Endwalker Story sucked and it's time to admit it

[Naomishtola]

I do feel like you got a point. I did enjoy the endwalker story tbh and it still is one of my favorite stories, however the way this expansion was handled was just a bit poor. I am disappointed that the garlemald war was concluded this lackluster... one could argue that it was a narrative choice, but we went from needing an entire expansion to drive out garlean forces from 2 occupied areas to... just casually ending the war. This is ESPECIALLY disappointing for anyone who did the Bozja questline as there was more to come with lyon and gabranth... but gabranth was killed... OFF SCREEN... after the ending cutscene of bozja teased more to come. So definitely a huuuuge disappointment on that part. It did feel like it wanted to tell a story that should've been 2-3 expansions in just 1 expansion and instead of just addressing any of the plotholes... we just move on

[VictorTheed]

I enjoyed EW, but I do wish Meteion wasn't the big bad, I consider our fight with Zenos after that to be the end Boss for EW since it's the last fight.

Garlemald shouldn't have been rushed, should have had a way bigger plotline for EW.

Did they ever say what was the thing under neath Silver Tear Lake in Mor Dhona?

[Iscah]

I don't think a whole lot about stories that I consider perfect for their intention after finishing them, but something that's almost there is really fun to prod at and ask 'how would I change this, and would that actually improve this or have I produced something worse but more to my tastes'.

That's my sort of approach here as well. It feels like 90% stuff I'm happy to take as it plays on screen, but tinker around with that 10% and pretend it played out differently in a way I feel makes the story stronger – ideally without disrupting the overall narrative too much.

I guess it counts as prompted creative writing? It's enjoyable in itself and more engaging than just consuming it as presented.

Right? It was so incredibly obvious that everything was leading up to the scions making a dramatic return that the character deaths felt almost comical rather than sad and/or inspiring. Especially toward the end when it was like, "bye Alisaie, see you in 5 minutes."

It worked well enough for me, because it's still a potent thing if you think about how your character must be feeling in that moment. From an external viewpoint we know it's a story and they'll almost certainly be fine, but our character can't be certain, and they're carrying the increasing burden of their friends' lives – even before you consider the entire planet – with no certainty except the need to press on to the end of the path.

[sidurgu-12]

That's my sort of approach here as well. It feels like 90% stuff I'm happy to take as it plays on screen, but tinker around with that 10% and pretend it played out differently in a way I feel makes the story stronger – ideally without disrupting the overall narrative too much.

same. though its mainly lore points and side content found in elpis.

[GeckoMain]

Endwalker is dissapointing to me. Writing wise, I think it's above arr, but I rank it below arr since at least arr has the ball to kill characters and let the protagonists made mistakes. Meanwhile EW is free from nearly all consequences.

I do like Garlemald and elpis section, but again, the bad outweigh the good. For a finale of 10 year arc, they certainly rushed it and crammed too many plots.

I certainly don't appreciate the introduction of dynamis to ffxiv world, since it's pretty much a deus ex machina.

The complete absence of stakes is what makes it a bit harder for me to get excited for the next MSQ story, cause I’m still sure that in the end of it, we will win, the heroes will lose absolutely nothing in the process. If there will be any need for “sad” moments, they’ll just resort to fake deaths once again coupled with preaching about “sacrifice” when everyone is perfectly fine. I hope they can at least make Golbez a good villain and not kill him off too early before 7.0. All scions return except the one who sacrificed themselves permanently, I think it would have made the story more powerful.

The obvious candidate for this would be Urianger, instead of just randomly dying with Y’shtola he follows through to the end, and then plays the part.

Yeah or if it turned out that Thancred really couldn't be saved at the end since he sacrificed himself to allow to exist there. I actually agree that in ways I actually prefer ARR- obviously in story telling amd engagement EW wins but in lore and world building, ARR is better in my eyes.

I think them cramming 2 expansions into 1 was a really bad idea and the story would have been hugely improved if they had given more time to every single part of EW. Garlemald should have been half an expansion at least, the world being destroyed and the corruption of all the zones should have been explored wayyy more and the role quests all feel really lackluster as a way to explore them. It's just copying ShB and the lightwardens but with the literal invasion of all the realms and city states which should not be delegated to role quests.

Hell they could have done something crazy and ended the 1st part with the defeat of zodiark and the corruption of all the realms, after an expansion on the fall of garlemald which deserved way more exploration than it received and should have literally been much larger. Instead it was deligated to Alphinaud and Alisaes little side arc. No way man, too many things are done a disservice in EW just to rush to the end.

[ShinyChariot]

...whatever you thought was the plan probably wasn't the plan for as long as you thought it was.

No, it's not what I thought it was. I'm not one to excessively theorize and predict the story. I'm just an individual who played Endwalker after playing Shadowbringers, all of which through dialogue and information presented in the MSQ itself implied a heavier focus on the Final Days and the Convocation and the prolonged political conflict after the Zodairk was summoned and stalled the Final Days and the disagreement between the Ancients regarding the fate of the newly created life.

I'll say it again, the story Emet-Selch himself told "Zodairk and Hydaelyn fought and fought and fought". Venat was supported by her faction and Hydaelyn was summoned AFTER Zodiark stalled the Final Days.

What did the cutscene at the end of Elpis show us? Venat doing a thing which might have been summoning Hydaelyn, or sundering the world. We will never know. However the cutscene is completely inconsistent with the story told thus far. Hydaelyn sundered Zodiark after a long battle. That was not what the cutscene portrayed at all. Hydaelyn was summoned after Zodiark came into being and new life was made, when the Ancients reached the conclusion that Zodiark was to be opposed, that was not what was portrayed at all. The Final Days cutscene with Venat was a hot mess and a disappointment.

