Endwalker Story sucked and it's time to admit it

[Hurlstone]

It is not a completely subjective issue. Though it's not completely objective either, there is enough of a writing standard reasonable enjoyers of narrative understand that we can go to in order to come to a conclusion about a story.

I dunno, I think it is more subjective an issue then you say. As some who enjoys writing, I find that fiction and storytelling is an incredibly personal medium. Themes and subjects will never resonate completely with everyone, no matter how much mechanical skill you have in the application. Its why reviews are reviews, and not judgements. They are one persons view on an artwork, which is spewed forth in a mixture of their own personal tastes, history and biases.

That aside, even if what you say is right and and we can come to a conclusion about a story… then how do we reach such a thing? It seems clear that even in a place like this forum, where criticism of the narrative is louder then elsewhere, its still a mixture of positive and negative. If you look across the net it seems that the expansion is seen as a success. And yes, before anyone says it I know ‘echo chambers’ exist out there, but then how can anyone come to a conclusion? Forums like this may be more open to negative language, but that does not mean they are immune from the same tropes of echo chambers and biases.

[ShinyChariot]

That cutscene is not a literal depiction of events.

It sure wasn't. Felt like an Elementary School theatre play of the Final Days in 30 seconds or less. You know what would've been better? An actual series of coherent flashbacks that actually carried more dialogue, context, content, and didn't completely ignore everything set up in ShB.

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.

"I sunder us" ( Doesn't actually sunder us)
The sundering actually took place after a long battle, so I dunno if Hydaelyn went into that and did that entire fight against Zodiark charging her Ult, or she just decided it on the spot.

Hey, it would been great if we got a real cutscene for that. Less mental gymnastics involved.

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.

Just because they explain it doesn't mean it isn't contrived, the explanation itself is part of the contrivance. And don't confuse your lack of examples for my supposed disinterest in explainations, since you thought that was a cute zinger.

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.

No, not the Sundering, not the independent event itself, I just spoke about it because it's place in the timeline goes so poorly with the Elpis cutscene they presented. Symbolism be dammed, that was a horrible utilization for it.

How about I wanted to see the emotions, the dialogue, the backstory, the interpersonal conflict, the sacrifices (which would probably be worth more than the piss poor limp lukewarm fake farewells we got in Ultima Thule. Yshtola went "I wanna be a nerd" before getting poofed because she has no actual character, and Urianger going "Hey, my story is already kinda resolved so what the hell, I might as well throw myself in too.") Yeah, shoot me for wanting cutscenes that convey a solid coherent narrative instead of some weird abstract metaphorical copout they put in there in place of some real content.

Your simplifying my desire for a deep understanding of the big picture to just "the sundering" is a complete misrepresentation of what I actually said.

[Seraphor]

There are objective issues with Endwalker's storytelling.
That said, there's still a lot of subjectivity here that's being painted as fact, and the attitude of the TC leaves a lot to be desired. Kinda makes any kind of debate seem pointless, like talking to a flat-earther, but regardless:

I don't think Endwalker is the peak of FF14, both Heavensward and Shadowbringers told better stories in better ways, but Endwalker did serve as a good conclusion to the arc we've been building since 2.0, it had pacing issues, some questionable motives and inclusions here and there, but it also had tons of great payoffs. Whatever you may think of the design of Meteion, her story gave us some incredible cosmic horror that I never expected, which I feel many are glossing over simply because she's a stupid anime lolita.
I wish there had been less time in Labyrinthos, more time in Garlemald, and more focus on Zenoz, Anima and Zodiark before they fulfilled their limited roles.
But that didn't ruin the story for me, there was still more good than bad I feel. I loved Thavnair, what little Garlemald there was, was done well, and Elpis and Ultima Thule were good too.
The time spent in Elpis was absolutely necessary to the plot, and I wouldn't have it reduced to a solo instance anything like some are suggesting. Without Elpis, Hermes and Meteion become worthless villains.

I'm sorry that's not a scathing indictment of Endwalker TC, if it makes me a SE fanboy so be it.

[thegreatonemal]

Which was a whole lot of nothing. As confirmed by the short story. So what did they try to convince them with EXACTLY?

That their doom was still assured. The Convocation refused to listen to anything else. You'd think they'd just investigated but being tempered is what probably prevents them from even trying to hear Venat's side out.

[Cilia]

The expansion is not even a year old yet and not everyone completed 6.0 in December or even January. Plus, many people have said they initially enjoyed EW, but having gone through it again on an alt or NG+ their impression changed.

I just think it's ridiculous that anyone thinks in a current expansion that criticism and negative feedback is going to stop after a certain period of time. You've got at least another year of it and that's not including anyone who doesn't start playing until after 7.0. EW is simply too divisive to stand the test of time being remembered fondly vs. controversial, it will at the very least be another SB in the library of expansions. Worse, because it was the finale.

This isn't even going into if 7.0 isn't good and more people will start to question why the arc was ended prematurely to usher in a 'lackluster' story.

