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

[Eisi]

I think it's childish to assume the writers either wouldn't believe that Venat's actions would constitute genocide or that they would condone that action. But that's the point, the story is not that deep, the writers didn't think about it that much (also incidentally a Yoshi-P quote: "We didn't think players would think about it that deeply" with regards to the Elpis timeloop). And they show their hand constantly in the story, disengaging you and yanking you out of a state of immersion.

It's a Kingdom Hearts level story that needs to exist so that the game has a story. There is not much the writers had to say beyond "everything will be fine, we are here for you during Covid". No more, no less.

Let me go a little bit more into detail here. The story is written with the end in mind first and then everything up to that point is done so that it fits without much regard for characters or the like. What was the end goal for the Elpis timeloop? So that the previously unknown character Venat/Hydaelyn would share a bond with your WoL that spanned the ages. That's why it's not an alternate timeline. That's why she had to retain her memories. That's why Kairos was invented, a literal mindwipe device that exists just so the timeloop roughly makes sense even though it shouldn't even exist based on the Crystal Tower's prior function in Shadowbringers. So it's not like they wrote Venat's character beyond "I love the land and the people and I want them to be free". They didn't ask "What would such a person do in this situation" or "how with these parameters in mind would the story organically evolve from here". They asked "how can we make it so that the world evolved the exact same way it did, that she did everything that was established prior with the whole sundering the world thing and now simultaneous sharing of that new knowledge and bond with you". And since there's no good answer for that they had to give us bad answers that crumble under scrutiny - they should have arrived at the conclusion that the timeloop was a bad idea, but that's not how they operate. They had to have a timeloop and so they made it happen against all logic.

Why do you think Fandaniel claps before Zenos can kill a character in Garlemald? Well because they wanted to have a hype duel with the WoL and Zenos at the end of the storyline. And had Zenos killed for example our friend Alphinaud it would have never been hype. It's not that complicated. Also major character deaths are in general not appreciated in the writer's staff, I think that's pretty obvious since Y'shtola was sliced in half by Zenos at the beginning of Stormblood. Again, just think of the writers as having clearly defined goals first and then trying to write the characters and plotlines that lead there so as to fit those goals later with varying degrees of success.

So take the story for what it is and use your knowledge to tell better stories yourself. Or worse/equally as bad stories. The best thing the story can do for you is inspire you not just in spite of, but because of all it's shortcomings. That is the true message of Endwalker for me personally.

[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?

[Xirean]

Not false. You fiercely argued for single timeline theory and you don't like that now it is confirmed, I'm pointing out problems it creates with regards to the whining in the thread about justifying Venat. It doesn't make it impossible, but they opted for time theory here that makes it complicated to address and can barely offer solid reasoning for why our single timeline didn't diverge.

Do you not understand the difference between understanding how the story actually works and suggesting ideas for how it should work? We are on a time loop, which you consistently seemed to not understand. Proof was provided to show you how it actually does work so that you could understand the frustration of those in this thread and why many of us desire it to work differently than has been shown in the story.

[Xirean]

Yes. Do you care to elaborate? What are you looking for me to say here? To agree that your only issue with my post was that I claimed "we could not exist in Elpis because we are sundered"? I've explained multiple times that what I meant was, there is some original timeline where we did not visit Elpis where we could not have been there because we were the unsundered Azem at that time. It was just a theory.

I'm well aware that theory. Honestly I don't really care about it. The whole point of the discussion for the past several pages was explaining how the time loop system canonicaly works, which you have finally admitted to so thanks for that. What I don't get is why you are still fighting as though there is something to fight about. You yourself said if the timeloop is how it works then you could write a book on how much that sucks. What do you think people have been doing in this thread for the last year? It's essentially a collection of people saying "Hey this kinda sucks. Could the devs make it maybe not suck?"

[Theodric]

I don't think anyone in this thread who is critical of the writing surrounding Venat is suggesting that the story is particularly deep, at any rate. It's simply being suggested that if a writer intentionally or unintentionally makes a character directly complicit in acts of genocide, racial replacement and eugenics then there should be more room for the player to criticise such actions - especially when the game spent a decade's worth of writing establishing such actions as being considered to be morally reprehensible within the setting.

Though this particular discussion doesn't appear to be about the actual story so much as the usual unsettling attempts to police the reactions to Venat as if any given character is owed someone's love, support and approval.

Then again, this is the same community that has very vocal elements who spent years stalking, impersonating and threatening various players with physical harm and sexual assault if they so much as cast a shred of doubt upon their precious 'cRyStAl MoMmY'.

So you'll forgive the regulars in this thread, I imagine, for entertaining the idea that someone solely concerned with painting Venat in a specific light is very likely not acting in good faith - particularly when they throw around insinuations of sexism and reduce criticism of the story as coming from 'haters'.

You're welcome to approve of Venat's actions. Nobody is suggesting otherwise. They're just not hugely interested in the performative song and dance pretending as if her actions do not equal the complete elimination of her own species. Feel free to substitute 'genocide' with whatever term you see fit but the meat of the matter is that she intentionally sabotaged, betrayed and destroyed her own people and that isn't an act many of us see as worthy of praise.

