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

[ZavosEsperian]

I feel that people invent a sentient race never seen or heard of before or after the Sundering to justify Venat's actions because the truth is so horrific, headcannon has to makeup people for her to save to live with it.

There is a lot of headcanon to go around on the forums unfortunately. Per EE3 page 11:

"Once the star was duly returned to vitality, they would offer a portion of its living energy to Zodiark in turn, thus allowing them to resurrect their sacrificed brethren whose souls slumbered within the deity."
-EE3 page 11, section 'The Schism'

Within EE3, there is no distinction as to what is being given up to Zodiark for the purpose of resurrection as the term "Living Energy" is rather vague and could mean a whole assortment of life forms. Anyone stating there is any specific lifeform, be it sentient or not, being sacrificed is directly contradicted by EE3. It should be noted the sacrifice back to Zodiark to attempt to resurrect the sacrificed Ancients in question would likely not work for any souls fully consumed in totality and it is unclear whether or not any Ancient whose soul was not fully consumed could be resurrected either.

As I have previously stated in a previous post, your viewpoint is one where people tend to become rather vitriolic, rude, or just plain old mean when it is encountered. I personally do not have qualms with anyone with differing opinions whereas others here clearly do and will not admit to their biases. If you are interested, I might be able to introduce you to individuals I know who also are of my mindset where people are able to discuss their various interpretations of the story without fear of ridicule or, at the very least, with the ability to agree to disagree . I personally am more of the opinion neither side was morally correct as both sides are various blends of grey to me.

[Lady_Silvermoon]

There is a lot of headcanon to go around on the forums unfortunately. Per EE3 page 11:



Within EE3, there is no distinction as to what is being given up to Zodiark for the purpose of resurrection as the term "Living Energy" is rather vague and could mean a whole assortment of life forms. Anyone stating there is any specific lifeform, be it sentient or not, being sacrificed is directly contradicted by EE3. It should be noted the sacrifice back to Zodiark to attempt to resurrect the sacrificed Ancients in question would likely not work for any souls fully consumed in totality and it is unclear whether or not any Ancient whose soul was not fully consumed could be resurrected either.

As I have previously stated in a previous post, your viewpoint is one where people tend to become rather vitriolic, rude, or just plain old mean when it is encountered. I personally do not have qualms with anyone with differing opinions whereas others here clearly do and will not admit to their biases. If you are interested, I might be able to introduce you to individuals I know who also are of my mindset where people are able to discuss their various interpretations of the story without fear of ridicule or, at the very least, with the ability to agree to disagree . I personally am more of the opinion neither side was morally correct as both sides are various blends of grey to me.

From what I can tell from the story it seems the souls inside Zodiark were protected and unharmed as Hythlodeus comes out of it perfectly normal and they were returned to the lifestream upon Zodiark's destruction. Given the sheer amount of aether Zodiark had to work with and the Ancient version of G'raha at the helm, I am not surprised no harm came to the souls of the sacrificed. Even if they couldn't be brought back as themselves, even releasing them back into the lifestream would have been a kinder fate than leaving your friends and loved ones serving as a human shield forever.

As for my reception, I'm not taking it personally. I don't blame other people for being emotional, like I said, I am haunted by the implications of Endwalker. If someone actually had an explanation that both fit with the text and didn't make our WoL the champion of the most terrifying villain I've ever come across, because not only does she murder, mutilate and torture us for her agenda, she makes us love her as she does it, I think I'd be the happiest here to see that perfectly reasonable alternate explanation that fits the text.

But what I usually get is one of the 30 contradictory reasons Endwalker gives that the Ancients HAD to die. And it makes me sick to hear them because they are the same reason we give for real world genocides too. "They are too powerful." "They are culturally inferior." "They are biologically inferior." "We can make better use of their resources than they could."

[Theodric]

But what I usually get is one of the 30 contradictory reasons Endwalker gives that the Ancients HAD to die. And it makes me sick to hear them because they are the same reason we give for real world genocides too. "They are too powerful." "They are culturally inferior." "They are biologically inferior." "We can make better use of their resources than they could."

Yep. The blame lies squarely at the feet of the character who forced both the Ancients and the Sundered into a confrontation with one another - namely Venat.

To trot out one of my favourite snippets from a certain manga:



It's really as simple as that as far as I'm concerned. I'm frequently baffled by the persistent habit around these parts where certain posters insist that backing Venat is the only way forward and that the Ancients 'needed to' just be killed and replaced.

Shadowbringers was so largely successful on the basis that it proposed a solid premise - neither the Ancients or the Sundered deserved to be completely wiped out but unpleasant circumstances forced such a confrontation as inevitable for the sake of their respective goals and long term survival.

You can go back pretty far and see many supposed 'ZoDiArK fAnS' express this very opinion and point out the many different routes in which Venat could have taken in order for things to play out differently.

The character that deliberately sabotages, lies to and then destroys her own species is not a trustworthy source for what 'has to' happen - and once again, I want to point out how the Sundered only come to exist as a direct consequence of the Ancients being thoroughly wiped out.

We know full well from their own statements that the game's protagonists wouldn't accept Venat's judgement if she were to wipe out their loved ones, memories and civilisations through the Sundering so...there's no real obligation or need for any other species to submit to such judgement themselves.

