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

[Lunaxia]

The problem with the "it's just fiction" justification is that it can be applied to just about every argument in the story, and runs the risk of rendering all discussion rather pointless. The world of FFXIV shares our morality (or thereabouts) and beliefs, and I'd rather the game acknowledge and deal with questionable scenarios when they arise rather than brushing off certain acts whilst condemning others because "it makes for a cool fantasy story."

And we have a dictator who committed mass genocide against a group of creatures to steal their land, a “leader” who still allows slavery in her city to this day, and a “leader” who bends to the will of forest sprites and allows them to have their way and turns a blind eye to the mass racism happening to her people resulting in the rape and hanging and murder of many. The city state leaders are quite literally as bad as him yet he’s the only one to face repercussions despite in the end him just doing what’s best for his people and doing unto others what was done to him. Also…are we just going to ignore the fact uldah basically gassed an entire population and turned them into zombies?

I'll give you Sil'dih, though we are talking about a city state that existed hundreds of years ago and has little to do with Ul'dah in the present. But you're grossly exaggerating the reality of the other city states in an attempt to justify what the Garleans did. I can't really take you seriously when you're trying to make out the Eorzean Alliance are "just as bad" when Garlemald has continually sought the conquest and subjugation of other nations for its own glory and brought the racism, rape, genocide and slavery you mentioned to the countless provinces under its control.

Varis was dealt a rough hand when it came to his family, for sure, but after a certain point it cannot be used to justify the choices he made.

[Theodric]

Varis was dealt a rough hand when it came to his family, for sure, but after a certain point it cannot be used to justify the choices he made.

The very same argument used to declare that the Ascians should have just rolled over and allowed Venat to wipe out their civilisation in its entirely, including their entire race as well as all knowledge of their existence. With such horrific stakes in play and the alternative being the loss of absolutely everything one cares about, I daresay justifications can be found.

Sure, it sucks for the people who are screwed over in the process but if two forces are put in a position where only one can emerge victorious then I'd expect both sides to do everything possible in order to defend their loved ones.

[tokinokanatae]

The very same argument used to declare that the Ascians should have just rolled over and allowed Venat to wipe out their civilisation in its entirely, including their entire race as well as all knowledge of their existence. With such horrific stakes in play and the alternative being the loss of absolutely everything one cares about, I daresay justifications can be found.

This comparison doesn't make sense as Eorzea wouldn't have been inclined to attack Garlemald if Garlemald hadn't attacked them. Garlemald didn't need to subdue Erozea in order to exist, they are not made of of shattered remnants of catboys and femroes that Erozea is trying to glue together in order to recreate their country. Once ceruleum was "discovered" by Solus, they had the means to do more than eke out a miserable existence for themselves in an inhospitable place without going to war. You're comparing apples to butterscotch pie.

[Lunaxia]

I'd rather trust a Larsa...

Instead we get regime change driven by a 16 year old elf

The two characters are practically mirror images of each other, only Larsa is twelve. I don't understand your preoccupation with one and dismissiveness towards another.

I agree the previous senate shouldn't be responsible for the new Garlemald either - by all accounts what we've heard about them is little better than what we've seen so far from its rulers - but I don't really have an answer to your claim that Garlemald without a monarchy is automatically boring. To each their own, I suppose? I hope XVI gives you what you're looking for.

snip

The Ascians had lost their people and their world. The Garleans, on the other hand, acted out of little more than revenge, spite and arrogance. They had nothing to gain by conquest save more power and resources. They're not comparable.

snip

Very well-said.

[CrownySuccubus]

snip

Just gonna say that I agree with you 100%, and that's pretty much what I said in another thread.

"Everyone else has also done bad things" isn't a catch-all justification that each side is right. Especially when the entire point of FFXIV as a story is that the Eorzean city-states are trying to make up for the wrongs they've done, which is certainly NOT the case for Garlemald at present. Even if we were to take this argument completely at face value, though, Garlemald is still worse. They have done every single bad thing that the individual city states have done (except maybe primal summoning), but have also done more atrocities aside from that. There is also a matter of scale -- as bad as Gridania's racism may be, Garlemald has still basically spread a campaign of cultural genocide across multiple continents. You might be able to pass judgment on Uldah for wiping out an entire city, but bringing the same judgment upon Garlemald brings up the immediate question "Which one?".

