Would Endwalker have been better if we never visited Elpis at all?

[jameseoakes]

It has to be clarified because of people like you that can't seem to come to terms with it. Some people are so delusional about the concept of a utopia that they will argue until they are blue in the face about it. And even after being said so by the dev team, people still reject it because they full heartily believe that the unsundered world was a better one. No matter how well a story is written, people will miss the point, especially if it goes against a core belief that they have. It's why this topic keep coming up. Endwalker hit a specific point that rubbed some people the absolutely wrong away. It basically broke down the idea of a utopia and some people will not accept that. The story made the point clearly. Everyone saw this point clearly. Everyone except for those that don't want to accept that point. So they reject/ignore/purposely miss it because it challenges their beliefs. This is why so many posts regarding the topic comes back with the same answer. The point was obvious, how did you miss it? But your pride and inability to accept what was written chooses to argue with these people instead of accept that you were wrong. You even go on to admit that it doesn't matter what anyone says, not even the people that wrote the story, you will just see it your way. You are the one being stubborn in your own hubris and pride. Essentially, the story is bad because you wanted it to be different and no one can tell you otherwise. There's no point is discussing things with you if that is your outlook so I simply won't. Easy right?

I think most of the issues are the writing is for it is bad. Endwalker does a terrible job addressing this, the ancients seemed a pretty driven and motivated people so the idea of them ending up as the Plenty seems remote, they even wrote it so the plenty was happy until Meition came. If the writers had have spent time building this as an arc it might have worked but as it is it's a mess filled with lot of deeply unsettling themes on festishing suffering but then not following up on that as the the game then demonises the societies more driven by that.

Edit: I guess I also struggle to see why the Plenty is so bad...I'd much rather a slow decent into apathy than a world of unending suffering given that seems to be the choice given here

[BubblyBoar]

I think most of the issues are the writing is for it is bad. Endwalker does a terrible job addressing this, the ancients seemed a pretty driven and motivated people so the idea of them ending up as the Plenty seems remote, they even wrote it so the plenty was happy until Meition came. If the writers had have spent time building this as an arc it might have worked but as it is it's a mess filled with lot of deeply unsettling themes on festishing suffering but then not following up on that as the the game then demonises the societies more driven by that.

Well, that's not true at all. One of the big plot points of Elpis was what the unsundered did once they were "done" and have completed their duty. They specifically chose to die. Only the "odd" ones did not. How come this fact keeps getting ignored like the connection between the ancients and the Plenty is out of nowhere? This is why people keep asking if those with questions are paying attention. Death as their ending was a constant. And the fact they chose to die rather than see their work flourish after completion is a massive part of their culture. The Plenty shows what happens with the ancients have finished their work. It's incredibly on the nose. But it's like these points are being ignored because some people don't want to accept the message behind it. The argument has constantly been "it's bad written because I disagree with the message." Which is basically a rejection of the story because it offends your beliefs and blaming the writers because of it. Hubris and pride.

Stuff

When did I say anything about what Venat said or did? I was specifically mentioning what the devs said about the Plenty and the Unsundered. Not once have I said that Venat did the righteous thing or that she absolutely should have done what she did.

[jameseoakes]

Well, that's not true at all. One of the big plot points of Elpis was what the unsundered did once they were "done" and have completed their duty. They specifically chose to die. Only the "odd" ones did not. How come this fact keeps getting ignored like the connection between the ancients and the Plenty is out of nowhere? This is why people keep asking if those with questions are paying attention. Death as their ending was a constant. And the fact they chose to die rather than see their work flourish after completion is a massive part of their culture. The Plenty shows what happens with the ancients have finished their work. It's incredibly on the nose. But it's like these points are being ignored because some people don't want to accept the message behind it. The argument has constantly been "it's bad written because I disagree with the message." Which is basically a rejection of the story because it offends your beliefs and blaming the writers because of it. Hubris and pride.

They chose to die with the lifes work complete I don't see why that's such an issue. I'd take the fate of the plenty over a world with suffering. Also don't mock me like that, your post is extremely rude and there no need for that.

I don't believe that suffering is some kind of uplifting force that when exposed to makes people better, it breaks most people as this games story in the past has taken time to explore.

[BubblyBoar]

They chose to die with the lifes work complete I don't see why that's such an issue. I'd take the fate of the plenty over a world with suffering. Also don't mock me like that, your post is extremely rude and there no need for that

And that's a core belief that you have. So someone with that belief will, of course, take issue with a story that preaches the opposite. That is not an example of bad writing, it's just disagreeing with the message. There's plenty of bad writing examples you can poke at. But disagreeing with the message of the story is not an example of the writings doing their job badly.

[jameseoakes]

And that's a core belief that you have. So someone with that belief will, of course, take issue with a story that preaches the opposite. That is not an example of bad writing, it's just disagreeing with the message. There's plenty of bad writing examples you can poke at. But disagreeing with the message of the story is not an example of the writings doing their job badly.

