*Spoilers* Anyone feel joining Emet would have been better

[EaraGrace]

VENAT IS A HERETIC

[OhNooo]

When someone decides it’s time for the sundered to get sundered:

[RyuDragnier]

You dare turn this into a meme thread!?

[Selvokaz]

Continuously sacrificing beings to feed Zodiac is in and of itself an evil and hostile act something that the ancients would have been highly against, which means they would have been betraying their own tenents.

[Stepjam]

Doubt I'm adding much, but in character it would make zero sense for us to side with Emet. The Warrior of Light wouldn't condemn everyone they know and love to lives of misery and death to bring back a society from the past, not to mention they wouldn't subject all those other shards to suffering and death for it. They may be the reincarnation of Azem, but they are their own person with their own history and feelings, and after all the hell they've gone through for their world, they wouldn't just throw it away and condemn millions for a theoretically better society they've had no part in.

People who say that we should be able to join Emet speak from a place of emotional distance from the world. It's just fiction, so it's easy to say "Yes, lets team up with the villain whose plan involves mass genocide". I acknowledge I'm also speaking from a place of distance, but I'm just thinking about how our character ingame would feel. And sure there's room for roleplay, but I just don't think it make sense narratively for the WoL to even consider siding with Emet.

[KizuyaKatogami]

Doubt I'm adding much, but in character it would make zero sense for us to side with Emet. The Warrior of Light wouldn't condemn everyone they know and love to lives of misery and death to bring back a society from the past, not to mention they wouldn't subject all those other shards to suffering and death for it. They may be the reincarnation of Azem, but they are their own person with their own history and feelings, and after all the hell they've gone through for their world, they wouldn't just throw it away and condemn millions for a theoretically better society they've had no part in.

People who say that we should be able to join Emet speak from a place of emotional distance from the world. It's just fiction, so it's easy to say "Yes, lets team up with the villain whose plan involves mass genocide". I acknowledge I'm also speaking from a place of distance, but I'm just thinking about how our character ingame would feel. And sure there's room for roleplay, but I just don't think it make sense narratively for the WoL to even consider siding with Emet.

I mean, we side with Venat and she committed mass genocide and her whole plan and even backup plan resulted in mass genocide. Pick your poison.

[Anvaire]

Doubt I'm adding much, but in character it would make zero sense for us to side with Emet. The Warrior of Light wouldn't condemn everyone they know and love to lives of misery and death to bring back a society from the past, not to mention they wouldn't subject all those other shards to suffering and death for it. They may be the reincarnation of Azem, but they are their own person with their own history and feelings, and after all the hell they've gone through for their world, they wouldn't just throw it away and condemn millions for a theoretically better society they've had no part in.

People who say that we should be able to join Emet speak from a place of emotional distance from the world. It's just fiction, so it's easy to say "Yes, lets team up with the villain whose plan involves mass genocide". I acknowledge I'm also speaking from a place of distance, but I'm just thinking about how our character ingame would feel. And sure there's room for roleplay, but I just don't think it make sense narratively for the WoL to even consider siding with Emet.

the thing about the continual sacrifice was that it was what they suggested doing and not that that they actually did it. it was likely the thing that Elidbus refered to in 5.3 "divided over the fate of a star, always fleeting but not this time." I think that Elidibus extracted himself from Zodiark specifically to mediate and find a solution. Given time this is likely to have resulted in them Not sacrificing more given the kind of people they are portrayed as in Amaurot.

I can only assume the reason it didnt come to fruition is because of Venat becoming Hydealyn and sundering before they even gave mediation a chance. Hell i think the only reason Zodiark was bound at all was likely due to Elidibus extracting himself. This also explains his bitterness towards Venat in endwalker.

The other thing to note, is that to given that all life that was due to be sacrificed to restore the original souls that created Zodiark was prior to the sundering and that the ancients are the only confimed lifeforms on Etheirys prior to sundering that would indicate they were not going to sacrifice people but rather the creations. Because if they sacrifised those left behind to reclaim the original souls, then in effect they would only be doing the same as they did initially. So the question then becomes, what exactly where they going to sacrifice?

I suspect it was creations or the offspring of creations.

I also think that seeing the initial sacrifice as evil is misguided. These people agreed to sacrifice themselves to save their people. There is no evidence to suggest they were forced only did so willingly. I cant honestly say sacrifice is right, but equally if it is willing done because there is no other choice then the individuals choice to sacrifice themself is not evil. It should be applauded.

[Ralphe2449]

Doubt I'm adding much, but in character it would make zero sense for us to side with Emet.

This is an mmorpg, we are the WoL and therefore we decide who we are, the WoL is not some independent character so from my perspective it makes absolute sense to join Emet Selch.

Another thing people forget is that they keep talking about "genocide" while Emet Selch did say that by perpetuating this farce you are only causing more destruction and suffering overall than just one quick worldwide snap destruction and that is a fact, the overall suffering and destruction would be far less if the Ancients were able to return by causing those rejoinings and that says a lot.


And how about the Ancients? Seems to me that people have completely forgotten and chose to justify the genocide of the ancients at the hands of Hydaelin which destroyed their entire civilization which was objectively superior, immortality, ability to create concepts, those are objectively superior traits and you cant argue against that.
It is like being a god and then turned into a mere mortal without any special powers, that is literal degradation.

