Nope, I am doing neither of those things. I am simply critical of the fact that the story is pushing a genocide – feel free to substitute in whatever term you prefer – as necessary and, as a solution to Endsinger, as a good thing. But I am making no demand of anyone, so much as pointing out things for what they are. Even if I did not use the term, and used terms like “mass slaughter and enforced regression through magic”, I am sure you would claim the same thing, because these are still frightful actions. But it’s a massive leap of logic to think I’m making a moral “demand” on you in relation to interpreting a video game story. The term is already used in game to discuss less destructive actions in game. Maybe you want a word with the writers over that?
If the story simply presented it as the writers did in the Q&A, as a tragic event which you’re free to come to your conclusions about, I might agree. But it doesn’t. It pushes Venat’s actions as necessary and frames them in an unabashedly positive light, e.g. in the Codex. In other language versions, such as JP, she doesn’t even apologise for her course of action so much as say what’s done is done. At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter what question Endwalker thinks it’s asking, what matters is what message it is ultimately sending, whether the writers realise this or not. I am well within my rights to point out that the game is deviating from its usual preachy tone in not calling this out for Venat. The writers clearly realised it was an issue enough to bring in the Omega side quests. I just think that it was too little, too late.
What you are describing now is down to how the story was ultimately written. There’s many ways to address this, as others brought up, but for me it would be sufficient to do so through including some open criticism of Venat in the MSQ, not propping her up via the codex, more clearly present the Sundering instead of stylised cutscenes with ancient strawmen and shoving the actual aftermath into a crossover for NieR, and leaving the inference of an AU for Panda, much as they did with the short story covering the 8UC, An Unpromised Tomorrow. None of that would require massive effort or rewrites.
Is that not exactly what happened during the course of SHB and EW both, though? The Warrior of Light travels back in time to solve a problem that has no answer in the present during Endwalker. The same happens again with Pandaemonium. And that is not to mention the myriads of other plot devices appearing through the course of each expansion, like Cid’s solution to the Void… so I can’t really make much sense of this objection.

Reply With Quote



