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

[Turtledeluxe]

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.

[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.

[Absimiliard]

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.

You uh... might wanna go play the game, my dude.

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.

If memory serves, the Re[in]carnation side of the crossover involved extensive input from FFXIV's writers. In any case, it's considered reliable insofar as the information it provided about things in FFXIV are concerned.

Yoko Taro's team probably had more creative control over the NieR raids in FFXIV, ironically.

where else could I find proof that people have no idea what "context" means, and argue for two years over things the vast majority of the playerbase accepted as "necessary means to a cause that can widely be seen as pretty nice : life".

Different interpretations and values notwithstanding, I believe part of the disconnect stems from some people, myself included, thinking more deeply about the story than what the devs accounted for. In fact, I believe Yoshi-P even said as much at one point. It's not even really about Venat for a lot of the naysayers. It's more about how poorly things stand up to scrutiny. It's in human nature to value that which is shown over that which is told. For my part, I look at the story, specifically Venat's part in it for the sake of our discussion here, and I see a character that wasn't selfless or pure. I see a character that unilaterally decided on a course of action for an entire world and its inhabitants based on information about the future gained from a time traveler. A character so headstrong as to believe her way was the only way, and she confirmed this for herself by subjecting her people to a test they had no chance of passing without the information she withheld. This? This I'm fine with. Sometimes people are like that. I am not bothered by Venat's nature or even the actions she took. The story is what it is.

The problem I have is with how the narrative frames it. Wiping out all life on a planet, whether well-intentioned or not, is pretty messed up in just about any conceivable sense. It makes sense a lot of characters wouldn't get overly bent out of shape about something that really didn't affect them - we see this play out with people IRL all the time, not being moved by ancient, or even comparatively recent, events that had nothing to do with them. So this is also fine. I find it odd the Scions weren't even slightly bothered by it, but so be it. That's how people roll. What I found myself unable to reconcile specifically with Venat wasn't even Venat herself. We're told we should feel X way about the character and the events surrounding it, but what I saw in the game left me with a very different perception. If you want me to think something was an absolute necessity, then show me that. Don't tell me it and show me a bunch of stuff that'll turn it on its head under even cursory scrutiny.

Like I said, Venat as a character is fine. Her part in the narrative would've worked fine for me with better framing and more showing than telling. I'm well aware the majority disagree with this take, but I kinda don't care. It's my take, and while I am open to having my mind changed, I've yet to see anything that would.

As for people spending a year fighting it out, I might note that most people tend to react very poorly when someone tries to tell them their opinion, whether well-founded or not, is stupid. Not just wrong - stupid. The more you try to tell people they're stupid, a bad person, etc. for having a dissenting opinion, the more they will dig their heels in and keep defending their position. This is doubly true if it's about something they care about. FFXIV is something a lot of us have dumped far too much time and money into. It's something many of us used to thoroughly enjoy. People that care about something will want to be outspoken when they feel it's being harmed, or in the case of a game going in a direction they perceive as bad for its health.

As for me, I've already given up on the game at this point. I know the direction it's going in won't change, and I'm aware I am no longer its target demographic. I really only hang around because I'm keeping some friends' estates from getting demolished while they are off serving, and for the most part I only poke my head in these debates because I am bored out of my mind at work. :P Otherwise, I just comment in suggestion threads and the like in the vain hope at least some measure of the game I used to enjoy so thoroughly can be brought back.

[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.

[Turtledeluxe]

After reviewing developer statements I found an excerpt where Yoshi P answered the question about time travel directly. He indicated that what happens with Elpis a closed loop, but suggested to form your own theories after pausing for a second. I think they could be saving it for later due to the reflections being untraveled. But based on his comments these are my two cases atm:

- The loop is self-sustaining, always happened and always will happen.

The problem with assigning agency to Venat in this case is that she doesn't have a choice. It's a fate vs free will situation. It also possibly puts some accountability on the player for causing the summoning of Hydaelyn in the first place as we gave her the idea when we created this loop. Technically it means we created our MSQ timeline altogether as we affected the future by visiting the past. You can't have your cake and it eat it, too. Elidibus statements about time in the game also push us toward this idea. Although small changes are tolerable, meaningful change cannot occur because what happens in the timeline has happened and will always happen.

- If meaningful change were to occur i.e the final days are averted it creates a paradox where the player may never come to exist.

This necessitates that the Elpis visit is an alternate time and there is some original timeline where non informed Venat acted, and this is the Venat the game could be reflecting. All of the hints about people remembering the player and even the Morbol thing work with the alternate timeline idea because it's possible that those are the effects of our actions being observed before we actually caused them. This is moreso what I was theorizing because i think the original events happened in an original past where we were Azem. Additionally XIV already uses this type of time travel in other cases (with multiple alter alternate timelines in fact).

And you may ask well why does everyone love Hydaelyn yet the time travel affected all these other things like Argos etc? Because as I have have said it seems like the alternate timeline gets conjoined into the MSQ original timeline very late in the game. So if dark Venat exists, her future got closed off by the conjoing. And before someone tells me this can't happen-- it has already happened in the game (G'raha mentions at some point a future of a timeline being closed off related to the 8UC).

You're welcome to your opinion but it's not exactly clear. We need more information. And when and if the devs do decide to clarify I'm highly doubtful they're going to lean into a scenario where Venat is some kind of problematic killer.

Just saying "you didn't see it" "play the game" isn't an argument for all of the reasons I just said. Arguing about Venat's actions really in any case is entirely pointless, even without director clarification. Because frankly if some original Venat does exist, then you are an Ascian apologist because their solutions involved planned and detailed instances of massacres following the summoning. They were basically planning a harvest. Not to mention they wanted to eternally avoid suffering, which is naive and dangerous. If original Venat doesn't exist and it's always dark Venat, she had no choice bc of how linear time works in that case.