[6.0 - 6.4 Spoilers] An interesting video detailing Venat's polarizing reception

[Cleretic]

What I'm not overly fond of is the lack of in-game negative response to the truth of what she did. It's the sort of thing the Scions would normally find positively revolting, but they seemed quite willing to just overlook it. The closest thing we really see to it being called out proper is in one of our responses to Omega on the matter. Quite frankly, I don't think I would have even become embroiled in the numerous conversations on the subject were it not for this particular thing. It just didn't jive with me for whatever reason. "What's good for the goose is good for the gander," as they say.

I think an important part to remember is that the game keeps Venat and Emet's crimes at a distance. Venat did her thing twelve thousand years ago, and nobody who meets Emet is really personally victimized by anything he did. This is very much intentional, because it puts the question forward without providing an answer or letting it derail the story. With Venat, part of that is absolutely that nobody who learns about this is impartial, and nobody who was hurt by it is alive anymore; the only people hearing this and being available to cast judgement on it are the people who were (very, very distant) results of her actions, but more importantly who kinda have something more important to do. They're not going to weigh in on this--which, again, is intentional, because in a story with well-liked main characters, any word they'd say on it would hold more weight than any on-paper fact. The Scions being 'truly disturbed' would become the only evidence on the table, because we consider the Scions and their feelings that much more important than any other source in the game. Trying to use that fact in putting forward two different sides seems to be something they're doing with Dawntrail, but in Endwalker, it would've just been an unwelcome distraction at the climax of the story. (And I suspect won't work well with Dawntrail because people will pick according to their favorite Scion to the exclusion of all else, but we're a good year away from knowing that for sure.)

It actually makes complete sense, and works very well, that Omega's the only one facilitating anything resembling a discussion on this, not just because it's a relatively minor character that wouldn't really sway that debate, but because it's kinda the only figure anywhere on the Source who actually doesn't have stake in it: it was neither a victim or beneficiary of Venat on even the most abstract and tangential level. Omega is the most outsider one can be to the subject... and as a result I think it's interesting that from that perspective, Omega doesn't limit the conversation to her. It actually puts forward all three of the sides I mentioned way back in my first post, even considering Hermes to be a valid perspective, because from its perspective Venat's only part of a debate that has no clear right answer.

You want the game to take the stance you agree with, or at least provide stronger evidence in favor of it than all alternative views. And it's just not going to, in the same way that it consciously avoided taking the stance I wanted it to with Emet. And all of this is deliberate.