So what we have now is people defending the genocide of the ancients and perpetuating a far worse and inferior world that is filled with destruction and suffering.

It would be similar like real life, the planet and species are a disaster, yet people due to their attachment would be willing to protect this war ridden planet(and not referring to just the current popular one) that might soon be uninhabitable due to climate change rather than see it gone to bring back an objectively superior world, because again, the ancients are not some delusional people like some IRL people who obsess over "le good old days", the ancients were objectively superior so you would be arguing against a better world simply because you are used to this disaster of a world.

And let's be honest, it is illogical to assume that Ancients wouldnt have figured out the problem considering how research focused they were and how zodiarc protected the planet for literally thousands of years and would for many more.

[EaraGrace]

Another thing people forget is that they keep talking about "genocide" while Emet Selch did say that by perpetuating this farce you are only causing more destruction and suffering overall than just one quick worldwide snap destruction and that is a fact, the overall suffering and destruction would be far less if the Ancients were able to return by causing those rejoinings and that says a lot.

Is the prevention of suffering the ultimate goal of justice in your view?

And how about the Ancients? Seems to me that people have completely forgotten and chose to justify the genocide of the ancients at the hands of Hydaelin which destroyed their entire civilization which was objectively superior, immortality, ability to create concepts, those are objectively superior traits and you cant argue against that.
It is like being a god and then turned into a mere mortal without any special powers, that is literal degradation.

A degradation for sure, but stories and myths are full of examples of gods becoming mortal, and in so doing gaining from their lowered status.

So what we have now is people defending the genocide of the ancients and perpetuating a far worse and inferior world that is filled with destruction and suffering.

Worse? Debatable but I think that’s incredibly subjective and thus prone to personal bias. Inferior? Now there’s where I have to voice disagreement. Having greater power and lifespans is not the only goal for a species I don’t think. Questions like is the world just? Is it a world of virtue? Do people value the good? Will this society even last? These are also important questions I feel. A world of immortal demons (hypothetical not saying the Ancients are this) would be an inferior world to me.

It would be similar like real life, the planet and species are a disaster, yet people due to their attachment would be willing to protect this war ridden planet(and not referring to just the current popular one) that might soon be uninhabitable due to climate change rather than see it gone to bring back an objectively superior world, because again, the ancients are not some delusional people like some IRL people who obsess over "le good old days", the ancients were objectively superior so you would be arguing against a better world simply because you are used to this disaster of a world.

But in truth I think the metaphor is reversed. It’s the Sundered that have the opportunity to last for much longer on a star not threatened my Meteion, and the Ancients who die to their attachment refused to change.

And let's be honest, it is illogical to assume that Ancients wouldnt have figured out the problem considering how research focused they were and how zodiarc protected the planet for literally thousands of years and would for many more.

I do think they would’ve figured out a half solution. Creating beings that possess a will and low aetheric density, the two requirements to manipulate Dynamis, is a distinct possibility for them. The question then, is could they come up with a way of imparting the hope and perseverance needed to progress through Ultima Thule. That I feel is much more difficult and fraught with moral dilemmas.

[Ralphe2449]

Is the prevention of suffering the ultimate goal of justice in your view?

If you care about justice you wouldnt be defending hydealin's genocide of the ancients, if you care about prevention of suffering you again cant defend Hydaelin's sundered creation that is filled with it which is far more than the sundered parodies.

A degradation for sure, but stories and myths are full of examples of gods becoming mortal, and in so doing gaining from their lowered status.

Unless they regained their godlike by the the end they are still inferior and many times weaker than they were before, some personal realization about life does not compensate for loss of LITERALLY godlike powers.

Why? It doesnt matter how smart or wise you feel you are, if you can get casually smitten out of existence by a being with magical powers that lives forever you simply cannot compete because you cannot attain that level of power, especially considering your extremely limited lifespan.

Worse? Debatable

World is filled with conflict and people fighting and hating each other unlike the far more united society of the ancients who even when they had disagreements it didnt result in cycles of war and death and hatred.
That is because just like real life the fact remains, he who has power can do whatever to the one who does not, which often leads to things like Garleans who even without Emet Selch would inevitably try to get revenge for the crimes they suffered in the past if they ever found a power, so would the beast tribes and many other nations

And if we are to be honest, this is a video game, in reality you would never just barge into Ishgard, a place where the populace lives under huge delusions and cult level historical knowledge and suddenly make everyone friends with their enemies, fundamental delusions such as those take GENERATIONS to be removed who suffered unjust acts in their relatively recent history.

But in truth I think the metaphor is reversed. It’s the Sundered that have the opportunity to last for much longer on a star not threatened my Meteion, and the Ancients who die to their attachment refused to change.

And that is a statement with no evidence, the Ancients were a heavy research focused civilization, meaning if a change was needed they would accept it, just like they accepted sacrificing half their number to protect the star.

People need to stop confusing "we need to build things back after a worldwide catastrophy" with "attachments and refusal to change".

If you home gets devastated you dont just accept it and stay homeless, you try to build it back up to how it was with possibly some improvements

I do think they would’ve figured out a half solution.

Immortality, godlike powers of creation and having thousands of years do make that a certainty, they might have even found a superior solution.