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

[Lunaxia]

If you think the use-age of the word genocide to describe the act of genocide is only for shock value or for trolling then you are entering the conversation in a disingenuous mindset from the start.

This is honestly ridiculous, and I've repeated myself about five times over why that isn't the case and the issue of individual perceptions. If you foist all responsibility for the way you explain yourself and how you come across on other people, you'll struggle to be taken seriously.

When the game describes events that can only be termed as genocide and you refuse to call it genocide because it's too harsh a term then what good is the term?

To be used in instances outside of a fantasy video game where applicable and isn't used in reference to discussing the bad writing surrounding immortal demi-gods and giant intergalactic harbingers of despair, I imagine.

To make a frustrating point clear, I'm in no way using the term genocide for shock value. I'm using it to describe the exact events that took place in the story because that's simply what happened.

I'm not sure how many times I can say "in your view" without it losing all meaning. Yes, you can tell me you're not using it for shock value, but that's not much good if that's not the impression it gives to others. That's where I'm saying it might be worth pausing to consider what you're saying before assuming it's down to everyone thinking the worst of you or the absolute best of Venat.

I understand that people have different perceptions and interpretations of events

Okay, and that's really all I'm saying, so why are you arguing the point so much and doubling down as if your view is an automatic fact that should be immediately accepted as such, otherwise the person is being "disingenuous"?

but quite frankly when I'm told rather blatantly that someone just made up an explanation for things that are already explained and am expected to take that seriously I have to wonder, what are you even doing?

That's an issue with that poster, and not actually related to what I'm talking about.

I'll reiterate - use whatever terminology you like, but ask yourself what the point of these pages of arguing, debating, going back-and-forth and engaging with other posters is for, for you personally, and what battles you want to actually spend your time fighting. That's it.

I'm not interested in having this discussion further, and I'm stepping back from the thread. I've seen some ugly sides to some posters I rather regret, and rather than foster any more ill will in a place I've previously found some enjoyment and relief in frequenting in the past, I'll leave it here, considering Endwalker is reaching its end anyway. May Dawntrail be a happier experience for most of you than this one has been, and you derive from this thread whatever you hope to find until then.

[Xirean]

This will be a lengthy post. My apologies in advance.

My understanding of the current discussion is that people are under the impression that these 3 characters may not be all the same person.

Hydaelyn on the boat ride to Sharlayan

Venat in Elpis

Hydaelyn before trial

I would first like to state that on it's own, this is a fair assumption to make. In any story where time travel is a plot tool it's good to be skeptical of such things. So let's discuss that with specifics.

Recap

Starting with the boat version, she is the Hydaelyn we know from ARR up until we speak with Elidibus in the Crystal Tower during EW. She has an accusation against her from Emet-Selch and a lot of suspicion from the WoL, especially during the boat scene.
She is the reason the WoL did not die when facing the Ultima Weapon and Lahabrea.
We know that she, through the body of Minfilia, stopped the flood of light on the first.
There's also the question of why did she deny Ardbert's sacrifice while accepting his friends when stopping said flood.

Next there is Venat whom the WoL meets in Elpis. She directly calls the WoL out as being from the future and asks them a lot of questions about that future. She is also very confused about the WoL's tale of Hydaelyn and the actions that Venat supposedly took as her. Additionally she lands a spell on a fleeing Meteion.

Lastly there is Hydaelyn in the Aetherial Sea. She is aware that the WoL once journeyed to Elpis and remembers them. After being questioned by Y'shtola about the reason for the sundering to create beings who could manipulate dyanamis she admits this to be true. Notably in the same dialogue box she states "There was no kindness or justice in the tragedy I wrought." and that the sundering of the world was her only recourse against Zodiark.

So, are they all the same person? Setting the nature of 2 being a primal aside there's a few things we can draw upon. First I would like to compare the worlds the WoL leaves behind and returns to. To my knowledge there is no change; no additional or missing structures, no mention of there being more or less Calamities. Zenos is still biding his time for his rematch against the WoL while being bound to a voidsent with the same appearance as before. All 3 unsundered as well as Fandaniel remain dead and Zodiark is still destroyed putting The Source in the exact same Final Days state the WoL left it in. There's even a special dialogue from Alisae if you completed the Binding Coils of Bahamut which means the world the WoL has returned to also responds to prior quest progression. To be clear, none of this is definitive proof that the WoL has returned to the same world and thus the same Hydaelyn. It is however indistinguishable from the world they departed from.


