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

[Lunaxia]

If, if, that were the case...

Sorry for the delayed reply (to the thread in general) - life has been very fun, if you catch my drift.

That's more or less the question I was posing - were the writers insecure? Perhaps as you say, they had intended to "lighten" (no pun intended... or maybe a little bit) him up all along. It's very possible. I couldn't make up my mind, honestly, which is why I was interested in others' opinions. Perhaps they really captured lightning in a bottle with Emet in ShB, and his subsequent characterisation was just more of what we usually get. But they do show they've really got in them on occasion to deliver great, nuanced characters and a gripping story - 3.0 and Pandaemonium in particular say hello - and Endwalker to me was such a let down compared to all the other expansion packs that it seemed more the exception rather than the rule, even if Emet and Amaurot were unusually spectacular high notes. Even Stormblood, which lags behind in public opinion, didn't necessarily feel out of place or struggle with bland, Disneyfied writing - it was more an issue of an identity crisis where it stretched itself too thinly in too many places. There's an identifiable thread running through the other games that connects them in terms of the tone of the plot's writing that just seemed to abruptly end with Endwalker (hah), and the reason for that being their trying to deliver a big, fan-pleasing finale to match what came before with ShB and believing the best way of achieving that was by playing it safe made the most sense, to my mind.

I'd forgotten about that line in Ultima Thule though - I think somewhere along the line I've unconsciously chosen to block that part out. What was it he said, exactly?

If I may I had always suspected Garlemald was the cut expansion premise (we know the original idea was to have the story conclude in 7.0, not 6.0) due to Stormblood...

That's a very good point, and one I hadn't considered. They may have believed a military/ war-themed expansion would have been received poorly and went with what worked previously - i.e. a more fantasy-leaning direction. But the irony is that the Garlemald section was probably one of the best parts of EW, and after playing it I imagine such an EP would have played out more like HW than SB, which is far from a bad thing. Another thing that gives me cause to doubt that is I really would have thought they'd jump at the chance to flesh out the lore surrounding Emet's time in that region - given his popularity, it felt like an easy way to rope the fans into the story, but instead we really hear and see very little about any of it, even when it seems they established several starting points to explore. Why? Hmm.

[Midareyukki]

I'd forgotten about that line in Ultima Thule though - I think somewhere along the line I've unconsciously chosen to block that part out. What was it he said, exactly?

It's the part where he and Hythlo leave after you tug at Meteion's heartstrings. Something along the lines of

"But more than that [having to live by Hydaelyn's design], the future you seek is not the past we loved. That is why we fought. And why I lost. But though you defeated me, my ideals are inviolate. Invincible."

Again, what I felt at the time (even as someone who likes Emet Selch and understands there's more to him than the actions he's done), and taking it from the viewpoint you presented, it didn't feel like a benevolent farewell. While to many people it just seems like he's stubborn about wanting to bring everyone back, to some, especially to players whose native places were destroyed due to his machinations, it comes off as rather insensitive. Almost like he's saying "Yeah, I don't care if I knowingly and willingly caused mass murders a hundred times over. I'm still feeling justified in my actions."

Because keep in mind that one of his most famous spiels is him saying that he does not view us as truly alive. Therefore he cannot be convicted for murder. This is one of his ideals, which he claims are inviolate and that we have not changed his mind on.

While it's great that he holds us with some respect, and is benevolent enough to appear before us and urge us to explore Hydaelyn's world as he once did, it still comes off a bit "oof". Because in the middle of his ideals comes his primary justification to continue taking lives. And it's simply brushed off as "oh that silly Emet, still evil >w>".

However, that's my interpretation of his line. I don't remember if there's any other that would fit better, but as far as I can remember, that's the one that struck me the most. I was like "What do you mean you still feel justified? Dude, you murdered a bunch of people just for a chance to have your own back! Don't you have anything to say for that? We're just expected to believe you're the Kingdom Hearts villain-is-a-good-guy-now because of how you're behaving?". Because actions speak louder than words, and he did commit atrocities for which he apparently still feels the justification holds! Those were actions too, with far dire consequences than him telling us "I don't like it, but at least I concede defeat"... BUT I understand if other people have a different reading of that. Perhaps I'm looking too much into it, and I won't deny if people see differently.

Otherwise, yes, from your perspective and based on how I saw parts of the story, it did feel like the authors were insecure. But that was my interpretation of less positive parts of the story, and it's from the lens of a perspective that I obviously don't know whether it's true or not. Could just be the authors just thought that was fine? :| who knows

[Lunaxia]

It's the part where he and Hythlo leave after you tug at Meteion's heartstrings. Something along the lines of...

I had to go back and rewatch it upon you reminding me, and the whole scene was as staggeringly awful as I remember (damn it, Midare, I'd almost managed to forget that "I bid them remember, but I'm the one who forgot!" line!) Apologies to the people who enjoyed it and found it moving, but good god, the entire scene was Emet's characterisation bouncing around the scene like a yo-yo so the writers could make use of his popularity and make him their mouthpiece. The almost gentle chiding of the woman who caused him to suffer absolute misery, the lighthearted buddy cop show banter between him and Hyth during the supposed emotional highlight of the entire series when everything they've fought and sacrificed for is at stake, those endless godforsaken theatre kid puns that should have died with Emet's Garlean facade and the subtle justifications for the nebulous story, claiming mortals had fared better than anything they could have achieved...

But to focus on that line in particular, because it is the most interesting - I do distinctly remember feeling very ??? upon hearing it, because I wasn't actually sure what the writers were trying to get at with it either. The first part, I actually really like as a stand alone quote - it feels very much like the Emet we defeated at the end of ShB, and the poignancy of that "and why I lost" line is beautifully heart-breaking, as if he's admitting aloud for the first time what we knew, but he had never allowed himself to think - that his heart had gone from the fight, and he had lost the will to continue. They could have ended it there.

But the ideals part baffles me. What ideals? Did Emet have ideals? I thought he was painted as a "by any means necessary" kind of guy adhering to his duty who had little regard for principles, morals, notions of good and evil - he frequently resented being seen as a villain, and seemed to view to everything through the lens of "is this useful to me?" rather than anything else. His ideals that the Ancients were superior? That the world should have been rejoined? As you say, were they genuinely trying to shoehorn in a quick "I don't regret any of the suffering I caused" in the same moment they were trying to make him a grudging protagonist?

The kindest interpretation I can give is him referring to his sense of duty to his people, meaning he would always have done whatever he could to save them, and that he still believed the past world was a better place... which isn't much better, but a little less of a spit-in-your-eye goodbye, I guess.