/shrug

The Garleans lived in one of the most technologically advanced, powerful nations of the currently known world for long enough that anyone that had experienced the hardships you speak of directly would have been a child at the time.

Even if the average Garlean had a better standard of living than, say, the average Eorzean, their lives still weren't free of hardship or suffering - their nation was propped up on a policy of aggressive expansion, its government was fascistic, and the civilians that traveled abroad were often met with understandable scorn even if they didn't approve of its war machine. A lot of Garleans were soldiers or had family in the military, or otherwise supported it through engineering and medicine.

I might not agree with the cause they fought for, but that doesn't make their hardships nonexistent.

[Brinne]

That their doom was still assured. The Convocation refused to listen to anything else. You'd think they'd just investigated but being tempered is what probably prevents them from even trying to hear Venat's side out.

"There was a raging fire, but we put it out. Now we can rebuild and restore things to where they used to be."
"No, I'm telling you, we're still doomed!"
"Why?"
"[RADIO SILENCE]"

"The stubborn fools wouldn't listen to me!"

Very reasonable and convincing!

Even if the average Garlean had a better standard of living than, say, the average Eorzean, their lives still weren't free of hardship or suffering

I'm glad we just had an elaborate chapter of a raid story all about how the Ancients' lives were clearly completely free of hardship and suffering. I mean, grief over personal loss is clearly a completely alien concept to Themis, for example, and definitely not something he scolded Lahabrea for trying to deny his son the right to, and even called Lahabrea himself practically insane for ripping out of himself (before knowing the full circumstances.)

[PawPaw]

That their doom was still assured. The Convocation refused to listen to anything else. You'd think they'd just investigated but being tempered is what probably prevents them from even trying to hear Venat's side out.

Imagine how wonderful and helpful it would have been if, instead of lecturing a group of grieving people who had seen no other way out with vague hints and platitudes, she had actually imparted useful information that might have at least given them a chance to find another way BEFORE sacrificing half their population. She gave them absolutely nothing to investigate, no crumbs to follow, so it makes complete sense that they would have turned her faction away. What on earth did they have to offer except their guesses about the future? They didn't even know the truth themselves.

[ShinyChariot]

I dunno, I think it is more subjective an issue then you say. As some who enjoys writing, I find that fiction and storytelling is an incredibly personal medium. Themes and subjects will never resonate completely with everyone, no matter how much mechanical skill you have in the application.

We have people that shovel popcorn into their mouths to Phase 4 Marvel and Disney Star Wars and then we have YouTubers like Mauler blowing to shreds every movie they make for their completely incompetent writing. I'm personally someone who sides with the latter.

Some people just don't have the ability to identify good and bad writing decisions. Whether it makes you feel good and that you enjoy it is something some people can't separate from something that's also well written and deep in narrative sustenance. And it's completely fine to shut off your brain and enjoy it, but people are entitled to blow it up for any dumb decision and plot holes that are made.

Everyone has their take. Just because there's all these echo chambers and whatever doesn't mean we throw the baby out with the bathwater. Having a decent level of personal competence will let you identity the wheat from the chaff. And for some people things they agree with are the wheat and things they don't are the chaff.

But this isn't a place where one side is right, there isn't a "total victory", it's just a place where people come to express themselves and dunk on other people in discussions and maybe rarely take something positive away from it.

Convincing a single person or coming to an agreement is the only real win in this place. People constantly whining about who's saying what and still complaining about what are just wasting their breath lmao.

[Brinne]

Imagine how wonderful and helpful it would have been if, instead of lecturing a group of grieving people who had seen no other way out with vague hints and platitudes, she had actually imparted useful information that might have at least given them a chance to find another way BEFORE sacrificing half their population. She gave them absolutely nothing to investigate, no crumbs to follow, so it makes complete sense that they would have turned her faction away. What on earth did they have to offer except their guesses about the future? They didn't even know the truth themselves.

I mostly tend to roll my eyes at or laugh off people preaching about an upcoming, inevitable apocalypse or doom with nothing concrete backing it, like those who fearmongered about Y2K or 2012. Especially if they try to use this as a bludgeon to force or shame me into acting a certain way, more to their own liking. Clearly, this means I was a stubborn fool and it would have been absolutely my own fault for not heeding their words if a meteor wave of despair or whatever did indeed happen to hit us out of nowhere in those years, in spite of being given no reason to believe them or take them seriously at the time.

[Iscah]

Isn't it just so much easier to assume that there were genuine attempts to argue their case, and it didn't work out well, and we just didn't see those scenes? It's what we're supposed to accept happened.

I just feel it's better to take the writer's word that a thing happened than try to argue ten reasons why it actually played out differently.

They wrote it badly, yes, and their attempts to patch up the cracks via Q&A sessions made it sound even worse, but ultimately it's better to try to work from what they were trying to do than the mess we actually got. I think the scene got re-re-written to its detriment and we're left with a sticky-taped mess.


(I think it's ironic(?) that for all the debate over the Sundering, and for all that it's theoretically the crux of the whole story, you could really just pull that whole scene out of the game or replace it with different events and nothing would change in the present day part of the story.)