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

[Vyrerus]

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here or if you have the meanings of words mixed up.

The definition of an antagonist is the foe of the protagonist. It has nothing to do with morality. Hydaelyn is not opposed to the WoL or the other way around. You can have an evil protagonist but a heroic antagonist. There's plenty of video game examples out there like that.

The Ancients are not the protagonist of the game. She was certainly a foe to them, but we are not them, and our lives as well as all of those in the remaining unjoined worlds depended on defeating the Ascians. Worlds that, as corny as is is to say, were treated with unconditional love by Hydaelyn. Her motivations as written in the EW MSQ may be stupid as hell and the writers introduced a bunch of nonsense where there didn't need to be any, seemingly just to make everything fit the song Answers, but it doesn't make her an antagonist since she has never done anything but help our character defeat our foes and the game never treats her as one.

The level 89 trial is a battle to the death against her to change her will. Her will being that we run away, since we haven't proven we're better than her until then. She was literally our foe, even if it was contrived.

[MikkoAkure]

The level 89 trial is a battle to the death against her to change her will. Her will being that we run away, since we haven't proven we're better than her until then. She was literally our foe, even if it was contrived.

A trial to prove ourselves that we can save the Star doesn't suddenly make her an antagonist. Surely you all have consumed enough stories to know what a protagonist is and what an antagonist is and I'm surprised that I have to explain myself.

If you boil down the meaning it can mean "adversary", but in the context of an actual story, the antagonist is typically the chief enemy of the protagonist who needs to be defeated to resolve the main conflict of the story.

We go through the same exact "trial to prove ourselves in a fight to the death" against Hraesvelgr at Sohr Khai. Does that make Hraesvelgr an antagonist? No, because like Hydaelyn, it was a test of our worth before they helped us fight the actual antagonist and they were always on our side.

Hydaelyn was never written as the antagonist of the story, no matter how much you don't like her. I like Emet-Selch more than Venat but I still have the presence of mind to know he was an antagonist and that Venat is a supporting character to the protagonist.

[Vyrerus]

A trial to prove ourselves that we can save the Star doesn't suddenly make her an antagonist. Surely you all have consumed enough stories to know what a protagonist is and what an antagonist is and I'm surprised that I have to explain myself.

If you boil down the meaning it can mean "adversary", but in the context of an actual story, the antagonist is typically the chief enemy of the protagonist who needs to be defeated to resolve the main conflict of the story.

We go through the same exact "trial to prove ourselves in a fight to the death" against Hraesvelgr at Sohr Khai. Does that make Hraesvelgr an antagonist? No, because like Hydaelyn, it was a test of our worth before they helped us fight the actual antagonist and they were always on our side.

Hydaelyn was never written as the antagonist of the story, no matter how much you don't like her. I like Emet-Selch more than Venat but I still have the presence of mind to know he was an antagonist and that Venat is a supporting character to the protagonist.

Poor example. Sohr Khai was literallly not battles to the death. Explicitly stated by the moogle first boss. We also don't succeed in killing Hraesvelgr. Sure he says that he needs to fight with us seriously, but it was to make sure we could withstand the full might of a Great Wyrm. Which he clearly wasn't using, since Nidhogg is much more powerful, and Hraesvelgr had to give us one of his Eyes after proving ourselves in Sohr Khai as well.

But yes, it does make Hraesvelgr a minor antagonist. Forget not that he gave Nidhogg one of his eyes so that he could enact the Dragonsong War. This caused us to face many dragons as antagonists. Some of who would later become good and help us.

As character motivations are revealed and changed, so changes their role in the story. Sometimes this results in a plot twist, other times not.

Venat became an antagonist when she didn't just give us the Meteion crystal.

Also it doesn't help your case to switch from the more flexible version of antagonist in one post, and then switch to a hardline Greek tragedy definition in the next.

[MikkoAkure]

Poor example. Sohr Khai was literallly not battles to the death. Explicitly stated by the moogle first boss. We also don't succeed in killing Hraesvelgr. Sure he says that he needs to fight with us seriously, but it was to make sure we could withstand the full might of a Great Wyrm. Which he clearly wasn't using, since Nidhogg is much more powerful, and Hraesvelgr had to give us one of his Eyes after proving ourselves in Sohr Khai as well.

But yes, it does make Hraesvelgr a minor antagonist. Forget not that he gave Nidhogg one of his eyes so that he could enact the Dragonsong War. This caused us to face many dragons as antagonists. Some of who would later become good and help us.

I was just pulling close examples from the same story we've been talking about. We're told to fight seriously but you're insane if you thought we were going to kill moogles or that Hraesvelgr wasn't going to stop the fight before dying. Considering we know it's a test, just like with Hydaelyn, and everyone is on the same side, Hraesvelgr is not an antagonist. I wouldn't mark him as one for giving his dying brother one of his eyes either.

Also it doesn't help your case to switch from the more flexible version of antagonist in one post, and then switch to a hardline Greek tragedy definition in the next.

I didn't switch anything up. I didn't think "foe of the protagonist" needed to be clarified before because I thought it was an understandable concept, but then people took that and and suggested that anyone we fight in a battle is an antagonist.

There are some characters who actively switch their role in the story. Nero for example goes from 100% trying to stop us, to being on our team more or less, to basically being a full contributing member but pretending he's not. But we don't see the characters treat Hydaelyn any differently from ARR to the end of EW and is never maligned by anyone after the fact.

[Vyrerus]

But we don't see the characters treat Hydaelyn any differently from ARR to the end of EW and is never maligned by anyone after the fact.

Most of the cast cannot interact with Hydaelyn with any regularity. For some of them, this was their first interaction with her, ever. Even the WoL who gets the most interactions with her is basically forced to just listen to her lie and vague speak in every story event till now.

In her trial she was supposedly fighting us with intent to kill, so that it'd be a true test. It's not a friendly sparring match like you're making it out to be. Which really just chocks up another lackluster quality of Endwalker. The Scions weren't even breathing hard afterwards, and none of them even got minor wounds.

Stories are wide and varied. In some stories, antagonistic forces don't even need to be people.

Imagine we were allowed to actually lose to Hydaelyn and have the story progress. What happens? We get on Crystal Mommy's Moon and ride off to god knows where. That is the outcome we oppose. Again, if Hydaelyn wasn't ever an antagonist, then she would not have fought us.