The way it tells it is terrible it spends no meaningful time on it, it sets up a terrible time loop sets up some dross characters to drive the narrative and then gaslights it's audience. Tell me how this was well written how it sets up Venats actions in any good sense, it's not well written if you have to believe that suffering is a universal good, which I think is a monstrous ideology to hold and honestly I'll take it with pride that I think story of Venat is one of a hellish monster fit to be the true villain of the story

[PawPaw]

Well, that's not true at all. One of the big plot points of Elpis was what the unsundered did once they were "done" and have completed their duty. They specifically chose to die. Only the "odd" ones did not. How come this fact keeps getting ignored like the connection between the ancients and the Plenty is out of nowhere? This is why people keep asking if those with questions are paying attention. Death as their ending was a constant. And the fact they chose to die rather than see their work flourish after completion is a massive part of their culture. The Plenty shows what happens with the ancients have finished their work. It's incredibly on the nose. But it's like these points are being ignored because some people don't want to accept the message behind it. The argument has constantly been "it's bad written because I disagree with the message." Which is basically a rejection of the story because it offends your beliefs and blaming the writers because of it. Hubris and pride.

Who is ignoring the fact that they can choose to return to the star when they feel they have completed their work? I think it's one of the parts of their society that is admirable. Unlike the denizens of the Plenty, the Ancients didn't try to eliminate all things that made them sad, they didn't try to escape death. The vast majority accepted life as finite and chose to start again when they felt they had done all that could be done to better their star. The people of the Plenty could not do this because they had eliminated death in their fear, and that is why Ra-La was created. The only thing that the Plenty and the Ancient world had in common was that they both wore robes and masks, one of the funnier attempts by the writers to draw some parallels.

[EaraGrace]

Who is ignoring the fact that they can choose to return to the star when they feel they have completed their work? I think it's one of the parts of their society that is admirable. Unlike the denizens of the Plenty, the Ancients didn't try to eliminate all things that made them sad, they didn't try to escape death.The vast majority accepted life as finite and chose to start again when they felt they had done all that could be done to better their star. The people of the Plenty could not do this because they had eliminated death in their fear, and that is why Ra-La was created. The only thing that the Plenty and the Ancient world had in common was that they both wore robes and masks, one of the funnier attempts by the writers to draw some parallels.

That’s not what the souls on the moon said.

Temperamental Spirit:
The Final Days taught us to fear a death forced upon us.
The injustice of duties and dreams left unfulfilled. The grief of unexpected partings...
Swift as darkness, cold as ash.
Such tragedy, yet no catharsis! Such truth, yet no consolation...

None of the Thule races seemed to have had any effort put into making them, though the race on the plenty are odd as they were happy until Meition came and convinced them there was no point to anything so they embraced death...which doesn't tie that well with the ancients.

I don’t think that’s what the dialogue in Dead Ends was implying. Meteion asked what they lived for and they told her they had nothing to live for. They even seemed bemused by her repeated questions, as if what she was asking was childish.

[jameseoakes]

I don’t think that’s what the dialogue in Dead Ends was implying. Meteion asked what they lived for and they told her they had nothing to live for. They even seemed bemused by her repeated questions, as if what she was asking was childish.

No it says they had no answer to her question and that she was unable to stop asking it and that drove them to there fate

[PawPaw]

That’s not what the souls on the moon said.

Ah yes, lamenting the deaths forced upon them by the advent of the Final Days as opposed to what they would normally be able to do which would be to have the freedom to choose their own end. That totally negates everything I said about them valuing their existences and understanding that life is finite. You got me.

Edit: Oh I see what you were trying to do! I generally don't bother looking at screenshots but you were attempting to say that the agonizings of the traumatized souls that had been trapped for 12k years were a very good and completely normal representation of the views of the Ancients before the Final Days and that they had always been aggressively seeking paradise. It wasn't because of the trauma they had been subjected to and possibly their desire for the nightmare to end.

[EaraGrace]

Ah yes, lamenting the deaths forced upon them by the advent of the Final Days as opposed to what they would normally be able to do which would be to have the freedom to choose their own end. That totally negates everything I said about them valuing their existences and understanding that life is finite. You got me.

It does completely contradict what you said here though.

Unlike the denizens of the Plenty, the Ancients didn't try to eliminate all things that made them sad, they didn't try to escape death.

They feared the very concept of an involuntary end (the Final Days just showed them that that was a possibility for them) and thus created Zodiark as a solution to that fear. The fact is that the Ancients and the denizens of the Plenty both sought to eliminate their fears, a clear parallel between the two. Combined with Hermes speech after the Lykaons are put down, where he says explicitly that they were heading towards mass suicide, it seems like we have enough reason to connect the two.

No it says they had no answer to her question and that she was unable to stop asking it and that drove them to there fate

That last bit is what I’m questioning. Where does it say that drove them to their fate? In top of that I have to say that if I asked someone what they lived for, and the question so shook them that they decided life wasn’t worth living, I’d struggle to hold myself responsible for that.