Inconsistencies with the sundering (Spoilers)

[kpxmanifesto]

I'm in awe, that there are people who really think that cutscene was a retcon. There were wayyyy too many inconsistencies in it, for it to be anything other than metaphorical and just a visual spectacle.

The OP has a point though. The story writer is telling us through this metaphorical cutscene that the cause of the sundering was different from how Emet-Selch said it happened in ShB. If the story wasn't retconned then we would know that the sundering was actually because of a battle between Zodiark and Hydaelyn, but we didn't see that mentioned at all in EW MSQ

[MikkoAkure]

The OP has a point though. The story writer is telling us through this metaphorical cutscene that the cause of the sundering was different from how Emet-Selch said it happened in ShB. If the story wasn't retconned then we would know that the sundering was actually because of a battle between Zodiark and Hydaelyn, but we didn't see that mentioned at all in EW MSQ

The first Tales from the Dawn restates the ShB reason for the Sundering. It's almost as if events can have more than 1 reason for happening.

[kpxmanifesto]

The first Tales from the Dawn restates the ShB reason for the Sundering. It's almost as if events can have more than 1 reason for happening.

So a double retcon? They messed up the cutscene by forgetting to show the metaphor for the great battle between Zodiark and Hydaelyn, and then they have to write more lore after the game was finished to reconcile the two diverged stories? That's just plain carelessness.

Isn't that poor story telling? You know, having to have the creators of the story explain things outside of the story themselves?

Looks like they did this twice now. Once with the Live Letter and now with Tales of the dawn.