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

[Lauront]

Personally I say we refrain from Venat Genocide Bad Ascian Genocide Good because at the end of the day they're both bad and genocide. It really doesn't matter if the world used to be better, I wouldn't give up mine for something I wouldn't get to experience. And no, our soul being preserved doesn't mean we would survive, as we've been over numerous times discussing Venat's genocide. Obviously what Venat did was evil but like... at the end of the day I'm gonna try to keep living my life. Sucks for you man but I can't control what happened in the past, now quit destroying our world or I'll kill you.

IMO the issue is whether one has to identify with the sundered or not. For me, there is no "we" here... I'm just going along for the ride, but if the character were under my total control and I had a choice in the matter, they would seek to restore the ancient world, one way or another, including the sundered Ascian path. Of course, if a bloodless way of doing it became available, like the formation of an AU (very much a notional concept before SHB proved these were possible I'd think), I'd go with that, but I would not want the world and its souls to remain in a broken state. Naturally it doesn't mean I believe the sundered are just obliged to roll over and die or that it's good - it's a bad situation they were left in all around - but rather to point out, I as the player do not necessarily identify with the sundered and putting a character with that perspective in my hands does not really change that for me. Even so, I was relatively fine (given the constraints the writers appeared to want for the story) with where SHB left things, i.e. a position of mutual understanding and honouring the legacy of the ancients, but then EW comes in, throws in time travel but denies an AU with a better ending for the ancients, and also tries to present what she did to the ancients as unambiguously justified (vs SHB's more perspective-driven approach), and yes, I am salty over that. All that plot gimmick amounted to doing is making the story more convoluted and not being used for the one good thing it could've done.

I don't like how either party chose to handle things, but it's easier to sympathize with the Ascians because their reasons are much more relatable then Venat's weird ideology that seems to contradict her actions at times.

For all the preaching about "not losing hope", it felt like she had already dismissed her people as a lost cause by the time we had left Elpis. She knew the Final Days was the catalyst that would send them down a dark path, but decided against telling the single most qualified group of people for averting disasters about it despite further foreknowledge they would eventually go on to become her worst enemies if things were allowed to play out the same way.

Ultimately she even relies upon it - she certainly takes no corrective action when it becomes apparent things are going to go the same way, and if she is trying to maintain the timelines, it's implied in doing that.

[Sevan]

(Again, I hope my English can express my thoughts well ......)
I said I might stop posting ......I broke my word. because I might figure out why they would create a story with such authoritarian/chauvinist values ......
The purpose of life in ancient times was to build the planet.
For this purpose, Hermes judged the right to life of many creations, and he suffered for it.
He learned that after all the suffering, the planets would be destroyed, so he despaired.
He was trapped by the value that "the value of the existence of all living things is to serve the planets". This is the key, but the story does not show it clearly.
Because the story shows that sunder the world is the right answer to his question, but any sober person knows how cruel the modern world is.
I think there is a possibility that in the original script, Hermes wanted the right answer not from Hedlin, but from Zodiak.
In the final days, there was a clear shift in the thinking of the Ancients, who were willing to sacrifice new life to redeem their loved ones. This meant destroying the planet's natural environment.
Ascians further demonstrates this change in values as they teach the art of invoking the gods, and the prime will suck the planet's Ether dry.
They no longer care about the planet, only about their loved ones.
If we care about transient and eternal love, then what does it matter if the planet is doomed to extinction in the probable Future?
Hydaelyn, as a conservative, shows concern about this shift. The result was a fight between two gods, and a awful fault committed by accident.
But some people in the SE, want Hydaelyn to be the right answer.
Since the ancient world is considered "problematic", how can the Hydaelyn be the right answer?
sunder the world......
We don't care what the players who love the story think anymore, and we don't care if changing the cornerstone of a building will make it collapse. We got the job done.