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

[Absimiliard]

A question seeing how you focus on the portrayal of Venat:

Would you have preferred a story where the narrative wouldn't have been significantly altered but where Venat was unmistakably portrayed as a villain over one where the narrative would have been altered, written smarter and had her actually be a hero or tragic hero with understandable motivation? Let's say one where a time loop wouldn't have occured.

If you could take either or, why focus on Venat, not the narrative inadvertently making her a villain?

In the case of a coherent narrative, I'd be fine with either/or.

As I said before, I don't have a problem with Venat as a character. For me, it's not really a moral issue or what have you. Omnicide in a video game is a pretty common trope, after all. I have a problem with the seeming inability of the writing team to reconcile A with B. Venat simply happens to be sitting right smack in the middle of a large part of what went wrong with Endwalker, making it far easier to communicate the issues I see by focusing on the one character they used as the linchpin for the entire train wreck.

The writing team has effectively tried to tell the player-base they should feel X about a character, when the reality is they mostly provided reasons to feel Y. Or, put another way, they portrayed the character's motivations and actions in a way that she comes off as an outright villain to many of us, but at the same time they had the rest of the cast behave as if she is the second coming of Christ. This is a level of narrative dissonance that I very much believe should be called out. The already dissonant storytelling only worsened once we began learning about the day to day lives of the ancients, the truth about the limitations of Zodiark's power and the intended third sacrifice, etc. The narrative destroyed the writing team's own argument about the validity of Venat's decisions fairly quickly.