Uuuh.... when was this said so directly, I don't recall it ever happening. Yoshida just said there would be a new storyline in 7.0, he never said precisely what it was. Where's YOUR citation, Vel?
6.2's MSQ plot in a nutshell, really. I keep saying it, and I'm going to keep saying it. Barreling through the Arch-Fiends in this way will prove to be a considerable narrative blunder, in the end.
When you start with the first bolded part, and end with the latter; well, people tend to have trouble taking you seriously. It's inherently contradictory in your intent to do so, or perhaps illuminating what you actually intend? Either way, one thing in particular I've noticed about the likes of you and Striker is that for as much as you constantly demand to have people state what is and isn't their opinion alone you seem to possess the same inherent flaw you find in so many others. Until you sort that out, it may be wise to cease pointing it out in others.
I, meanwhile will continue to be unashamed, unabashed, and unrepentant in my predilections. Stay frosty, dissenters~
Hmm, gonna disagree heavily on most if not all of this. Funny that you mention that of all things, however since the mods on this forum DO frequently take the side of those who defend Endwalker's plot and my posts have been removed in the past for posting quite literally the same words another poster who praised the narrative instead of condemning it was permitted to remain.
Also, you are lacking in Language Arts rhetoric yourself if you believe this for it too is inaccurate. The fact of the matter is, many people do indeed take issue with various dilemmas in which 6.0 and beyond were handled and the number continues to grow every day as shown by the uptick in posts I've seen here and on social media decrying Endwalker's failings. None of those you accuse of foul play are under any obligation to reveal every particular person they debate with just because a select few onerous folk make unsavvy demands, and any who would dismiss the points they would make on that basis alone show their full hand so to speak on lack of knowledge on how debates work.
Oh, guess I'm running late. Just noticed this~
Hmm. Yeah, you're right it is a valid question and I'd take it seriously if it weren't for the manner in which it was phrased and what it followed.
"The point Aveyond was trying to make" is that it falls flat when the Scions' suffering and despair is presented as representative of how virtuous the Sundered are as a whole, over a mountain of corpses who undoubtedly suffered more and failed Venat's rigorous test. It fails when the Scions are far more privileged and get many things (but not all, of course) handed to them in as convenient a cosmic manner as humanly possible. It makes for a rather unimpressive moral narrative, overall. 6.2's MSQ "anime fller plot" as some other user on this thread called it proves this. The Voidsent we've seen so far bear no resemblance at all to the vicious, conniving demons we've confronted in the past and it shows. They are now either cowardly wimps who refuse to unsheath their claws and fangs or super-simpy morons who drool over their latest slave driver. As a RPer heavily invested in the possible heirarchy and culture of the 13th, this disappoints me immeasurably.
Anywhoozies~, tangent over. As ever, and while I don't speak for Aveyond of course I reckon their main gripe with the story in 6.0 and beyond is that it lacks consistency and fails to mesh with what we'd gotten from the narrative previously. This concern is not hilarious, nay frankly it's rather understandable and I share it.

Reply With Quote


