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

[Nayukhuut]

It wasn't world's full of people and many of them did want to die, by literally serving a summon who recurring called for sacrifices and tempered the rest. I wouldn't call being permanently tempered living. It's bizarre because you're either being obtuse or just don't realize that Zodiark was only a good solution for people who were content permanently serving and sacrificing for him in order to act as a shield against the Final Days.

And I keep having to remind everyone-- Hyaelyn was a group effort. So it's not the awful act of Venat, it's the awful act of a collective. And it isnt awful because as I keep saying, the force required to injure Zodiark had the byproduct of sundering. Its not "Venat plotted to send humans back to the dark ages". If anything your hyper focus on Venat seems very odd. I don't notice anyone calling out or making threads about the myriad other genocidal people in the story who are also framed as heros at particular points or even have redemption arcs. I think the real issue you have is deeper than that.

Venat doesn't even really get a redemption arc. It's a confession and then we kill her.

We don't call out the other mass murderers because the story is happy to call them out for us. All we are asking is that it actually do the same to Venat. Her scene before we kill her wasn't that. It was basically her saying "I have done something awful" and us comforting her for it. I don't want to comfort her, I want to agree with her that she did something awful.

As for many of them not wanting or wanting to die, while it's kinda awful that you do not considered Tempered people living as we have shown that Tempering is reversible, what about the innocent people on the Shards who had to die before wee got to the point where her plan might work? She knew about them. They certainly did not want to die.

And yes, I am aware of her followers and I do not care for them other. A small group who all decided that they knew better for the world and then planned to force their will on it. Now the Twelve are forever soured in my mind too since they are all just based on Venat followers, and creations of Venat herself. The reason I do not mention them, though, is that Venat never entirely told them what was up. They followed her like good little sheep and she led them to their doom.

That said, I am not sure arguing with you has much of a point since you basically keep trying to argue that even the most vile things are okay and should never be questioned so long as they lead to an outcome we like. Which is a valid viewpoint, I suppose. It is just not one I can agree with. I figure that we can acknowledge the world we live in now, while still calling out Venat for being a crap person.

[Xirean]

Expecting that we are not done with that alternate timeline, either. I wouldn't be shocked even in the slightest that if in a few expansions from now we basically pull another Shadowbringers, but this time end up in that alternate timeline. They would get to parade around Emet, Elidibus, and Venat version 2. :P

It's gonna be FF14's Warlords of Draenor/Legion moment.

Don't give me hope that this happens. The moment it does then there no longer exist any reason to prevent the summoning/sundering by going back to Elpis. If they ever actually make multi timelines truly Canon then we better go back and fix that event.

[Theodric]

As someone else already pointed out, WoL doesn't know every mechanism at play but an overall idea. They can't instruct Venat how to sunder people right for example.

Sure, and that in turn is part of the problem of the whole idea of maintaining timeline consistency over that time span and so many worlds, with such limited knowledge, and so she is figuring some aspects out - like I said, there is fuzziness to her methods. But we are discussing her aims here, which are known, not the "how". She cannot be certain of anything but she is still taking extreme actions with an end goal in mind.

Regarding the follower count, I never said it was more, I said it was a significant number. That's a fair assumption because summons need a certain level of aether.

Sure, but as we've seen these summonings can be performed with quite a low threshold of aether, as per Tsukuyomi and Shiva. Anyway, it need not even be an assumption, because we know from their own words that it was a low count, precisely twelve plus herself.

And besides more people =/= morally correct.

I'll be sure to inform whoever is arguing that as much.

No it doesn't. The last two expansions were all about questioning her. You're asking me to live in a time period longer than 5 years ago and well, no. It's a 10 year long dev cycle, expecting perfect consistency is unrealistic.

They were not. SHB only cast some doubt on her motives on the basis that she had lied about what she is. But it wasn't until the end of the 5.x series that the Scions began asking questions, and even then it was more in the direction of what her precise will was. We did not know her actual motivations until EW, so trying to pretend SHB dealt with this when it's not revealed until EW is comically silly.

Zodiark requires sacrifices and he tempers people who follow him.

He requires sacrifice for specific acts. He tempered his summoners through his sheer power in the act of summoning him. But nowhere is it stated he tempers people who follow him beyond that. If you insist on claiming it, provide the textual evidence. The cutscene with Venat won't do because it doesn't come up there at all.

Given any amount of time at all, any rate of progress, he would consume the world or, at minimum, temper everyone.

Again, citation for where this is ever mentioned. Not even her followers articulate such a concern.

Just because a character says something to acknowledge an event occurred doesn't mean they're aggressively proud of it. I called it a confession. Implying it was some well laid out plan "Hmm humans will devolve to this point, with this many resources, let me decorate the reflections" is different from "I had no other choice and I did the most powerful attack I could that unfortunately sundered the world".

But who here is arguing that she saw herself in a villainous light? She no doubt believes she has good reason for it. But it can be questioned whether her course of action, given its extreme costs, was the right one.

Where are the quotes regarding Venat is preserving the timeline and our visit was capable of affecting reality to the degree of avoiding the Final Days?

