Are <5.0 main villain> fanboys also supportive of <6.1-6.5 main villain>? *SPOILERS*

[Lady_Silvermoon]

Honestly, I think they already did. Going by their post history, I don't expect them to come back; they seem the type to really want to post about one subject, and then leave once they have.

It was really frustrating to watch, because they had that awful mix of 'frequently factually incorrect' and 'grossly emotionally charged language'. I wanted to 'well actually' them a whole lot more than I have (Including with EE3 evidence, I was actually excited to bring that in), but for a lot of it they're clearly wrapping way too much of themselves and their own values into it, and they'd take it as a personal attack if I told them that actually, Emet would not be praised as the ender of poverty and sexual assault if he completed all the Rejoinings. I only really felt confident refuting the more isolated points, like a misunderstanding of how time travel works.

I do kind of wonder why they did all this, because it really feels completely out of nowhere. Their post history confirms they're not the sort to do this regularly, and they completed Endwalker at least half a year ago (and were talking about very different parts of it), so this isn't 'I just hit the credits and I have kneejerk opinions'. It's also not just a new member/sockpuppet of the usual Team Zodiark crowd, because they tend to post together, and have fairly consistent talking points that this doesn't really jive with.

You can see that much information on me? That's creepy. (My bad, I thought you could actually see my gameplay history, not that you guessed I finished Endwalker around my first posts.)

To answer your question, I googled something that landed me on a forum thread and I sat there reading through 60 pages of a lore discussion from like two years ago, but didn't want to comment on it because it was like two years ago. So after reading that, I looked up some more current posts. Wrote some comments, went to bed and woke up to my existence being highly analyzed and discussed in a way I'm not used to seeing on forums. But okay.

Just a rando who usually discusses lore on other mediums and just happened upon a forum post last night. That's all.

[ZavosEsperian]

You can see that much information on me? That's creepy.

To answer your question, I googled something that landed me on a forum thread and I sat there reading through 60 pages of a lore discussion from like two years ago, but didn't want to comment on it because it was like two years ago. So after reading that, I looked up some more current posts. Wrote some comments, went to bed and woke up to my existence being highly analyzed and discussed in a way I'm not used to seeing on forums. But okay.

Just a rando who usually discusses lore on other mediums and just happened upon a forum post last night. That's all.

Unfortunately, the inhabitance of the lore forums are not afraid to go through post histories. I tend to lurk instead of post but most who are of your mindset have moved on to greener pastures or also tend to lurk as well.

[jameseoakes]

Unfortunately, the inhabitance of the lore forums are not afraid to go through post histories. I tend to lurk instead of post but most who are of your mindset have moved on to greener pastures or also tend to lurk as well.

Yeah it really feels there's a creepy policing going on in the lore with people being pretty much harassed for talking about the wrong topics.

[SannaR]

Unfortunately, the inhabitance of the lore forums are not afraid to go through post histories. I tend to lurk instead of post but most who are of your mindset have moved on to greener pastures or also tend to lurk as well.

Maybe because we have had Titanman necro things as is their want and try and troll this subform? Or that other guy who openly called people in here slurs and whatnot begging us to report them so that they would get banned. That and some of those who post here don't frequent the other parts. And it's not like other people in other sections of this forum don't go and look at others post history. Then there are those who when subbed have in the past will talk about a thread's topic only to go "but did you know Venat's a b*tch and a genocidal maniac?" in the middle or the end of their statement knowing full well that it's bait in hopes they'll get round 456 about the sundering.

[ZavosEsperian]

Yeah; you don't have a very long post history, so I basically just hit 'View Forum Posts' and scrolled down very slightly. You posted about Meteion mid-ish last year, so I have very little information, but what I do have says 'you finished Endwalker back then at the latest, and had a different broad response. I didn't actually consider that a negative per se--I considered it a green flag of sorts actually, since you clearly don't have an established history and aren't some kind of burner account--it was just a bit curious.

Something you're probably not aware of is that this subforum has a particular problem with 'drive-by trolling' (I think a lot of subforums have it, but it's very noticeable here probably because the subject matter is much looser); someone who turns up exactly once, posts a weirdly argumentative hot take, and then completely vanishes. Sometimes they're there for one day, sometimes it's just a single post. It sucks, because I always like new people joining the conversation with new ideas, despite what some people might think... and then we instead just get an angry, probably deliberately incomplete argument from someone who never comes back. But a slight bit of extra reading can help identify the sort of person we're looking at pretty early, and help inform what conversation there is to have: if they're not coming back, you're not about to get any answers to your questions, but there might still be a conversation worth having about, say, 'all the ways the Empire didn't fix the primal problem and in fact made it worse'.

