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

[aveyond-dreams]

What enemy leaders has he toppled and regime changes is he supposed to have enforced? Alphinaud has only ever acted as a diplomat between nations/ peoples similarly in the name of peace. They're near enough the same sort of character to me so I'm honestly struggling to understand it.

Ishgard, Ala Mhigo, Eulmore, and now Garlemald. One after the other bending to modern day moral frameworks, shattering the fantasy with Alphinaud as the spokesperson for it all. The person preaching constantly about the virtues of freedom and democracy is always him. It's gotten tiresome. Each time sucking more and more of the fantasy out of FFXIV's world.

Larsa taking the throne of Archades preserved the fantasy of Ivalice and gave hope for the future in a way that actually made sense and made for a story that was interesting to sit through. He wanted to make a better world but he wasn't ruining the magic of it in the process. That is the key difference here, along with the fact that he's just not as annoying.

I am tired of sitting through stories in FFXIV that end with nations turning into democracies and republics. At this point it would a shocking display of creativity if a nation were to actually keep its monarch instead of having them turn out to be evil villains that must be put down by the Scions and their crusade of spreading liberty and freedom across the world.

The last remaining monarchies are Doma (now irrelevant as far as the MSQ is concerned) and Dalmasca (who we'll probably not see the finale of because the playerbase couldn't handle Matsuno's writing). There are no more nations to root for, not Ishgard with its own faceless parliament that practically holds Aymeric hostage, not the 3 starter states who are as boring as they are dysfunctional, not Ala Mhigo with the infamous Lyse forever tainting its image, and not Garlemald seeing as how the writers gave up on telling a compelling story with it. As I mentioned earlier, the most compelling thing now in FFXIV's future is the Void, but given all we've seen across Endwalker and 6.1 I have considerable doubts as to whether or not future storytelling will be handled well.

[MikkoAkure]

Ishgard, Ala Mhigo, Eulmore, and now Garlemald. One after the other bending to modern day moral frameworks, shattering the fantasy with Alphinaud as the spokesperson for it all. The person preaching constantly about the virtues of freedom and democracy is always him. It's gotten tiresome. Each time sucking more and more of the fantasy out of FFXIV's world.

I am tired of sitting through stories in FFXIV that end with nations turning into democracies and republics. At this point it would a shocking display of creativity if a nation were to actually keep its monarch instead of having them turn out to be evil villains that must be put down by the Scions and their crusade of spreading liberty and freedom across the world.

FFXIV takes place with a similar level of technology and societal change as Europe had that led to its own overthrow of monarchies so it's no surprise. Each of those examples you provide have reason and context for their becoming democracies and only one of them even has a monarch they could keep who even wants to rule. You can't create something that isn't there for a people that don't want it.


Ishgard was a theocracy for 1000 years because of a forever war of their own creation. The government maintained their power because only through the government and its military could its citizens survive. When that war was removed from the equation, its citizens were armed with guns that leveled the playing field against the old regime-supporting knights, and it was revealed that the war was a lie caused by the original government screwing everything up, the people wanted power and the old ruler's benevolent son gave it to them. For christ's sake, the people you support in this who wanted the monarchy back and wanted the Dragonsong War to start over again tried to stab Aymeric to death and threw a child off a roof.

Ala Mhigo's royal family was completely destroyed by the first rebellion and the Garlean occupation. The only remaining royal has no intention at all about having anything to do with the government and absolutely refuses to even let people know he exists. The last native monarch also tried killing everyone. In the absence of a surviving royal, the country was liberated in part by regular citizens who were part of a rebellion, not Ala Mhigan nobility. It makes 0 sense in the context of the world for them to restart a monarchy.

Eulmore's last ruler turned people into monsters which he fed back to his people to keep them in line. He was also the last of his line.

Garlemald was a republic for ~600 years and a monarchy for 60. I don't see what the problem is with them going back to what they were doing for most of their whole existence, especially when their status as a monarchy caused 2 civil wars that killed the majority of their population.

[aveyond-dreams]

words

Everything you've just said does nothing to justify the repeated use of the same "let's become a democracy!" plot that has been used 4 times already.

Also theocracy via the pope is not the same thing as a monarchy, as far as I am aware Thordan was chosen to be Archbishop from within the Church and his name "Thordan VII" refers to the fact that he is the 7th Archbishop to take the name of Thordan. It isn't his birthname.

Ala Mhigo was a massive failure of writing from multiple fronts but "yay democracy!" won out over the inclusion of any potential surviving royals (Larsas, Garnets, Ashes, etc) that could have been written into the plot, but weren't. Same thing for Garlemald.

