Live Letter Thoughts

[hagare]

From what was implied slightly (and we probably could have understood more if a certain zone wasn't 90% devoted to fan service) is that the influence of Meteion was suggesting the populace sacrifice half of themselves - again and again - to sustain Zodiark. While we see that Zodiark was holding it back just fine without more sacrifices, I sort of assumed it was that it was the direct result of the Song's influence causing people to double down until no one was left.

SE didn't clarify or justify it, but that was my final interpretation of the cinematic. Why Venat wasn't influenced and why the Unsundered wanted to continue the cycle (sacrifice all those on the shards) I have no idea.

that doesn't shake considering Zodiark specifically shielded the star from meteion.
Hence the "at last" when Big Z bit it.
So all the sacrifice idea are all their own.

[LisSquid]

that doesn't shake considering Zodiark specifically shielded the star from meteion.
Hence the "at last" when Big Z bit it.
So all the sacrifice idea are all their own.

Yeah, and it makes even less sense because he was holding it back regardless of more sacrifices or not. It's all half-baked.

[hagare]

Yeah, and it makes even less sense because he was holding it back regardless of more sacrifices or not. It's all half-baked.

No. I see it as Summoning Big Z was successful and meteion was held back.
But the Ascians didn't see that as enough, and they basically want to sacrifice more to expand Big Z's function to restore things to the way they were.
Basically what they're doing is digging a hole to plug another hole.
They were probably thinking about creating new creatures to sacrifice to Big Z to upgrade him.

[LisSquid]

They were probably thinking about creating new creatures to sacrifice to Big Z to upgrade him.

That would have been 1000x cooler to see than what we got, honestly. The big problem is there is a lack of clarity in the big reveal. I remember my FC arguing in VC for about an hour because no one could really 100% get behind one interpretation. You could argue that leaving things up for the viewer to discern is clever story telling, but in this instance it just pangs me as Rule of Cool cutscene time sacrificing the explanation.

[hagare]

That would have been 1000x cooler to see than what we got, honestly. The big problem is there is a lack of clarity in the big reveal. I remember my FC arguing in VC for about an hour because no one could really 100% get behind one interpretation. You could argue that leaving things up for the viewer to discern is clever story telling, but in this instance it just pangs me as Rule of Cool cutscene time sacrificing the explanation.

I don't know, I feel like the context clues were enough. *shrug*

[Zarkovitch]

Glam dresser upgrade are nice. Sanctuary seem okay. Rest are the same old stuffs. Hilderbrand as a relic, oh boy. Yet still no qol changes such controller getting fixes or
UI improvements. 4/10

[Alleo]

From LiveLetter LXVIII
https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...=1#post5861033

6th image in this post
to be fair it specifically says
"Additional area for Island Sanctuary"

the 2nd island thing seems to be community imagination running away with that sparse piece of info

Thank you for the link. So that could also just mean that the island grows a bit (or get new building and stuff added) which imo makes more sense, because the island we will get is already huge.

[Alleo]

I've got a question since people are talking about genocide. Did Hydaelyn actually kill anyone when she split existence into 14 pieces? As I understood it, separated people, soul, body, and planet. Made 14 lesser versions of each in 14 different states of existence. If not, how could civilizations still remember ancients?

As far as we know the sundering did not kill because otherwise nobody would be alive. They may have messed up their memories though and some of their abilities. Of course for some, losing their memory could mean that the person is bascially death.

I mean I can see it from the angle of their memories because how a person acts is defined by what they have experienced. Taking that away could mean that they become a whole new person. But their bodies and mind are still theirs so is it truly death? (And that is with the assumption that they lost all memories)

I dont agree though if someone says that its genocide because the ancients got reduced in their powers. If I am in a accident and lose the functions of my legs, I am still me. And Dave is still Dave even if he cant just snap everything in existence anymore.

So I guess it comes down to what someone already sees as genocide? (Which means there will never be a solution to that)

The Ascians are more clear with that since they bascially do wipe out whole planets and kill its people.

[Kaurhz]

As far as we know the sundering did not kill because otherwise nobody would be alive. They may have messed up their memories though and some of their abilities. Of course for some, losing their memory could mean that the person is bascially death. So I guess it comes down to what someone already sees as genocide?

The Ascians are more clear with that since they bascially do wipe out whole planets and kill its people.

It's a philosophical (and albeit very pointless discussion to be had). Is it really death if you're 'reincarnated' effectively, or is the act more akin to maiming? depending on the perspective, you would effectively be taking Venat's action as infringing on:

(a) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(b) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

Keep in mind that genocide is not just exclusively an act of killing.

It's equally the same as what Emet-Selch and co. were doing. In that, he didn't really view our lives, as... Being life... Just ghastly mockeries of the ancients. So does he really view that as genocidal? Probably not, but by his own admission he saw himself then as a megalomaniacal madman. It's just a matter of relativism. From the perspective of 'us' - It would absolutely be a genocidal act, either by intent to cause harm or by conspiracy to commit it. Conversely, from their perspective, it is just 'restoring the star to its rightful place, and humanity therein'. - It would be the same for the acts committed by Venat. From her perspective, it wouldn't necessarily constitute a genocidal act on the basis that she may have seen it as the only possible measure for ensuring life (and not just a circle of death on which they were bordering on). However, on behalf of those, she was subjecting it to, it was absolutely that very act of genocide, just simple on points a/b).

That being said if we look at this through a less philosophical lens then it was all down to Hermes and his nihilistic view of the world leading him to play the game of judge, jury, and executioner with the universe. So in reality he's inarguably the biggest perpetrator, then we have Venat pulling the act out of what she saw as a necessity, and well... Beyond that point, we just have the unsundered following by Venat's example.

Conclusion? They are all as bad as one another.

[VelKallor]

So that could also just mean that the island grows a bit (or get new building and stuff added) which imo makes more sense, because the island we will get is already huge.

Yup.

Will be added as patches come along. Looking forward to it hugely..and I think to celebrate, Ill bring home some hamburgers.

No one tell Aveyond, okay? I dont think his blood pressure will be able to handle it