We do however have some quotes from Hydaelyn in the Aetherial Sea that potentially ties her to Elpis Venat.

This still doesn't prove they are the same person, but it does prove that this Hydaelyn remembers a WoL from Elpis. Does this confirm that this Hydaelyn was told the same things as the Venat we spoke to? No. That being said the information above lends credit to the argument that they are all the same person. Without some authorial statement or a view from a higher perspective in game we likely won't have solid confirmation that they are the same person. There's quite a few story moves that could invalidate this in an instant, such as an incursion from another timeline; though that seems unlikely, especially considering we are supposed to be done with this arc of the story.

I would like to note with this that we still have access to Elpis as an explore-able map and can therefore get new quests there any patch. This permanent access to Elpis is what I interpret to be the meaning of "conjunction between your time and mine". It is very possible that a split timeline could still occur and maybe that is some sort of backup plan later down the road. Who knows? That possibility though does cause me to believe that Elpis Venat has the potential to not become the Hydaelyn we know or potentially even at all. I'm left to conclude that the Elpis timeline is set to loop and replay the exact same events, eventually sending its own WoL back to another Elpis to begin the cycle again; unless something new comes along and messes with that time loop. I hold this view only because we appear to have permanent access. Although the Pandaemonium raid quests seem to present the WoL's arrivals in Elpis as a rare thing.

Additionally, this is all my justification for my theory that Hydaelyn purposefully held Ardbert back and put him in a state of purgatory with the explicit intent to merge with the WoL. During ShB it was and unknown element of the story and EW has provided an answer, though unconfirmed, but an answer none the less.

If you find this explanation disagreeable, please explain.

Edit: Apparently I forgot to include the second set of quotes from Hydaelyn to support the argument. I have added them now.

[Absimiliard]

And even then massacres don't usually beget new life. I'm not quite sure we have a a suitable word for what it is except a sundering. Maybe that's why the game calls it that, actually.

I might briefly note the sundering did not actually split its victims up into new life the way many people seem to think. It tore them apart spiritually, aetherially, and physically before haphazardly reconstituting what remained into wholly new entities, per NieR Re[in]carnation's very much canon crossover event. These unfortunate beings weren't even sapient at first, incapable of even the most rudimentary of communication. About the only thing they could do was exist in a state of absolute agony until however much time passed. Even the ascians could not communicate with them despite their innate ability to speak with anything that possesses a soul. Gives you a pretty good idea of the kind of shape the sundered were in.

It's also worth pointing out how similar this is to the way life in general works in the setting. A creature dies, and its soul returns to the lifestream for X amount of time wherein it will either be broken down into raw aether for a new soul to form or sent back to reincarnate as it was, albeit without memories of its previous life. The physical component... well, I should think that one is fairly self-explanatory. Anyway, does this process mean people on Etheirys that die aren't really dead? After all, everyone born is comprised of the spiritual and physical remnants of people and things that preceded them.

[Vahlnir]

Idk the Nier event seems to indicate it was an attack so powerful that it resulted in the state of man. So that's another strike against it, possibly not being deliberate, which is something I've mentioned time and time again. Nice for that to be confirmed by the Nier crossover. It definitely can't definitively be called genocide.

Even as a Nier fan, the Nier crossover "story" made little to no sense whatsoever in the end, and that includes the weekly quests following the raids. You can't really use that for much of a basis for anything. It was very much its own thing with little to no consequence to the game world itself. It's a shame though. They had the potential to continue the Automata story from its secret ending, and that is where I thought it was going to go when I completed the first raid. Yoko Taro considers just about everything related to his games canon, no matter how outrageous. The 2nd raid set up...well, something, and I was actually kind of excited to see how it would end. The result? "Here's a final tribute in the form of a giant tower. PS, BUY NIER REPLICANT!" The end. Tragic. It was very clear that Yoko Taro couldn't have cared any less about it even if he tried. He doesn't even like FF XIV.