Eulmore's resolution was lackluster after having gone through 2 versions of the same tired plot, because by that point my patience was exhausted. I had hoped Garlemald would have been handled better. And then it wasn't.

I suppose that when the Scions go into the void and beat up whoever is in charge there that we will once again set up a provisional government of freedom-loving voidsents to rule over the 13th. The nations back on the source will then proceed to morph into the United States of Final Fantasy, with Hien spontaneously deciding to give up his crown and Dalmasca being forgotten about entirely.

I don't see what fantasy that's shattering, other than that of living under tyranny. They were hardly sustainable forms of leadership, expect perhaps the theocracy in Ishgard before Thordan jumped off the deep end.

You can get rid of tyranny in more creative ways than "yay democracy!" especially when it's been repeated this many times. The good guy taking the throne would be a near-unthinkable turn of events in FFXIV's world given that as of now, it has only happened once in the case of Doma. These other states are all becoming ideologically homogenous with the likes of Sharlayan, and it's making for bad worldbuilding. Each nation stripped of what made it unique and gritty in the first place, then pacified as the Scions bulldoze their way through.

When the writers keep using the same messaging and plot over and over again, what is this if not preaching? This along with the messy themes and "morals" of Endwalker being shoved down my throat makes for a very unpleasant experience and a world that is quickly losing the things that made it worthwhile to explore in the first place.

Combine this with sectors of the playerbase that look down on others for being fans of Garlemald or monarchies in general (along with being on the "wrong" side of the debate regarding the Venat and Ancients situation), decrying them as all sorts of things while they parade around with their borgor catboy plushie, it's exhausting my patience and despite my love for the game I feel extremely strained by everything going on. The pillars of story and gameplay are crumbling, all while the community is too busy fawning over Tweetingway.

Again, why are these people playing FFXIV and not Persona? Why are they ruining this video game world when they already have their high school AUs and other forms of media where they can have their own values preached back to them instead of forcing them into a fantasy video game setting?

[Lunaxia]

Ishgard, Ala Mhigo, Eulmore, and now Garlemald. One after the other bending to modern day moral frameworks, shattering the fantasy with Alphinaud as the spokesperson for it all. The person preaching constantly about the virtues of freedom and democracy is always him. It's gotten tiresome. Each time sucking more and more of the fantasy out of FFXIV's world.

Technically, we were the ones who defeated three of those four, because two of them wanted to maintain a status quo or else instill a new kind that would bring about an apocalypse, another was forcibly ruling against the people's will, while the latter collapsed in on itself due to ongoing power struggles and Ascian influence. They were all later free to choose their own style of governance, Alphinaud had next to no influence on those matters. I don't see what fantasy that's shattering, other than that of living under tyranny. They were hardly sustainable forms of leadership, expect perhaps the theocracy in Ishgard before Thordan jumped off the deep end.

Eulmore's resolution was lackluster after having gone through 2 versions of the same tired plot, because by that point my patience was exhausted. I had hoped Garlemald would have been handled better. And then it wasn't.

Eulmore's resolution was incredibly boring though, I will give you that. I don't know if it was because the end of 5.0 was so spectacular or if 5.1 was handled that poorly, but I slept through most of it. They have developed a bad habit of going to all the trouble of setting up the stories of these various places and then promptly shoo-ing them off stage when it's time to move onto something else.

Which I think is great. I love Varis's sheer pettiness and singlemindedness about spiting his grandpa for the sake of spiting his grandpa because he hates him that much. It's grade-A black comedy and makes his ultimate fate at his own son's hands sort of poetic, after a fashion.

There's something very satisfying about when a game delves into the deeper psychologies behind its characters, and I think it's part of the reason Emet-Selch is so popular. They really dove right into what's going on behind the mask, and it made him that much more fascinating and complex to the extent many found him to be relatable, which is quite tremendous when you think about what he actually did post-sundering, even just during his tenure as Solus. We're shaped by such trivial things as our family, our childhood and our upbringing, even the big bads and seemingly all powerful rulers ever-present in these fantasy games, and I always enjoy when they remind us of that.

As another example, I appreciated how they frequently hint at Aymeric being deeply affected by the relationship he had with his father and how he still struggles with it. It's very subtle, yet I felt it really added a lot to his character.

[MikkoAkure]

Everything you've just said does nothing to justify the repeated use of the same "let's become a democracy!" plot that has been used 4 times already.

