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

[Xirean]

There's no asterisk in any definition of it that says it doesn't count if the perpetrator thinks they're acting for the greater good. In itself, there are various forms of genocide both direct and indirect, soft and hard. It can be as simple as killing large swathes of people with direct murder or cutting off supply lines in order to cause them to starve. The method matters little as opposed to the intended result and we know that the intended result was the deliberate eradication and replacement of her own species.

Adding onto this for clarity/fairness. I want people to understand that this applies to the Ascians as well. This is not about hating Venat or taking one side over the other. The Ascians are called out plenty in game and the simple desire is that the same be done with Hydaelyn or failing that, be able to recognize the similarity. The sundering is genocide as are the rejoinings. Both sides have their reasons for doing what they but that changes nothing. There is no asterisk for the definition. It's just genocide.

[Turtledeluxe]

Adding onto this for clarity/fairness. I want people to understand that this applies to the Ascians as well. This is not about hating Venat or taking one side over the other. The Ascians are called out plenty in game and the simple desire is that the same be done with Hydaelyn or failing that, be able to recognize the similarity. The sundering is genocide as are the rejoinings. Both sides have their reasons for doing what they but that changes nothing. There is no asterisk for the definition. It's just genocide.

It's closer to genocide for some of the Ascians because said individuals are targeting humans and have contempt for humanity. Emet stands out here. For Ascians generally it's debatable as what they want is a rejoining to get back their world (so again its a case of targetting all living things) which has the effect of returning humans to Ancient form which is, again, effectively killing but is it bc FFXIV.

There could also be a case of genocide when it comes to who/what they're sacrificing to Zodiark to feed him post summoning (it isn't clear enough to make a definitive case).

I'm also not interested in defending Venat or the Ascians. I'm just pointing out there are better ways to describe their actions and motivations. There are genocidal characters in XIV but with the Ancients their motivations can be more complicated and "larger" than targeting people due to race or ethnicity. Yotsuyu targets people because she is cruel..Ancients are in a battle for what they believe leads to survival.

I'd also note anyone who says "dancing around it" or something similar is exposing themselves as contrarians. It's shock value because you're admitting you understand the very human and legal context of the word but you're applying it to an imaginary version of humans who are in a war for survival against a doom songstress (not downplaying EW I loved it). It screams edgelord and that's just how it seems, I'm sorry if that's insulting. I'm not implying anything about anyone's moral preferences or whatever. I find it odd people do that in relation to Venat, again it seems so specific bc no one will call me out for saying it's case by case with the Ascians and Ancients I am sure. As I've said earlier Venat not acting also destroys the future so it's a bit hypocritical as well bc if you think one thing is genocide so is her alternative. So there is no winning for Venat. I've called out some instances of it but I just don't think every single thing is up for the genocide label.