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

[Turtledeluxe]

Many cases of genocide have been framed as a matter of necessity and survival. It doesn't cease to be an act of genocide solely because there are those who stand to benefit from the atrocity in question. Given that the ancients no longer exist as a species it isn't really up for debate as to whether it qualifies as such because it fulfills the criteria of the definition.

Certainly, the Rejoinings are considered to be an act of genocide and those are a matter of reversing the consequences of Venat's actions. (Though I'd add that even the Rejoinings are something that Venat has an indirect hand in given that she knowingly left room for Emet-Selch to be spared despite being well aware of what that would result in...)

Uh this may be the case for fiction but I am not aware of any cases IRL as such. Although intent is considered that doesn't mean there have been cases where good intent has been found, it just means it's complicates proving it as intent can theoretically be hard to prove IRL.

And again what led us to this discussion is the nature of time in XIV and, although many of you are in denial the director's answer and game make it clear that the characters are locked into a timeline of their own making. Even if you're arguing over technical criteria of X and y being genocide, it's ultimately meaningless in the absence of choice..and again I think that is part of why a lot of what is discussed in game is conveyed in the tone that it is. Honestly the blame for most things is Hermes and then the player.

This is why the worst thing about EW is the time travel and imo, not the base story. Without the time travel the base story would not be as vilified as it is, we would just be taling about Primals fighting and deciding the fate of man. With the writers not being clear about the time travel it leaves the door open for you to interpret many things however you want.

[Xeronia]

Uh this may be the case for fiction but I am not aware of any cases IRL as such. Although intent is considered that doesn't mean there have been cases where good intent has been found, it just means it's complicates proving it as intent can theoretically be hard to prove IRL.

And again what led us to this discussion is the nature of time in XIV and, although many of you are in denial the director's answer and game make it clear that the characters are locked into a timeline of their own making. Even if you're arguing over technical criteria of X and y being genocide, it's ultimately meaningless in the absence of choice..and again I think that is part of why a lot of what is discussed in game is conveyed in the tone that it is. Honestly the blame for most things is Hermes and then the player.

This is why the worst thing about EW is the time travel and imo, not the base story. Without the time travel the base story would not be as vilified as it is, we would just be taling about Primals fighting and deciding the fate of man. With the writers not being clear about the time travel it leaves the door open for you to interpret many things however you want.

My apologies for interrupting but if the timeline is as you say it should be present in the game itself and not hidden away in some interview, I would also like a citation of this interview(apologies if you already posted it and I missed it) as the game and short stories on the site itself do not back your view of how the timeline is.

[Turtledeluxe]

My apologies for interrupting but if the timeline is as you say it should be present in the game itself and not hidden away in some interview, I would also like a citation of this interview(apologies if you already posted it and I missed it) as the game and short stories on the site itself do not back your view of how the timeline is.

It was in a live letter. I wish I had noted the number. 58 perhaps?? I will edit when I find it. It's 68 during the portion when the translator is with him for fan q and a.

Also time travel is not irrelevant in any aspect of story discussion. As it turns out XIV is the story of a meddling time travel who instigates two Primals whose battle results in the sundering. If the major events don't occur in Elpis we don't exist. Let's say laws of causality collapse and its just whatever you want buffet of casuality (which is what people want with these 'give them a choice' takes). If Venat gets to the point of choosing sunder vs don't sunder, she has no way of knowing if another choice othrt than sunder wipes out the future or not.

So your choices are Venat (and everyone else) lacks agency because the loop is self-sustaining and the future must come to exist so we can play the game OR

Venat gives the Ancients more choice than we already know she does (as it is shown), finds an alternative, and the game collapses.

There's no magic situation where Venat finds a solution and the future still persists. None. Zero. So decide what you want, either way it's problematic for Venat whether by the players choice or your story take which leads her to kill off the reflections.

Also we know from the conversation in Elpis the Ancients had NO concept of the primals. We are the ones who brought it into their plane of thought. Saying "they could have chosen not to" just brings us back to the same loop. You cannot ignore it.

So no, her culpability doesn't matter. No one's does except Hermes and WoL. There could have been Athena with a gun to Venat's head saying "sunder them" or Venat blood faced and laughing as she drew her sword to sunder. Either way the result is the same and it must be the same for the future to occur.

And if you think Venat can just willy nilly the future with zero consequence, guess who has joined me on the train to alternate timelines? Because that's the only way she can change events with no effect on the MSq timeline.

[fulminating]

So your choices are Venat (and everyone else) lacks agency because the loop is self-sustaining and the future must come to exist so we can play the game OR

Venat gives the Ancients more choice than we already know she does (as it is shown), finds an alternative, and the game collapses.

There's no magic situation where Venat finds a solution and the future still persists. None. Zero. So decide what you want, either way it's problematic for Venat whether by the players choice or your story take which leads her to kill off the reflections.
.

The warrior of light dies to black rose, as the world collapses the ironworks free graham from the tower, combine the raid series and send him to the first. Crystal graham then pulls the warrior of light to the first, averting the 8th umbrella calamity with the defeat of hades. Yet crystal g’raha doesn’t die nor disappear from existence when that time line is dodged, rather surviving bodily until he turns himself into a statue, and spiritually by sticking his mind in a rock and being ferried to the source.

[Volgia]

It was in a live letter. I wish I had noted the number. 58 perhaps?? I will edit when I find it. It's 68 during the portion when the translator is with him for fan q and a.

Also time travel is not irrelevant in any aspect of story discussion. As it turns out XIV is the story of a meddling time travel who instigates two Primals whose battle results in the sundering. If the major events don't occur in Elpis we don't exist. Let's say laws of causality collapse and its just whatever you want buffet of casuality (which is what people want with these 'give them a choice' takes). If Venat gets to the point of choosing sunder vs don't sunder, she has no way of knowing if another choice othrt than sunder wipes out the future or not.

So your choices are Venat (and everyone else) lacks agency because the loop is self-sustaining and the future must come to exist so we can play the game OR

Venat gives the Ancients more choice than we already know she does (as it is shown), finds an alternative, and the game collapses.

There's no magic situation where Venat finds a solution and the future still persists. None. Zero. So decide what you want, either way it's problematic for Venat whether by the players choice or your story take which leads her to kill off the reflections.

Also we know from the conversation in Elpis the Ancients had NO concept of the primals. We are the ones who brought it into their plane of thought. Saying "they could have chosen not to" just brings us back to the same loop. You cannot ignore it.

So no, her culpability doesn't matter. No one's does except Hermes and WoL. There could have been Athena with a gun to Venat's head saying "sunder them" or Venat blood faced and laughing as she drew her sword to sunder. Either way the result is the same and it must be the same for the future to occur.

And if you think Venat can just willy nilly the future with zero consequence, guess who has joined me on the train to alternate timelines? Because that's the only way she can change events with no effect on the MSq timeline.

I often think about Elpis and try not to think too deeply about it before the plotholes of a messy, rushed time-travel episode in EW starts bringing so many plotholes it'll rot my brain. It was just SE wanting us to hang out with Venat, Hytho and Hades.
A lot in this thread talks about Venat being irresponsible or close to being an evil-doer. But now that she's perma-gone, there's no way to explore this other than saying that Venat had to do this because she had no choice and she's just a good aligned character.