Also theocracy via the pope is not the same thing as a monarchy, as far as I am aware Thordan was chosen to be Archbishop from within the Church and his name "Thordan VII" refers to the fact that he is the 7th Archbishop to take the name of Thordan. It isn't his birthname.

Ala Mhigo was a massive failure of writing from multiple fronts but "yay democracy!" won out over the inclusion of any potential surviving royals that could have been written into the plot, but weren't. Same thing for Garlemald.

Eulmore's resolution was lackluster after having gone through 2 versions of the same tired plot, because by that point my patience was exhausted. I had hoped Garlemald would have been handled better. And then it wasn't.

I suppose that when the Scions go into the void and beat up whoever is in charge there that we will once again set up a provisional government of freedom-loving voidsents to rule over the 13th. The nations back on the source will then proceed to morph into the United States of Final Fantasy, with Hien spontaneously deciding to give up his crown and Dalmasca being forgotten about entirely.

I'm not specifically talking about Thordan VII. Ishgard's ruling class are noble houses. Thordan VII also comes from a noble house. Aymeric was adopted into a noble house. Throughout the whole expansion it's the church, nobles and the knights who are causing us trouble. The Ishgardian theocracy is powered by the church and the noble houses whose existences are intertwined. I didn't think that needed explanation.

As for Ala Mhigo, why would a bunch of average, pissed-off citizens who just took back their own country without the help of the nobles who destroyed it and paved the way for Garlean takeover decide that they suddenly need to find a random jerk who crawled out of a specific womb just so they can rule? It could have been different if the monk NPC did the Estinien thing and came out of the side quests and into the MSQ to lead the army to victory but that's not what happened and he wants nothing to do with nobility or his family's "birthright".

Not sure what you would have expected for Eulmore. Would it really have changed everything for you if some random captain of the guard said "I'm king now, I guess" and the story never talked about it again after we move back to the Source?

And again for Garlemald. From at least ARR they were described as a former republic who started doing bad things as soon as they became an Empire so I'm not sure how someone could imagine them staying that way when none of the named ruling family exists anymore. They had 2 civil wars in the span of a year because they couldn't decide which royal butt deserves to kiss the throne when meanwhile they had 600 years of stability as a republic.


Edit: I could imagine the Ala Mhigans wanting to revive their monarchy if they had a favorable opinion of it. That happened with Doma. But the Ala Mhigan monarchy in recent memory purged their own noble houses and destroyed their own culture and religion before falling to a civil war that weakened the nation enough to be taken over with relative ease by Garlemald. As far as everyone knows, there's no one even left who could sit the throne. But the monk NPC (whose name I'm too lazy to look up right now) doesn't want anything to do with that history and has always been a monk. If he took the throne, old resentments that have since been buried would come back up. There's still Ala Mhigan royal loyalists calling themselves the Corpse Brigade in Thanalan and they're not exactly the friendliest people.

[aveyond-dreams]

more words

What part of this did you not understand? You've just described for a second time the flaws in the world-building that led up to each lackluster resolution. It's cyclical logic that would be broken by the inclusion of the necessary plot elements or characters to break free of the otherwise predictable mould. It still doesn't justify why things ended up the same way 4 times in a row.

There's no reason why they couldn't have added in an Ashe here or a Larsa there in order to break up the monotony and give us better leaders to root for than faceless parliaments 1, 2, 3, and so on.

Everything you've just said does nothing to justify the repeated use of the same "let's become a democracy!" plot that has been used 4 times already.

You can get rid of tyranny in more creative ways than "yay democracy!" especially when it's been repeated this many times.

[Theodric]

Again, why are these people playing FFXIV and not Persona? Why are they ruining this video game world when they already have their high school AUs and other forms of media where they can have their own values preached back to them instead of forcing them into a fantasy video game setting?

Let's not forget the player ran 'venues' which are often little more than brothels or modern day night clubs. Personally I use ESO for my 'immersive world' fix where MMO's are concerned. I'm also hoping Ashes of Creation, Pantheon and/or the League of Legends MMO end up doing very well for themselves.

I expect they'll each attract a very different type of player as well - one that primarily wants a game and an immersive, consistent world over a glorified visual novel.

It's a shame that it's a bit of a wait until any of them launch but...it is what it is.

[CrownySuccubus]

I don't see the problem in "this has happened 4 or whatever times already", because it's not like it happens to EVERY single monarchy. Aside from the monarchal beast tribes, we also have Doma, Fanow, and Radz-at-Han. All three of which are some type of monarchy and/or dictatorship, which more or less have stayed the same. So every expansion since 4.0 has basically introduced us to at least one more form of a benevolent monarchy.

