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

[Theodric]

You once argued that the terms "stalking" and "harassing" is incorrectly used to refer to any type of legitimate criticism.

So, in the interest of making sure this isn't one of those cases, do you have links?

I've spoken about it with various people in the past, so at least one poster from the lore forum can attest to have seen some of the stuff I have been sent over the years:

https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...=1#post5779783

A lot of it is so grotesque that repeating or showing it here would likely result in a ban - to say nothing of the added difficultly of getting around the 'naming and shaming' rules.

You'll probably have to read the pages before that post to see the full context of the discussion.

From what I recall, other posters have spoken up on the issue within this very thread in passing to express similar experiences, though the thread is so large at this point that I do not feel compelled to comb through it to find such comments - nor would I expect anyone else to either.

[YukikoKurosawa]

If the character stimulates you to think about things in a certain way, or gets a certain reaction out of you, they can act as a useful writing tool in that way. I am no writer, and I can't say I am a huge fan of him or even the intended messaging behind him (other than "grow up and stop being so self-centered if you want your one-sided best and first ever hostage friend to notice you"), but I appreciated Zenos in that sense in EW. I think she was aiming to prompt some 'deep thinking' with Hermes but he was under-developed, the civilisational backgrop against which they were trying to demonstrate these points was poorly suited to it and so it came across as relentlessly pretentious. At least in my eyes and self-indulgent.

What I meant was why would she knowingly write a villain who is neither interesting, understandable, or at bare minimum likeable? I didn't mean "villains who are meanies are bad because I don't like meanies". Hermes has zero compelling aspects as a villain and as a character. She suggests herself that she was self-aware of this, and knew he would be poorly recieved, which makes me ask why write such a character to begin with? He fails as a compelling or likeable villain, especially since we just went from Emet Selch and Elidibus. I like Zenos, in fact I think he was one of the redeeming aspects of EW. But Zenos has actual personality and is likeable. Hermes/Fanny-Danny is neither, along with not being understandable nor compelling.

[Lauront]

I doubt she set out to write him that way, where he brings nothing or very little to the table. We've speculated in the past as to whether the story being compressed from 1-2 further expansions into 6.0 potentially compromised its writing, and I think it may have, but that would not reflect well on her boss, if true.

[jameseoakes]

I doubt she set out to write him that way, where he brings nothing or very little to the table. We've speculated in the past as to whether the story being compressed from 1-2 further expansions into 6.0 potentially compromised its writing, and I think it may have, but that would not reflect well on her boss, if true.

I took from the media stuff they've done that he is very much the character she wanted to write, which I find...concerning

[CrownySuccubus]

I've spoken about it with various people in the past, so at least one poster from the lore forum can attest to have seen some of the stuff I have been sent over the years:

https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...=1#post5779783

A lot of it is so grotesque that repeating or showing it here would likely result in a ban - to say nothing of the added difficultly of getting around the 'naming and shaming' rules.

You'll probably have to read the pages before that post to see the full context of the discussion.

From what I recall, other posters have spoken up on the issue within this very thread in passing to express similar experiences, though the thread is so large at this point that I do not feel compelled to comb through it to find such comments - nor would I expect anyone else to either.

On the subject on the death threats: assuming good faith, sorry you had to go through that.

But, reading through that thread, I have to agree with what most others are saying. Unfortunately, your accusations are way too broad and vague, and if I'm understanding correctly, seem to have happened primarily on Reddit.

I'm bringing this up because this seems to be something you constantly repeat on the forums as a primary motivator behind your distaste with certain segments of the fandom and their influence on the game and community, but from all outside observances, it's a matter of taking your word for it. Even with full sincerity assumed in this specific case, however, the culprit seems to be only ONE person on Reddit, which is not enough to go on. It's hard to actually see the relevant connection of unacceptable poster behavior and some sort of greater hypocrisy/fallacious actions within the forum community itself. There's no denying that such toxicity exists....but I'm struggling to see greater effect on the discourse of the game.

Again, there's no excuse to go through death threats, but it's hard to differentiate between the validity of those death threats and the ones the FFXIV writers have claimed to receive.

[Rulakir]

I'm more disturbed by Ishikawa herself asking whether he was the first step for mankind or not, and I am free to reject that, just like their shallow Plenty parallel. (Ra-la take me, though.)

Same. This is why I had a kneejerk negative reaction to the end of the Omega chain. Coming off that statement from the Famitsu interview I thought she was further trying to justify Hermes' "test" rather than seeing it as casting shade on Venat.

The Plenty is disappointing, especially given there are signs in Amaurot that stagnation was becoming an issue for the Ancients so it seems this direction was always the intent. It's so unsatisfying.

He insists he sees Hermes as nothing more than a memory/soul graft, and he makes at least a couple of comments on how much the man he used to be would hate what he's doing, and all I can think is... would he really?

Honestly, I thought Amon was the true persona of Hermes. It was difficult for me to buy into the many compliments lavished upon his Ancient self. Once again, I have to wonder if Ishikawa played through Elpis and saw the character we were presented with, which doesn't seem to match the one inside her head. What's particularly troubling is he can theoretically reincarnate again and the world will have to deal with another iteration of him.

(That my reading of Hermes in this way might not match up to Author Intention doesn't necessarily bother me, but I completely understand it being a hard line for others. This is not the first time I've more or less gone through the "hey, author, you wrote a super compelling character here and totally didn't realize it, lmao" rodeo.)

