Can 7.0 focus on a storyline without the philosophizing

[Hurlstone]

Not sure why every story thread turns into a debate about Venat. Regardless, the fact that there is such controversy surrounding Venat at the very least implies bad writing.

I believe Yoshi P mentioned that the story is up for interpretation. In that case, why does the writing portray the situation under such a black-and-white lens? I would concur that when I played through Endwalker, I have not felt that the writers intended Venat to be a morally grey character. In fact, in one of the 6.x patches, you were given a choice to say that Venat's actions were unforgivable, but one of the Scions would quickly dismiss you and change the topic as if they wanted to move on and the cutscene had an "Awkard..." mood as if you just blurted out a racist slur.

Was that when the Watcher offers the choice in the Omega side quest? I am a staunch Venat supporter, though I do understand why people wanted a bit more ambiguity and introspection regarding her actions and the reactions form the Scions. That would have been cool, especially to have Thancred or someone call Venat out, but if I could only like and support writing that I felt was flawless, then I would never like anything I feel haha. Thats the thing with writing and storytelling, its very subjective. The very fact her arc can be seen as, at best, divisive rather the outright hated points more to that then bad writing.

I do wish we could move on from just debating about Vanet, but at leats it has been a while since I have seen the Geneva Conventions being posted here... thats somthing!