The governments that fell are the ones that were actively at war with the Scions or their allies, such as Ishgard, Eulmore and Garlemald. And aside from the outright surrender of said dictators, I'm at a loss how you would have preferred things turn out. In basically every case, the source of the problem was the local dictator who refused to settle for anything less than death, and in all three cases, NONE of them had some sort of heir to take their place. In fact, since Garlemald settles its succession crises with war, the civil war that ultimately wiped them out was the only conclusion they would have even accepted.

So if you have a dictator who won't listen to reason and wants death, and there's no system in place to continue as a benevolent monarchy, exactly how are you expecting the Scions replace the monarch? And, for that matter, it's pretty believable that a nation that barely survived an oppressive dictatorship wouldn't be in the mood to install another one immediately. That's kind of the risk/problem inherent in absolute monarchies in the first place.

[Brinne]

There's something very satisfying about when a game delves into the deeper psychologies behind its characters, and I think it's part of the reason Emet-Selch is so popular. They really dove right into what's going on behind the mask, and it made him that much more fascinating and complex to the extent many found him to be relatable, which is quite tremendous when you think about what he actually did post-sundering, even just during his tenure as Solus. We're shaped by such trivial things as our family, our childhood and our upbringing, even the big bads and seemingly all powerful rulers ever-present in these fantasy games, and I always enjoy when they remind us of that.

As another example, I appreciated how they frequently hint at Aymeric being deeply affected by the relationship he had with his father and how he still struggles with it. It's very subtle, yet I felt it really added a lot to his character.

The emphasis and depth given to exploring his emotional state and internal conflict is absolutely a huge part of the reason Emet-Selch is often considered a cut above the rest in terms of characters. The gaps within the contradictions between what we say, what we do, what we think and what we feel are largely what makes us messy, human, and worth exploring - and with Emet-Selch, you can talk at length about every single one of those aspects within him and how they work with and then clash with the rest of him, creating a character who often technically acts illogically, yet consistently once you grasp him on an emotional level. It rules.

With Varis, he certainly presents himself and says the words that may reflect an unflappable, dedicated leader of an empire at initial blush--but dive just beneath the surface and you'll still find the angry, insecure teenager seething from the hurt of his idolized grandfather not caring enough about him. There's a reason the first scene we ever see of Varis - his establishing scene - is him spitting on Solus's coffin. In that respect, I think Varis is a delight.

Aymeric was actually probably my favorite character in the HW era because I noticed that it felt like he had some neat layers to his character that were woven in just for the sake of rounding out his character; there was a consistent undercurrent of low self-worth and self-depreciation to a lot of his dialogue and scenes that wasn't strictly in service to the plot itself that I found really interesting.

If you're interested in narratives that revolve around exploring motivations and psychologies in messy, but authentic feeling ways, read umineko praise yasuda wait wait don't look up any details about either though for the love of god wait what? Not sure what happened there!

[MikkoAkure]

What part of this did you not understand? You've just described for a second time the flaws in the world-building that led up to each lackluster resolution. It's cyclical logic that would be broken by the inclusion of the necessary plot elements or characters to break free of the otherwise predictable mould. It still doesn't justify why things ended up the same way 4 times in a row.

There's no reason why they couldn't have added in an Ashe here or a Larsa there in order to break up the monotony and give us better leaders to root for than faceless parliaments 1, 2, 3, and so on.

This "benevolent monarch waiting to take their country back" plot has already happened with Hien and Doma. Gaius for some reason was made defender of Werlyt. The Hannish people kept their dragon lord when their ruler died and it was revealed he was operating behind the scenes. Would you still be complaining about it if they had an Ashe or Larsa figure to appear and gallantly rise the power of a single-ruler government and rule benevolently every single time a government is toppled or in crisis and that we need a republic in there to shake it up or do you just have a thing about monarchies?

I feel like this is less about repeated story elements and more about how you have a tendency to pop into threads to let people know how much you don't like republics in fiction. I don't know anyone else who has had a problem with this and of those stories, only the government switchover in Ishgard had any actual role in the plot. Ala Mhigo and Eulmore sort of just happened because there wasn't a need in the plot to concentrate on regime change more than a quest or two since as you say it's trodden ground, and Garlemald is a pile of cinders that people can barely live in, let alone a nation. We haven't even crossed that bridge yet.