[stenovrain]

You know what is even more annoying with all that? Venat's dialogue near the end of Elpis even mentions that we might end up finding our world very different when we are speaking to her before we leave. It gave me hope that the Venat, this time, might have been able to find a better solution, and that perhaps maybe a splinter timeline could have existed where the Ancients got a chance. She mentions not giving up on her species, but then does exactly that. I get that one of them is just general character being hopeful stuff, but the part about maybe finding our world being different gave me some sort of hope that maybe we would find a secret pocket of Ancients or something. There was nothing though.

Edit: And yes, I get that both lines were just platitudes that meant nothing, but at the time I was still hoping that somehow all these people I had come to quite like would be given a chance, even if it wasn't in my timeline.

Yeah, storytelling wide this is textbook lazy writing, because a story shouldn't have "platitudes that mean nothing." I thought the writers must know what Chekhov's Gun means but apparently they don't.

[Nayukhuut]

Idk the Nier event seems to indicate it was an attack so powerful that it resulted in the state of man. So that's another strike against it, possibly not being deliberate, which is something I've mentioned time and time again. Nice for that to be confirmed by the Nier crossover. It definitely can't definitively be called genocide.

It can though. She deliberately performed the Sundering attack, having prior knowledge of what would happen when she did. Maybe she didn't know EVERYTHING that would happen, but she knew it would create an entirely new species of man, and leave her species behind. Though I have to admit that I do quite prefer the term omnicide after seeing it a few pages back. It makes more sense as not only did she Sunder the Ancients, but all life on the planet.

Even if for some reason she had no idea that her attacks would wipe out everything on the planet (since she remembers us, I will hold this is not the case), her actions still resulted in the unintentional death and change of every life currently existing. The fact that it might have been an mistake originally shouldn't absolve her of her crimes. Whether mistake or intentional (and I still hold that it is intentional), she still should be held accountable for the death she caused. Yet the story holds her in quite high light.

[Xirean]

It can though. She deliberately performed the Sundering attack, having prior knowledge of what would happen when she did. Maybe she didn't know EVERYTHING that would happen, but she knew it would create an entirely new species of man, and leave her species behind. Though I have to admit that I do quite prefer the term omnicide after seeing it a few pages back. It makes more sense as not only did she Sunder the Ancients, but all life on the planet.

Even if for some reason she had no idea that her attacks would wipe out everything on the planet (since she remembers us, I will hold this is not the case), her actions still resulted in the unintentional death and change of every life currently existing. The fact that it might have been an mistake originally shouldn't absolve her of her crimes. Whether mistake or intentional (and I still hold that it is intentional), she still should be held accountable for the death she caused. Yet the story holds her in quite high light.

There's actually an argument that she engaged in eugenics as well.




Oh and in case it gets missed on the bigger post edit. I'll post the second set of Venat quotes that further supports the argument that the Elpis visit does take place within the worlds direct history.

[Nayukhuut]

There's actually an argument that she engaged in eugenics as well.




Oh and in case it gets missed on the bigger post edit. I'll post the second set of Venat quotes that further supports the argument that the Elpis visit does take place within the worlds direct history.

Yup, absolutely. If any of the people that the game deemed as villains said/did something like that, the characters in the game would be horrified. Rightfully so, to be clear.

It drives me nuts that she always gets a pass, and and is still being propped up as a benevolent force. I know this is the way the game has decided to go, and I know I can't change that, but goodness I am still allowed to be irked by it.

Edit: And I know she calls herself out, but it is basically that one throwaway line and the rest of the MSQ treats her like she did nothing wrong, constantly calling us her children or her champion, and mentioning her in only positive light. I just would have preferred if the game held her a bit more accountable, and stopped putting her on a pedestal.

[Nayukhuut]

I would also like to point out that she installed the Twelve as gods to watch over the Source and the Shards, and keep them separate and stable. They are no long there now, but they left a machine behind that will keep the Shards apart on the fuel of our prayers. None of the characters talk about this in much of any light other than it being sad the Twelve are gone. No mention of the very terrifying implication that in the future if our society ever becomes atheistic the world stands the chance of destabilisation.

So now, thanks to the story, I can add "peddler of false religion lest untold disasters be plagued upon the planet" to my resume as well.

[ArcaviusGreyashe]

You'd think after two years, you'd be over Venat, but I guess not. She does have a mansion in your heads. And are so convinced by yourselves you think "I did what I had to do to offer the universe a chance" is eugenics and makes Venat the meanest meanie in lore.

Boy, you're fascinating.