Not in the least because a lot of us are discussing the story from the perspective of an outside observer, as opposed to someone solely concerned with how various actions benefit the game's protagonists and the player character.

Feedback is being left in the vague hope that the story can learn from its mistakes moving forward and perhaps throw more of a bone to anyone who wasn't thrilled with the direction Endwalker took - and it's not like the criticism throughout this thread is even exclusively aimed at Venat either. Many of us have brought up other aspects of the story that we felt could have been handled better.

[Eisi]

I don't think anyone in this thread who is critical of the writing surrounding Venat is suggesting that the story is particularly deep, at any rate. It's simply being suggested that if a writer intentionally or unintentionally makes a character directly complicit in acts of genocide, racial replacement and eugenics then there should be more room for the player to criticise such actions - especially when the game spent a decade's worth of writing establishing such actions as being considered to be morally reprehensible within the setting.

That's contradictory. The writers didn't know that they inadvertently wrote a genocidal character so they couldn't have built in options to criticize that.

The story isn't deep precisely because the writers don't care about it as much. You care more about the story than they do.

[Theodric]

That's contradictory. The writers didn't know that they inadvertently wrote a genocidal character so they couldn't have built in options to criticize that.

I think they've had more than enough time to realise that is what they wrote, though. They've had plenty of critical feedback since EW released, including Yoshi feeling the need to comment on whether she's the "bad guy" or not, acknowledging her actions are controversial, and that's in addition to them taking some remedial steps via the Omega quest. All the same the rest of the MSQ proceeds as if none of that ever happened and as if her actions are uncontroversial, and the same goes for the codex.

The story isn't deep precisely because the writers don't care about it as much. You care more about the story than they do.

That may well be so, in spite of the fact that it and its most ardent defenders like to pretend it is. It certainly seems like they've given up on trying to make it make sense.

[Eisi]

I think they've had more than enough time to realise that is what they wrote, though. They've had plenty of critical feedback since EW released, including Yoshi feeling the need to comment on whether she's the "bad guy" or not, acknowledging her actions are controversial, and that's in addition to them taking some remedial steps via the Omega quest. All the same the rest of the MSQ proceeds as if none of that ever happened and as if her actions are uncontroversial, and the same goes for the codex.

I assume you wish a retroactive acknowledgement, not an actual change within the 6.0 storyline?

In that case I will wholeheartedly disagree with you. There is no way to make the story right retroactively, what's done is done and the goal of having Venat be a tragic hero screams out of the 6.0 MSQ with such fervor that anything to contradict it would merely seem like a weak and self-conscious meta acknowledgement of bad writing that would have me cringe. They should have written her as a tragic hero in the first place. They should have cared about their story. Having her be a genocidal villain was never the intention and to change everything to either lessen the impact of their writing's implications or embrace that unintended consequence that so clearly goes against everything they set out to do would be horribly awkward.

I think holding onto the idea that the story can be saved or needs to be repaired is a horrible notion. We should move on, accept that the story and lore is horribly flawed beyond repair and not seek to retroactively fix what was clearly never the concern of the writing team to begin with. Omega is as good as we will get and it couldn't resolve any of it either, but at least it accepts the main stories' biases and doesn't try to completely course correct into the opposite of what 6.0 tried to be.

[Nayukhuut]

I wouldn't mind ignoring her from now until the end of time and just writing off Endwalker as bad writing, but the story keeps doubling down on her and dredging her up. We find out the Twelve are false gods put there by Venat and that we have to pray to them else the planet destabalises and untold calamities likely happen as the actions of keeping a planet unnaturally apart come to a head, or we end up using something like the locator crystal MacGuffin to heal Zero.

The whole Twelve revelation being one of the worst. Why is no one in the story horrified that should we ever decide to become an atheistic society and stop believing in gods that Venat installed herself, the world as we know it could crumble?

[Theodric]

I don't expect them to do much about it at this point, so I'm just waiting to see if they can muster anything of interest going forward or whether the story will just continue the current string of silliness. I'd like to believe they may take on board some lessons from all this but I'm tempering expectations that they may just not care anymore.

I do not hold the view that the game offering different perspectives on Venat moving forward would serve to break anything. Certainly, the game hasn't shied away from bringing up and acknowledging the lingering consequences of characters that have already exited the storyline. It has happened already with Nidhogg, Ilberd, Yotsuyu and Ysayle. Even characters who are still around such as Hien and Merlwyb gain such treatment. At the very least they could stand to compromise by ensuring that the codex entries are more balanced and in alignment with each other across the various localisations.

Perhaps the game will continue down its current trajectory, or perhaps it'll change course. Only time will tell - and either way for as long as I continue playing I will continue to leave feedback relating to what I would like to see more or less of and encourage others to do the same.

I'm simply here to discuss stuff either way, whether they're listening or not.