It's not being free of the Ascians that allows Garlemald to heal, though. It's being free of any form of government whatsoever. This is evident from the actions of the Legates in EW; even with the Empire in such a shattered state, the military-based government was still operating under the core value of war. Garlemald was, first and foremost, a military dictatorship that respected only martial strength; most other industries and facets of its society were likewise judged by how useful they were to their military operations. This absolute faith in military might also determined who ruled the country as general-in-chief (Solus and Varis both earned their crowns through military might, and part of the reason the country fell is because the Legates went to war with each other over a power vacuum).

Even being reduced to a crippled, hopelessly underpowered military wasn't enough to deter most of Garlemald from their ways -- the whole point of the Anima primal was that the people were sure that their warrior king Varis was still alive and would unite the military, punish the traitors, drive out the foreign occupiers, and restore the Empire's hold on Eitherys. It's not until Anima is dead, their Legates have all surrendered or killed themselves, and there is absolutely zero hope of restoring the Empire to what it was that the surviving Garlean populace takes any steps in an alternate direction..

[Lauront]

The problem with the "it's just fiction" justification is that it can be applied to just about every argument in the story, and runs the risk of rendering all discussion rather pointless. The world of FFXIV shares our morality (or thereabouts) and beliefs, and I'd rather the game acknowledge and deal with questionable scenarios when they arise rather than brushing off certain acts whilst condemning others because "it makes for a cool fantasy story."

It certainly features a distillation of such views, as voiced through the protagonists, whatever the practical application of that, including consistency in this, ends up being. I think this comes down to differing preferences in world construction. I enjoy games like the Witcher 3 for their rather thorough-going depictions of such regimes, both in their good and bad aspects, which is beyond the scope of this game and, if I am frank, seems unlikely to be a significant focus of its future plotlines, especially with the Ivalice stuff seemingly drawing to a close. I will probably look to other MMOs (maybe Ashes of Creation, where it's a major feature) for such things, but it remains my hope that they do take on board and embed feedback for how they dealt with the ancients when considering ways to keep the future plot interesting for what it does choose to make its focus, which is a little nebulous right now.

The failings in FFXIV's worldbuilding is what is also serving to drive me full force into the arms of FFXVI, which has a far more balanced platter of nations. A duchy, two kingdoms, one holy theocratic empire, and one republic - important to note because the more republics you have the less unique they become. In the monarchies or "dictatorships" as they've been decried at least you have the chance to get a more colorful cast of characters to root for. Am I really supposed to be excited about a senate or parliament whose members are never on screen? Multiplied by 3 in the case of FFXIV? Give me a break.

I am keen to see if it will live up to expectations with Yoshida unshackled by a legacy plot and the pressures which exist upon XIV's writers. Certainly, as described, it has piqued my interest, and I would hope as a single player title designed with a vision for it at the outset that it will feature better narrative cohesion than a live service MMO where the plot had to be chopped and changed part ways through...

[Theodric]

It certainly features a distillation of it as voiced through the protagonists. I think this comes down to differing preferences in world construction. I enjoy games like the Witcher 3 for their rather thorough-going depictions of such regimes, both in their good and bad aspects, which is beyond the scope of this game and, if I am frank, seems unlikely to be a significant focus of its future plotlines. I will probably look to other MMOs (maybe Ashes of Creation, where it's a major feature) for such things, but it remains my hope that they do take on board and embed feedback for how they dealt with the ancients when considering ways to keep the future plot interesting for what it does choose to make its focus, which is a little nebulous right now.

Yep. It's just a shame that the development team weren't open and honest sooner about their intent. I certainly would not have invested in this game beyond Heavensward if I knew it was going to hastily wrap up long running storylines in a very awkward and contrived manner.

Not every in-game nation or race (playable or otherwise) needs to appeal to everybody either. I didn't care for orcs, tauren or trolls back when I played WoW but I didn't have an issue with their existence for those who did like them.

Allow variety to exist and 'comfort characters' will not be so heavily criticised by virtue of a broader range of tastes being catered to.