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

[BRVV]

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.

The timeline being a loop with no beginning and no end pulls the moral question you mention here... but you only apply it to Venat? If all is fate and nothing can change it than we the player are also having no choice. Same goes for all murderers by the way. You might not want to operate on that logic. Funny thing: If we excuse everything with that logic than we could kill Venat and trash her reputation, using fate as the excuse aswell.

- 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).

In your idea Venat did the sundering in the original timeline i suppose. If so then she was totally responsible for it. Not even the fate excuse can help her now. The fact you defend her makes no sense with the form of time travel you favor.

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 you need 2 headcanons to make this work.

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.

Yes the writers are portraying mass murderers as innocent. That's the problem. You seem to just adapt all their views. Makes me hope you never read problematic texts.

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.

You are allowed to kill people if they become evil later? I find that problematic. Maybe all those the Ascians want to kill are evil? No sense in going that route either.

When he says the timelines could have diverged, he is confirming that they didn't. So the past and present being unified implies here that time became deterministic either due to the player or Venat following the events. Elidibus comments on this exact thing-- that a lack of meaningful change leads to the fated events.

Can you quote that? Elidibus is a character, who doesn't need to be correct. He said we couldn't change anything. We arrived invisible. I thought that is what he meant. Elidibus simply didn't account for Emmet to make us visible. Elidibus was also suprised about suddenly remembering us in the past.

I clearly said in my post you can believe she lacks agency or you can believe she has total agency, but if she does it means she risks destroying the future we know to exist since the past and present have become unified. It isn't just "oh some magic timeline forms where we still result in the reflections and Venat is a hero". This is why your post is so long because you are avoiding it. You are focusing on everything Yoshi P said except for the fact that the past and present became unified, which conveniently works out for (again) preserving the timeline. Her preserving the timeline makes logical sense, saving Emet makes logical sense, based on the information she has.

Yeah why should anyone try to change this timeline? Rejoinings, death by primals, waging wars but hey if the paying MC dies we have to act!

I don't know you read their own answers and regard Venat as more than a tragic figure unless again, you get into headcanon. Originally you were all attacking me for implying the Elpis visit may have spawned an alternate timeline, now you're demanding it.

We simply think of it as a closed loop. Without beginning or end. The fact you seem to need to make up your "alternate timeline" headcanon and claim its ShB time travel when we were told it works differently is your own problem. Just because you can't wrap your head around a closed loop doesn't mean it can not exist in media.

Saying you want another Venat in an AU is your opinion and I have no comment on it. If you think the resources and time spent to make an experience like that would be worth it for the main MSQ that's up to you. I'm not sure about that.

Don't know what you are responding to here. Seems to be your strawman.

And again I don't even like that it's the same timeline, I think it's stupid. But pretending it isn't what he's saying is a waste of time. It's exactly what he said, he just gave his own reasons for why the timeline stayed the same which are headcanon bc he, like you, cannot come up with a good and practical reason for the timeline to diverge.

One timeline (not counting the ShB time travel). One loop. No divergence. Not that hard.

As far as Venat, I will also say they provide context surrounding what she did and imply her decision was "very Ancient like huh" which indicates to me, you're supposed to be viewing it as uncomfortable. But they also lend credibility to Y'Shtola's theory and its up to you to decide if it justifies. They're implying there it was a roadblock. They also mention that the disposition of many people who desired to avoid suffering was an existential threat.

Yes those characters claim there was no other choice. The garleans also said that about murder and the ascians. If it's members of the party i guess it counts? I find it wild that in a story that clearly pulls out retcons and new ways to use magic to solve any problem we are given a "they just had to die" - kind of explanation.

I actually think with this is I don't have anything else to say. The writers make everything clear here imo. You have to decide if certain elements are justified. As for why the game and people of Eorzea treat Hydaelyn well, I imagine it's because they give her the benefit of the doubt that she did what she could and made the best decision she could. Assuming she gave no information at all, did nothing, let it all unfold to become a light God is just a take you can have.

Can't critic because author's intend?