Read the bolded:

Q: I don’t really understand why the Warrior of Light messing around in Elpis didn’t create any alternate timelines. What happened?
A: Well, I think the most important thing is that you can come up with your own theories for this one. In my personal interpretation however is that the timelines were always the same. Another interpretation you can have is that maybe Venat worked really hard behind the scenes to ensure the timeline didn’t go awry. Therefore the Warrior of Light was always acting in accordance with this plan of Venat so the timeline that we are aware of didn’t change when we went back to the affected. I personally think that when we went to Mare Lamentorum and we first met Argos and Argos really took to us when we were able to ride it, that's basically the proof that at that point, the timeline is going accordingly. We are adding all these stuff to New Game+ in 6.1 so if you’re interested in this I suggest you replay it and think about these questions when you’re playing it.

Then couple this with the fact that she's attempting to spare Emet from her actions.

As to whether it could avert the Final Days or not, I don't believe I ever said it necessarily would - it's an unknown because the scenario never played out. What I am getting at is that if the Convocation and ancients were provided with the necessary knowledge, they would be able to come to a better solution than Zodiark. As was stated, he's still capable of shielding the star for a very long time given that he was created on the basis of incomplete knowledge, but we know G'raha's actions already resulted in a timeline split from the 8UC's future, so let's not pretend it's impossible for an AU to form here.

This is total conjecture, so it's not worth arguing. Speaking of being obtuse and hinging arguments, your literal entire post history ITT depends on this conjecture.

I think it is perfectly worth speculating on, because the entire story set up asks us to think of her motives in terms of knowledge the ancients were not provided, and on the basis of "what ifs" regarding what would happen if they didn't change when they were not really given any good reason to change. To affect meaningful change to the timeline would require that knowledge to be provided. This seems more like it's inconvenient for you to speculate upon it, therefore you don't' think it's worth arguing. Then don't. No skin off my nose. But I am not dropping the point.

I can see threads via search history. You're going to ignore the redemption of Zenos, Emet, even Durante? Their crimes or intended crimes are hand waived away and they get treated like normal people in game, not to mention have fandoms. There's never been an 800 page thread about ehem those types of antagonists.

Yes, they have fandoms. Villains/antagonists being popular in a FF series is not surprising. However, the story is critical of all of their actions, and specifically Zenos and Emet are both called out in lengthy exchanges by the Scions. Durante is subjected to much the same via Zero. So saying that their crimes are "handwaved" away is a bizarre mischaracterisation of what's happening here. Equally the story is not asking me to accept their actions as tragic necessities. It does try argue they should've taken a less bloody course of action. On top of all this, the WoL isn't working in concert with their agendas, but against them. They receive help from them after they've already defeated them in their capacity as antagonists or villains. They not painted as aligned to their goals.

The Omega story asks you who is more justified. How exactly is that condoning her?

A pity that it isn't reflected or followed up anywhere else, like in the MSQ itself, and is confined to that singular sidequest series, isn't it? And that the codex proceeds without acknowledging any such nuances.

And it is a test, in a way, because she was making it so that people couldn't rely on Zodiark. What's your point? I've called the sundering reckless and explained that while Venat wasn't entirely malicious, she also wasn't entirely innocent either. How many more times will I need to say it I wonder? The Ancients in general had slightly different set of ethics from our time and being arrogant is fairly common in their behavioral patterns-- Venat is not immune to that. Once again that's the whole point of the conflict itself and even the root cause of the Final Days.

Being arrogant is fairly common in many a character's behavioural patterns, but with the ancients specifically, we know their society arrives at large decisions through debate and consensus, and expect transparency from their officials, so this "she's an ancient" excuse the writers like to invoke isn't going to cut it, I'm afraid. Nor does it exempt her from any criticism, any more than it would the likes of Emet-Selch, Hermes or Athena. Indeed, the story does not shy away at all from a critical stance towards Athena.

[Nayukhuut]

The game does call her out but in less impactful ways (such as by asking if she's justified directly and killing her), most likely because of the nostalgia associated with her from before they decided to turn her into an arrogant Ancient. I think the MMORPG element played a role in this decision to be totally honest. I think it's a little disingenuous though to suggest the game never tries to bait you into thinking Hydaelyn is either evil or making a mistake though-- it does it more and more as the game ages.


I'm not sure what you're talking about. The entire tragedy of Zodiark is the massive sacrifice that had to be made. That means voluntary death. As far as people who supported his continued existence, that's pretty similar to desiring death because they had no idea tempering was reversible. And if Emet's dialogue is anything to go by, they were pretty intoxicated by him. It's not like his effects would extend to the Convocation and that's it. He would inevitably continue tempering. As far as Venat's sundering, you guys really need to get over it. The entire point of the conflict is that it's tragic and no one was right.

Your outrage entirely hinges on the game condoning her or your not having a dialogue box saying "I hate you". Is it really that serious???? The game doesn't totally condone her and they forgot your text box.

