What's the point with that quite lackluster story in Endwalker?

[Turtledeluxe]

- I don't remember HW that well, but Yotsuyu needed aether crystals, not one person.

- If you don't associate more == morally superior, then why bring it up? I never said more, you did.

- What's comical is that you don't search reddit threads. The game gives you reasons to think Hydaelyn is evil/suspicious and you can find reddit threads about it spanning, probably, the whole game's existence (in years). Maybe you weren't suspicious, idk.

- He requires half of the world just to be summoned and he tempers because he's a summon. We know from the MSQ uncontrollable tempering begets more tempering. Maybe WoL should've told Venat how to deal with tempering. As far as additional sacrifices, they were scheduled to happen so I'm not sure what's confusing about that. "This resulted in a series of sacrifices, first by offering another half of their population to restore Etheirys to habitability, and the plan on harvesting the lives of the new races that would develop on the planet in the future to resurrect those they had sacrificed earlier." Sounds like genocide to me, but again you all aren't actually concerned with genocide so why would you notice? Taking even half the population is outrageous, even if they were willing, because we have no idea if those people even understood what they were signing up for beyond "instant solution".

- Who cares[ if her decision was right? Endwalker is asking everyone to make their own decision about who was right or wrong in the Ascian conflict. There's no "I hate Emet" text button either as far as I know, and characters even dignify him with understanding, despite retaliating with yet more cycles of genocide. Whether I think it's right or you think it's right doesn't matter because Endwalker is not a morality pageant contest furthermore-- by subjecting yourself the tribalism of it all you're missing the whole point that no one was right. It's a trick question.

- What does the quote provided to do with anything? It says to make your own theory and "maybe Venat was working behind the scenes". That's not definitive declaration "Venat was preserving the timeline of events".

- A tangent but have you considered too much interference with the future in the Elpis timeline would mean the WoL never exists and create an inconsistency that doesn't work with this game???

-The Ancients coming up with a solution to Zodiark or the Final Days is conjecture and, imo, not relevant only because I interpret Elidibus's statements to mean the Elpis visit lacked any potential to change the future-- that the Final Days were an inevitable reality. Fate is a very common topic in FF so maybe I'm biased (I play the other games) but I don't think time travel can change fate in a particular timeline. As you've noted, maybe a timeline divergence can happen that results in a different future for that alternate timeline. But that's different from taking the original timeline of the sundering for example and just redoing it with a new future without establishing a deviation. I personally think the Elpis visit created a deviant timeline that spans the range of our visit and conjoined with our present MSQ time (which is the future of the original timeline). In that sense in terms of the present MSQ, there's still a Venat in the past who made the decision to sunder with no future knowledge (and as I've said I also think the walking sequence is depicting this based on the dialogue and the vocal delivery) and there's our new conjoined timeline which puts everyone on the same page and results in a new future. I think that's why Venat mentions a conjunction of time. It was a fanservicey way to have us experience Elpis without breaking the lore (we were literally Azem so a single timeloop paradox doesn't make sense to me). <--- This drives a lot of my takes btw and I understand not everyone sees the events this way.