Maybe because we have had Titanman necro things as is their want and try and troll this subform? Or that other guy who openly called people in here slurs and whatnot begging us to report them so that they would get banned. That and some of those who post here don't frequent the other parts. And it's not like other people in other sections of this forum don't go and look at others post history. Then there are those who when subbed have in the past will talk about a thread's topic only to go "but did you know Venat's a b*tch and a genocidal maniac?" in the middle or the end of their statement knowing full well that it's bait in hopes they'll get round 456 about the sundering.

You both realize neither of the excuses you make justify your behavior on the forums. It is up to you whether you wish to interact with someone, be it a curious new individual to the forums or a troll. Searching through post histories and talking about what you found openly, especially discussing it with the person you were looking into, is most likely going to draw the ire of whoever you have just looked into instead of having a conversation in good faith.

That being said, a poor sense of media literacy would suggest being unable to discern the intentions of the person who authored the post in question. It shouldn't be too difficult to identify a troll from a well to do poster on the forums. It all seems like there is a significant amount of gatekeeping going on here in terms of forums discussion if you instantly go on the offensive against someone who may actually have genuine questions.

In terms of different opinions related to the interpretation of the story, there will be individuals who will have different opinions and people do have the right to back up their claims and reach agreements on disagreeing with their various interpretation of events. Not discussing these various events in full stymies discussion and makes the forums boring. I have witnessed this sort of behavior where both sides of each argument becomes too combative and resorts to ad hominem attacks as well as behavior that would be decried as abhorrent by many people's standards. Don't claim to be a victim when you yourself were taking part in the selfsame behavior.

In short, be willing to hear people out. You may end up learning something new or see a new perspective you never thought of before.

[MikkoAkure]

That being said, a poor sense of media literacy would suggest being unable to discern the intentions of the person who authored the post in question. It shouldn't be too difficult to identify a troll from a well to do poster on the forums. It all seems like there is a significant amount of gatekeeping going on here in terms of forums discussion if you instantly go on the offensive against someone who may actually have genuine questions.

Going into a forum and replying to multiple threads multiple times each back-to-back with posts saying things like wanting to ignore that "millions died so I could play cactpot" and comparing the systematic killing of millions of people across multiple worlds to "stealing from someone and giving it to their kid" is going to make people suspicious and doubt their commitment to have an actual, real discussion. Especially with the history of similar trollish behavior on these forums.

[Lady_Silvermoon]

Going into a forum and replying to multiple threads multiple times each back-to-back with posts saying things like wanting to ignore that "millions died so I could play cactpot" and comparing the systematic killing of millions of people across multiple worlds to "stealing from someone and giving it to their kid" is going to make people suspicious and doubt their commitment to have an actual, real discussion. Especially with the history of similar trollish behavior on these forums.

I had to actually look up trolling to see how this whole discussion of if I'm a troll is even a thing. And I get it now. You think I'm saying what I'm saying in hopes of upsetting you. I'm not. I mean everything I'm saying and the snarkiness is just part of my personality and the way I speak. Until I came to find a discussion about me and not the story, it hadn't even occurred to me that what I said would be capable of upsetting you. I'm a big Emet-Selch fan, but there is no condemnation of his behavior that would upset me because it's true. If you point out he experimented on his own descendant, yep. He burned babies in their cribs, yep. He made every world he visited a worse place on purpose, yep.

So why would pointing out Venat killed millions if not billions of people be upsetting? She did. There is even a cool cinematic of it with a power ballad playing in the background. And while Shadowbringers did introduce the complicated and messy situation of if someone taking something from you and it's held by that group for generations, is it still acceptable to use violence to take it back. But comparing what Venat did to that scenario was never meant to be inflammatory, it is actually a massive downplay of what she did. She didn't just take their land. No, she took their world, their lives, their history, their bodies, their language, their sanity, even their very souls. Real people can't take from one another the amount Venat took from the Ancients due to a lack of magic power.

Endwalker haunts me more than any piece of fiction I've ever experienced. Because I liked it. I was fully on the Venat train. The Ancients had to die. Tragic, sure. But they weren't strong like the modern races. They couldn't endure suffering like the modern races. They couldn't wield dynamis like the modern races. They were genetically and culturally inferior. Useless eaters.