I'm not begging for a movie trilogy or anything, but at least give us something that makes sense. Most frustrating of all, we're probably never getting major Ancients content properly portraying the Final Days, one of the most important events in the timeline of FFXIV history (Which began as a mysterious noise from within the star which is completely apart from EW's dynamis from space, which is probably another retcon which was disappointing to me, as well as the Final Days being localized in Garlemald and one part of Thavnair. People transforming into the creatures because they're depressed is also really stupid even after the Endsingers song ended. It's really contrived.)

[Necrotica]

No, it's not what I thought it was. I'm not one to excessively theorize and predict the story. I'm just an individual who played Endwalker after playing Shadowbringers, all of which through dialogue and information presented in the MSQ itself implied a heavier focus on the Final Days and the Convocation and the prolonged political conflict after the Zodairk was summoned and stalled the Final Days and the disagreement between the Ancients regarding the fate of the newly created life.

I'll say it again, the story Emet-Selch himself told "Zodairk and Hydaelyn fought and fought and fought". Venat was supported by her faction and Hydaelyn was summoned AFTER Zodiark stalled the Final Days.

What did the cutscene at the end of Elpis show us? Venat doing a thing which might have been summoning Hydaelyn, or sundering the world. We will never know. However the cutscene is completely inconsistent with the story told thus far. Hydaelyn sundered Zodiark after a long battle. That was not what the cutscene portrayed at all. Hydaelyn was summoned after Zodiark came into being and new life was made, when the Ancients reached the conclusion that Zodiark was to be opposed, that was not what was portrayed at all. The Final Days cutscene with Venat was a hot mess and a disappointment.

I'm not begging for a movie trilogy or anything, but at least give us something that makes sense. Most frustrating of all, we're probably never getting major Ancients content properly portraying the Final Days, one of the most important events in the timeline of FFXIV history (Which began as a mysterious noise from within the star which is completely apart from EW's dynamis from space, which is probably another retcon which was disappointing to me, as well as the Final Days being localized in Garlemald and one part of Thavnair. People transforming into the creatures because they're depressed is also really stupid even after the Endsingers song ended. It's really contrived.)

Now I am wondering how fast the Song of Oblivion moves. Cause we travelled a VERY far distance across space to get to the point of origin. That song could still be hitting us like light from distant stars for the next 100 years.

I joke of course. Magic and wizards and shit.

[Cilia]

Such a thread already is in General Discussion, old friend.

Such are the unspoken rules of forums. If a thread exists, it will be copied and remade eternally.

I'm honestly not sure how many times and ways "Endwalker sucks!" can be repeated. 8 months isn't long enough to find out, evidently.

[Silvarer]

Now that the honeymoon period is over, I'd like to say that Endwalker's ending sucked and just flat-out ruined what could have been a great story.

A spoiled brat with, daddy issues, destroyed an entire civilization because life is so "mean". What an awful ending. Also, you don't just introduce new characters that late in the saga. Just terrible storytelling.

"Oh no, someone dares to criticize FFXIV!? quick, get the noose!!!" <--is what I expect from the loud minority here who rejects any real form of feedback because "feelings" but, this needs to be said and facts are facts and that's that.

TL;DR: Endwalker ending was terrible.

No one cares if you dislike it. That’s fine if you do. Just drop the condescending attitude and learn that your opinions are not facts, thanks.

[Cleretic]

What did the cutscene at the end of Elpis show us? Venat doing a thing which might have been summoning Hydaelyn, or sundering the world. We will never know. However the cutscene is completely inconsistent with the story told thus far. Hydaelyn sundered Zodiark after a long battle.

That cutscene is not a literal depiction of events, and that fact is fairly clear once you step back and consider what you're actually looking at and realize that it can't be; neither Venat nor Emet would've walked past the violent monsters, we know that Hythlodaeus went in the first sacrifice and yet the crowd Venat opposes is bringing on the second, they don't really try to hide the fact that the entrance Venat uses to get to that crowd is a destroyed bridge, we know the Anamnesis meeting was after the second sacrifice, etc. So it's depicting a few different events in the following order:

1. Actual coming of End of Days with the beasties.
2. Hyth leaving to participate in the sacrifice.
3. Venat failing to convince the crowd not to do the second sacrifice. The blade lightshow is not literally the Sundering, but more reflective of Venat realizing that it's the only option available to her, and also being a fancy scene transition that suggests the Sundering.
(5.2 Anamnesis meeting goes here)
4. The super figurative march in the grey void that is both reflective of Venat's sacrifice and sadness at what she has subjected people to.

A lot of the things you say are 'contrived' are actually explained, but I get the feeling you don't really care about the explanation.

But... honestly, I think the big part where I disagree with you is that I actually don't think the Sundering is important for the story we're playing. It's a big establishing event to create the world, but that doesn't mean it needs to be fully elaborated on because the important thing is 'it happened and now we're here many years later'. It's kinda like the creation of the Triforce in Zelda: the situation in which they made it is nowhere near as important as just knowing that they did, and while you could certainly make a game about the creation of the Triforce (which... well, they did) that story is not essential to someone playing, say, Breath of the Wild.

If they wanted to make a game set in the Ancient world, they can go ahead and do that and it would be completely legitimate to expect much of the game to revolve around exactly the scenes you want to see (although I can't imagine the Sundering would be a great finale; maybe if you got Yoko Taro to pen it, he's good at making the weirdo endings satisfying). But that is not our story; our story is people twelve thousand years afterwards trying to stop the apocalypse, who took a brief sojourn back to try to find out if anyone knew anything helpful.

EDIT TO AN EDIT: There was a reply to a different post, but I realized it came off too mean, so I'm gonna hold my tongue on that.