Quote Originally Posted by kpxmanifesto View Post
ShB says that the sundering happened because of a "great battle between Zodiark and Hydaelyn", the EW metaphorical cutscene fails to mention that battle and says it was done by Venat because of her own personal morals.
We already knew since ShB 5.0 MSQ that Hydaelyn objected to the third sacrifice due to her own personal morals and then in 5.2 we find out that Venat summoned Hydaelyn again due to her morals. In “Beneath the Surface”, we’re told Venat didn’t believe Zodiark is a permanent solution and that tracks with what we find out later in Endwalker so there’s still continuity. It was never just left off in ShB that “there was a battle and Sundering happened”.

The battle between Zodiark and Hydaelyn still happens, it’s just not shown in that one weird cutscene.


If we’re going by the “official” definition you provided, then this whole game was retconned in ShB when it was revealed that the Ascians are Ancients. Or when we find out that Zodiark and Hydaelyn are primals. Or when we find out in post-ARR that Ascian powers are also the Echo and later in ShB that it’s due to some soul memory thing. Or in SB when we find out that Emet-Selch was Solus.

There are so many more much larger examples that fit better with the common idea of retcons than this one the thread is about that also definitely fit the definition you provided. I still don’t consider this a retcon and don’t agree with the “official” definition.