The story isn't about me and my moral pandering or ego stroking. I'd also note not only are you kind of morally judgy but not everyone interpreted the story they way you did. Most people interpreted Venat's walk through the Final Days as the original act as it happened (without the Elpis visit) so it's not viewed as "mass murder". And you may think "wow that's crazy"but did you even watch the scene...? Venat is clearly relaying what happens as though she is taken aback but willing to continue on..and to elaborate what I mean by surprised is that she knew she was sundering but I don't think she anticipated the state it put humanity in and/or prepared for the weight of the consequences.

And tbh I'm not entirely sure if the walk abstraction is a reference to the original timeline or the modified Elpis timeline, because we don't know if the MSQ is operating on a single timeline (with a time loop) or if the Elpis visit is a seperate, deviant timeline we just leave.

The Endwalker story has made me feel like a hypocrite and had dragged me kicking and screaming out of a tale I quite enjoyed before. Asking for a dialogue box to express dissatisfaction with Venat's actions is not too much to ask. Especially since previous expansions have been fine with giving us more diverse answers in how we respond to our companions, even if the story inevitably still leads to the same dialogue.

Beyond that, the way the story had been written has basically given a moral dissonance between how we act, and what we endorse. It just seems weird that we can handwave all those lives "because they were necessary and beyond saving" one minute, and then turn around and save the 13th because everyone deserves a chance the next.

It is clear you and I will never reach consensus though, so prolly best to agree to disagree.

[Theodric]

At the end of the day this is also a thread about Endwalker's issues as a whole. Venat comes up often because of how much agency she has in the entire plot. I think that it's pretty bizarre to pretend as if she's being unfairly singled out on that basis alone when the game bent over backwards to tie her - and the player character - to so many different aspects of the story to a such lofty a degree.

Furthermore as can be witnessed throughout the entirety of this thread there are many different reasons outlined as to why Endwalker didn't land for particular individuals. Sometimes there is firm alignment and agreement, at other times there is not. Though understandably this thread is a place for people to express their concerns with the story and they will continue to do as much for as long as it exists.

[Xirean]

Quick question Turtle. Is the reason you refuse to see it as a true loop because it removes the genesis of the knowledge? You mentioned you prefer the idea that a Venat exists without the future hints. Does that mean you reject the idea that the game you played through could have contained future hints for Venat explicitly because you just think she didn't?

[Nayukhuut]

Don't give me hope that this happens. The moment it does then there no longer exist any reason to prevent the summoning/sundering by going back to Elpis. If they ever actually make multi timelines truly Canon then we better go back and fix that event.

Sadly, if/when we do go there it will prolly be just to back up that Venat was correct and and that the timeline went to rubble without her plan. I like your idea more, but I have seen how the writing has gone these past few patches. Heck, they wouldn't even let the Ancients live on in Ultima Thule, and we saved the rest of the supposedly doomed races there.

[Xirean]

-- As I've mentioned we were Azem...along with Ardbert and Golbez, and whoever is on the remaining reflections

Ok I really need you to explain why you keep sticking to the idea that the WoL is not in Elpis but is instead inhabiting Azem. We see the WoL travel to Elpis and appear as a mini ghost who then gets noticed by Hyth and Emit (noting the familiarity of the WoL's soul to that of Azem), enlarged & made solid, given clothes to better blend in despite everyone we talk to being able to instantly recognize as a familiar and specifically not "a person", compared to Meteion in regards to the lacking of aether, repeatedly badjured by Emet to explain who we are and what we are doing, and directly called out by Venat because she recognizes the ward on us.

Please help me understand what part of any of that allows for the non inclusion of literal time travel but also taking the place of any character besides the WoL and not Azem who is notably talked about as not being there by Venat, Hyth, and Emet.

[Xirean]

Sir do you not remember the words you type and what they mean?

I played the game where it's casually hinted at multiple times that we were Azem. It's not possible the WoL existed in Elpis-- they're a sundered being.

Do you understand that the WoL was very literally in Elpis or not? Bad writing or not aside, do you understand that the WoL canonically existed in Elpis for the duration of the Elpis MSQ as a direct result of actual canonical time travel?

You keep saying these random things and going off on tangents about them. Kindly please stop doing that.

[Xirean]

Yes, I've said repeatedly that we time travel to Elpis. But my point is that, it doesn't make us part of the actual history. You can think that, I don't think that for all the reasons I've cited.

And I think every time someone "recognizes us" what they're reacting to is Azem. In the same way Hythlodeus does.

I guess I used the wrong wording. I meant we didn't exist in the past of Elpis as WoL, but rather Azem. As in the past PRE VISIT. The months, weeks, days, hours, seconds prior. We were Azem. We were likely Azem when we visited. That probably sounds confusing but I don't know how else to explain it. I'm referring to the time period. When we visit, the unsundered Azem wandering around but not shown, is actually us. We are there as well as WoL, so it's like we exist twice in the same space.

That's why Hythlodeus jumps on us for being a thinner Azem. Because we are.

You've essentially head cannoned the entirety of Elpis as a giant Echo vision. Fun fact that's actually very close to how I suggested it should have worked some 600ish pages ago. What you are describing is time viewing and not time travel though. By this logic you don't think we actually traveled to the past and instead just looked at it which is prove-ably false; some of that proof I already posted to prompt this specific tangent.