The horror of realizing all it takes is a pretty lady, some inspirational words and an awesome song to turn me into a full on Garlean, yeah...haunted. That's how I'd describe it.

[ZavosEsperian]

Endwalker haunts me more than any piece of fiction I've ever experienced. Because I liked it. I was fully on the Venat train. The Ancients had to die. Tragic, sure. But they weren't strong like the modern races. They couldn't endure suffering like the modern races. They couldn't wield dynamis like the modern races. They were genetically and culturally inferior. Useless eaters.

The horror of realizing all it takes is a pretty lady, some inspirational words and an awesome song to turn me into a full on Garlean, yeah...haunted. That's how I'd describe it.

This isn't an unreasonable feeling, there are many who gladly sang the tune the story provided only to realize the gravity of the actions committed later down the line. The MSQ does a good job with this in terms of how it is choreographed; paring music with powerful moments performed by an attractive character to boot to capture the mind of the person going through the game. If anything, it is a proper example at just how powerful propaganda can be as a tool against the human mind.

With that being said, I don't fault people for enjoying the story. To me, there is no point in judging someone's take of a fictional story and as such I do not mind allowing people exploring what the authors/writers were trying to convey through the story. I also don't mind letting people be critical of how a story is portrayed, particularly if there is a discrepancy between what the author was trying to convey versus what is interpreted, as that can potentially indicate miscommunication between the author and the reader.

So why would pointing out Venat killed millions if not billions of people be upsetting?

Unfortunately, people do not like it when you go after Venat for the actions she took. For whatever reason, it appears the ability for people to accept your opinion in regards to Venat is tantamount to heresy in many corners of the forums, let alone other areas where the story is discussed. I, admittedly, do understand your point of view in regards to this, as Venat's actions are undeniable in terms of what the sundering did. Mentioning this fact, however, tends to draw the ire of many individuals either because they are unable to see how you arrived at your perspective or because they themselves feel attacked when you are critical of a character who is largely liked.

[Cleretic]

So why would pointing out Venat killed millions if not billions of people be upsetting? She did. There is even a cool cinematic of it with a power ballad playing in the background. And while Shadowbringers did introduce the complicated and messy situation of if someone taking something from you and it's held by that group for generations, is it still acceptable to use violence to take it back. But comparing what Venat did to that scenario was never meant to be inflammatory, it is actually a massive downplay of what she did. She didn't just take their land. No, she took their world, their lives, their history, their bodies, their language, their sanity, even their very souls. Real people can't take from one another the amount Venat took from the Ancients due to a lack of magic power.

So, imagine how this sort of talk feels to people who took the viewpoint of 'both sides faced difficult choices and there is no clear moral right answer, but I personally feel that I would side with Venat'. This isn't incorrect by what the game puts forward, and in fact is a broadly very popular take outside of these forums; it's hard to say if it's a majority, but it's certainly very popular and there's very little in the way of vicious argument about it, and Venat's routinely in the upper echelons of character popularity polls during Endwalker. You might realize, that sort of crowd isn't especially happy to hear these things, especially given we've been hearing them fairly constantly for the past two years.

Now, imagine how it feels to not just have that sort of view of 'in this difficult hypothetical, I would side with Venat', but also have the feeling of 'I would prefer to move on and talk about any other part of the game'. There's a lot of other parts of the game, after all! Venat is actually only a small part, and speaking personally, isn't even a part I especially enjoy; I find all of Elpis fairly dull. I'd prefer if we were instead talking about Thavnair, or the Thirteenth, or primals, or that new expansion we're getting more info about this weekend. And yet, it keeps getting relitigated, by people who at best aren't very nice about it, and at worst are actively looking to start a fight or derail ongoing conversation.

Now, with all that in mind, look at your post history the past day or so.

I think you'll understand why we aren't especially warm to the subject.

[Cleretic]

You both realize neither of the excuses you make justify your behavior on the forums.

What behavior? You're really gonna need to be much more specific.

The worst I can recall personally doing, and will readily admit was a fault of mine, was throwing out claims and verdicts about in-story characters and groups that I'll readily agree weren't helpful to discussion; 'genocide' was neither especially helpful, nor especially welcome, as a term when discussing the Ancients or Ascians. I regret using it, and I've done my best over time to have a better standard for it all and to steer any discussions into a different space than that. If that's what you're thinking of, then I apologize, and I've always felt that the best I can do about it is to just do better in the future.

But I get the feeling that's not what you're thinking of. So if I've forgotten something, please, let me know.