Your read is a lot better than what we got. :P

Venat, I think, is magnitudes harder to understand why she might have felt "she had no other options." She provides mostly logistical "explanations" (because we don't want to introduce the idea of Venat's personal responsibility in these decisions) that aren't compelling, and therefore, you're (general you) inclined to scrutinize those on a logistical level, rather than Emet's psychological one - and they don't hold up. The more you scrutinize, the more ridiculous it all seems.

Copying and pasting this everywhere. >_> It seems the people who were able to accept and enjoy the story as is fully bought into the conclusions the writer(s) demanded you arrive at. Honestly, if Venat was intended to be an antagonist, then I'd have to re-evaluate Ishikawa's writing as some kind of genius to manage to portray her as the heroine of the saga and have as many people believe it as they do.

Venat is a bad person and the narrative is exasperating for trying to sell us on the opposite, but equally important: she's also not compelling. All of the emotion surrounding her is an attempt to get you to feel for her, pure uncritical reaction, without thinking about any actual depth or conflict to be had in her character in any meaningful way.

This probably explains why I see so many streamers seduced by the post-Elpis cutscene. What I can't figure out is how someone can like both Emet and Venat. The two seem mutually exclusive to me. I don't know how you ignore the fact that Venat is directly responsible for every bad thing that ever happened to Emet.

[Theodric]

On the subject on the death threats: assuming good faith, sorry you had to go through that.

But, reading through that post, I have to agree with what most others are saying. Unfortunately, your accusations are way too broad and vague, and likewise, seem to have happened on Reddit.

I'm bringing this up because this seems to be something you constantly repeat on the forums as a primary motivator behind your distaste with certain segments of the fandom and their influence on the game and community, but from all outside observances, it's a matter of taking your word for it. Even in this specific case, however, the culprit seems to be only ONE person on Reddit, which is not enough to go on.

Again, there's no excuse to go through death threats, but it's hard to differentiate between the validity of those death threats and the ones the FFXIV writers have claimed to receive.

You're free to believe whatever you so wish. I'm not sure why you feel as if you have to take 'my' word for it when multiple posters within the thread have spoken up as a witness, though. Are you suggesting that they are worthy of doubt as well?

Nor have I ever downplayed the death threats that the writers have received. I have to admit, I'm not sure where you're getting that from - unless you're referring to me speaking up against the attempt to stifle criticism on the basis that the development team were sent knives as a threat in the mail? My point with that was that something happening on the Japanese side of the community is no reason to deny European and American players the opportunity to critique the development team.

Which...is very different to someone wanting to discuss something they like in the game without being insulted or threatened.

Either way, I'm not posting personal details as evidence here to ensure that the issue does not worsen. Nor do I have the time or desire to go back over the years to find the many threads on the lore forum where any positive mention of Garlemald resulted in horrific accusations of being a 'Nazi' or 'genocide apologist'.

[CrownySuccubus]

You're free to believe whatever you so wish. I'm not sure why you feel as if you have to take 'my' word for it when multiple posters within the thread have spoken up as a witness, though. Are you suggesting that they are worthy of doubt as well?

I mean, dude, multiple devs confirmed to have gotten death threats about various disatisfactions with the game, and you expressed doubt that those were real threats and not real criticism. I don't see how that's any different from another group confirming the same.

Nor have I ever downplayed the death threats that the writers have received. I have to admit, I'm not sure where you're getting that from - unless you're referring to me speaking up against the attempt to stifle criticism on the basis that the development team were sent knives as a threat in the mail? My point with that was that something happening on the Japanese side of the community is no reason to deny European and American players the opportunity to critique the development team.

Which...is very different to someone wanting to discuss something they like in the game without being insulted or threatened.

No, it's exactly the same thing. You don't want to discuss issues with the game without being insulted or harassed, and the devs want to work on the game without being threatened or harassed. Likewise, we can apply the same logic about the "Japanese community" here -- whatever handful of players (your words) sent you or anyone else death threats don't bear any relevance on discussions outside of the topics or threads they occur in.

Either way, I'm not posting personal details as evidence here to ensure that the issue does not worsen. Nor do I have the time or desire to go back over the years to find the many threads on the lore forum where any positive mention of Garlemald resulted in horrific accusations of being a 'Nazi' or 'genocide apologist'.

I mean, liking Garlemald is one thing. They look cool, act tough, and have cool machines. That doesn't make anyone a Nazi.

But, if someone (speaking generally here) were to say that they thought Garlemald was right or that their actions were laudable, that'd definitely be cause for concern.

I'm not sure what was supposedly said, so I make no accusations. But, generally speaking, it's one thing to say that the Empire is cool. It's another thing entirely to say that the Empire is cool because they conquer what they deem inferior races and think only the strong should survive and rule.

[Lauront]

Either way, I'm not posting personal details as evidence here to ensure that the issue does not worsen. Nor do I have the time or desire to go back over the years to find the many threads on the lore forum where any positive mention of Garlemald resulted in horrific accusations of being a 'Nazi' or 'genocide apologist'.

That, plus several of these sort of incidents were reported via moderation and removed, so are no longer there.

[CrownySuccubus]

That, plus several of these sort of incidents were reported via moderation and removed, so are no longer there.

In that case, those people are not an issue, and the community/mods have made it clear that it will not be tolerated.

In other words, we seem to be fine with discussing whatever without that riff-raff being any sort of factor whatsoever.