerns. Instead, she formed a rebellion, lead a coup, usurped Zodiark as the 'will of the star', and perpetrated a cultural genocide so none but those who escaped the sundering could oppose her.

I think the idea that they would always be their own undoing might be a bit more credible than you might think.

I think I've said this before, but the one credible indictment of Ancient society is that it could produce people like Hermes and Venat. It's highly probable that they wouldn't be the first people who saw themselves fit to judge the entire culture over deep, fundamental ideological differences. And considering those two had the means to destroy the world- one of which wasn't even that high up on the social ladder yet- it does seem less like a contrivance and more like an inevitability that some fuckhead would decide to do it again in the future. It would've taken a fundamental restructuring of Ancient society to stop another Hermes, and for all we know, that might've just made it more likely for another Venat to rise up and garner support, which they likely couldn't have done anything about.

That's why I liken Venat's actions to an act of ruthless utilitarian calculus. There are plenty of scenarios in which they could've resulted in better outcomes than had she not done anything, as heinous as they were.

That just ends up making Venat an even bigger hypocrite though, and doesn't negate the rest of your post.

[KizuyaKatogami]

I think the idea that they would always be their own undoing might be a bit more credible than you might think.

I think I've said this before, but the one credible indictment of Ancient society is that it could produce people like Hermes and Venat. It's highly probable that they wouldn't be the first people who saw themselves fit to judge the entire culture over deep, fundamental ideological differences. And considering those two had the means to destroy the world- one of which wasn't even that high up on the social ladder yet- it does seem less like a contrivance and more like an inevitability that some fuckhead would decide to do it again in the future. It would've taken a fundamental restructuring of Ancient society to stop another Hermes, and for all we know, that might've just made it more likely for another Venat to rise up and garner support, which they likely couldn't have done anything about.

That's why I liken Venat's actions to an act of ruthless utilitarian calculus. There are plenty of scenarios in which they could've resulted in better outcomes than had she not done anything, as heinous as they were.

That just ends up making Venat an even bigger hypocrite though, and doesn't negate the rest of your post.

Here’s my thinking though. Let’s say they would eventually prove to be their own undoing or even went the way of the plenty. So what? They’ve lived for what seems to be hundreds of thousands of years. If they did all die off eventually the planet would give birth to new life. That’s why Meteion and Hermes’ thinking is flawed though. You can’t go into life thinking well they’re just going to die anyways. Every single civilization will fall at some point. But that’s not what matters at all. Because then we can just apply the same logic to the sundered and what they should all die too? I really don’t think the devs thought about their themes and messages so much tbh. Especially with just how much they conflict with previous ff games’ themes.

[Theodric]

The Ancient's society was already built in such a way as to manage the likes of Venat and Hermes. It just so happens that the writers decided to stack numerous strange plot devices on top of each other as well as ridding numerous characters of any agency or sensible behaviour in order to brute force through a very specific outcome.

Shadowbringers made it clear that the Ancient world was built around debate and research for the benefit of all. Much of Endwalker further reinforced that and we're meant to just accept that a pair of extremists decided to go on a genocidal rampage but that it's supposedly a 'good' thing despite the game clearly outlining genocide as a red line that could never be justified elsewhere even with far more sympathetic baggage behind such events.

If nothing else, if the writers didn't want people to think about this sort of thing then perhaps they shouldn't have tried to moralise literally every other major event in the story...

[Rulakir]

I think I've said this before, but the one credible indictment of Ancient society is that it could produce people like Hermes and Venat.

This wasn't Venat's fear though. She specifically was afraid Etheirys would go the way of The Plenty, which is the antithesis of another subversive agent as they had achieved "perfect unity".

It's also not up to her to take executive action for the entire star to prevent possible future outcomes. The sundering left Etheirys open to fall to any one of the other stars' fates in Ultima Thule that were less likely to occur in the unsundered world. Plus, the goal of every civilization is to better itself. The notes within The Plenty even describe themselves as having once been similar to the sundered. At most she kicked the can down the road for one possibility while opening the door for numerous others, in fact, quoting Veloran: "8UC is basically a complete 'bad end' for Venat right down to people again trying to return to the past over going forward in the future (and by his very nature G'raha is the biggest thematic walking contradiction in the entire universe) and despite the short story existing to try and suggest some hopeful future for it, the storyline of Endwalker would imply that it's completely doomed."

[AziraSyuren]

Here’s my thinking though. Let’s say they would eventually prove to be their own undoing or even went the way of the plenty. So what? They’ve lived for what seems to be hundreds of thousands of years. If they did all die off eventually the planet would give birth to new life. That’s why Meteion and Hermes’ thinking is flawed though. You can’t go into life thinking well they’re just going to die anyways. Every single civilization will fall at some point. But that’s not what matters at all. Because then we can just apply the same logic to the sundered and what they should all die too? I really don’t think the devs thought about their themes and messages so much tbh. Especially with just how much they conflict with previous ff games’ themes.

Civilizational fuck ups rarely result in the end of the world though, and the Ancients were uniquely qualified to do that. Heck, they created something that could literally end the universe, which is truly unique to them, even including what we saw in Ultima Thule. It wasn't a matter of "these guys will eventually die," it was "these guys will eventually die and could take quite literally everything in existence along with them."

The Ancient's society was already built in such a way as to manage the likes of Venat and Hermes. It just so happens that the writers decided to stack numerous strange plot devices on top of each other as well as ridding numerous characters of any agency or sensible behaviour in order to brute force through a very specific outcome.

It was Shadowbringers that showed us that all it took to end the world was 14 Ancients in a trench coat (or however many people were in Venat's faction). Nothing about their society suggested that they could do anything to stop that.

This wasn't Venat's fear though. She specifically was afraid Etheirys would go the way of The Plenty, which is the antithesis of another subversive agent as they had achieved "perfect unity".

That just means she was a symptom of the problem she was trying to solve. That's precisely what makes her a hypocrite.

[KizuyaKatogami]

Civilizational fuck ups rarely result in the end of the world though, and the Ancients were uniquely qualified to do that.

It happened in the 8UC though with black rose. So it seems very possible. Look at the war of the magi as well. Major catastrophic events that could have or did potentially end the world. It really isn’t as rare as you might think, especially in a world where magic exists.

[Lauront]

Civilizational fuck ups rarely result in the end of the world though, and the Ancients were uniquely qualified to do that. Heck, they created something that could literally end the universe, which is truly unique to them, even including what we saw in Ultima Thule.

We're just talking about technical means and the specifics of this scenario, IMO. Meteion as a creation does not require vast amounts of aether - quite the opposite. There is, in theory, nothing preventing the sundered from creating something very similar to her; the Allagans had all manner of sophisticated devices, achieved in some cases through reverse-engineering Omega, as did the Mhachi. Already Y'shtola is putting familiars through the Void - it would not take a great leap for an intepid space explorer to stick something like an entelechy into space. The only reason Meteion posed a particular issue is because of how elusive dynamis is and because Hermes allowed her to escape. Both Hermes and Venat could've prevented all this. All the ingredients for this plot are equally feasible in the sundered world... including the presence of individuals who act out of spite, like Yotsuyu or Amon, or those with the willingness to sacrifice mankind on the altar of their superior judgement, like Thordan, Ilberd, Vauthry, Zenos, etc. So if we're going to wipe out one world on a "pre-crime" basis, you could do the same to the sundered world for similar reasons.