Personally I think Venat would have aged better as a Yunalesca type figure. It's essentially what she ended up being written as in the end. At the very least, the Sundering being an accident rather than intentional act would have been less tone deaf but...what's done is done.

[Lady_Silvermoon]

*snip*

There were so many outs they had to make Venat good or at least morally grey. The Sundering could have been an accident. She could have been trying to lessen her people's power levels and was unaware of the devastation she'd cause. But no, they had her do it on purpose with full knowledge of what would happen. And then, as if that wasn't horrific enough, they tell us she purposely let the Ascians go so that they could go crazy mass murdering her children for 12k years to make her extra special child. So your very creation is built upon a pile of bones. If you didn't impress her so much, worlds full of people wouldn't have died horribly.

They had her pick the darkside option at every single prompt, but were like, she's pretty and wearing white, so she's a Jedi actually.

[Theodric]

There were so many outs they had to make Venat good or at least morally grey. The Sundering could have been an accident. She could have been trying to lessen her people's power levels and was unaware of the devastation she'd cause. But no, they had her do it on purpose with full knowledge of what would happen. And then, as if that wasn't horrific enough, they tell us she purposely let the Ascians go so that they could go crazy mass murdering her children for 12k years to make her extra special child. So your very creation is built upon a pile of bones. If you didn't impress her so much, worlds full of people wouldn't have died horribly.

They had her pick the darkside option at every single prompt, but were like, she's pretty and wearing white, so she's a Jedi actually.

Yeah, pretty much. In the end it's a situation not unlike what caused a large ripple of disappointment through World of Warcraft's lore community. You have a similar character there who is responsible for horrific acts of attempted genocide and the complete destruction of a beloved city and when the time comes to finally and actually hold her accountable for her actions it's revealed that her evil side was responsible but her good side is back in control now so all is to be forgiven. Sylvanas slinks off to 'atone' ready to someday be brought back out for some cynical fanservice.

At no point did the fans of the characters who Sylvanas murdered in cold blood see any real payoff for it. What's unfortunate is that I encouraged some friends who were playing WoW to come over here because I believed that FFXIV would not make the same mistakes. Instead we end up with a character who not only has even more blood upon her hands for Sylvanas but also one who is actively praised for it and treated as a deity worthy of fond remembrance.

It's the most bizarre storytelling I've seen in some time, though I suppose it remains to be seen if lessons will truly be learned moving forward. I doubt it, personally - if only because the game seems thoroughly intent on catering to venue goers first and foremost these days.

[Lady_Silvermoon]

Yeah, pretty much. In the end it's a situation not unlike what caused a large ripple of disappointment through World of Warcraft's lore community. You have a similar character there who is responsible for horrific acts of attempted genocide and the complete destruction of a beloved city and when the time comes to finally and actually hold her accountable for her actions it's revealed that her evil side was responsible but her good side is back in control now so all is to be forgiven. Sylvanas slinks off to 'atone' ready to someday be brought back out for some cynical fanservice.

At no point did the fans of the characters who Sylvanas murdered in cold blood see any real payoff for it. What's unfortunate is that I encouraged some friends who were playing WoW to come over here because I believed that FFXIV would not make the same mistakes. Instead we end up with a character who not only has even more blood upon her hands for Sylvanas but also one who is actively praised for it and treated as a deity worthy of fond remembrance.

It's the most bizarre storytelling I've seen in some time, though I suppose it remains to be seen if lessons will truly be learned moving forward. I doubt it, personally - if only because the game seems thoroughly intent on catering to venue goers first and foremost these days.

I would take split personality over what we got. At least if her "bad side" had done it, we wouldn't be arguing about good and necessary genocides.

[Theodric]

I would take split personality over what we got. At least if her "bad side" had done it, we wouldn't be arguing about good and necessary genocides.

Heh. That's true. I think the biggest problem with the way in which it is all written is that it is practically impossible to discuss many aspects of the story without it tying back to the Ancients in some way. The other problem is that the Scions are inevitably going to encounter some minor, low stakes antagonists in the upcoming expansion and very likely display more of an emotional reaction to their antics over anything displayed towards the horrific cost of Venat's actions.

In many ways, Venat herself deserved better as a character. I think she'd actually be more popular than Emet-Selch had she actually been played straight and called out. They're clearly not above redeeming antagonists with blood upon their hands as they just did as much with Golbez. It's honestly quite baffling that they didn't take such a route and it's even more baffling that certain posters insist that there's some 'conspiracy of hate' against specific characters when the truth is many of us would very much enjoy the character if she was handled with more tact.

It'd be equally eye-roll worthy to me if Emet-Selch was at no point criticised for the cost of the Rejoinings. Consistency is key, really - and the setting spent so long being extremely preachy about its morals that not applying them equally across the board simply came off as a rather jarring sharp turn.

[Nayukhuut]

There were so many outs they had to make Venat good or at least morally grey. The Sundering could have been an accident. She could have been trying to lessen her people's power levels and was unaware of the devastation she'd cause. But no, they had her do it on purpose with full knowledge of what would happen. And then, as if that wasn't horrific enough, they tell us she purposely let the Ascians go so that they could go crazy mass murdering her children for 12k years to make her extra special child. So your very creation is built upon a pile of bones. If you didn't impress her so much, worlds full of people wouldn't have died horribly.

They had her pick the darkside option at every single prompt, but were like, she's pretty and wearing white, so she's a Jedi actually.

All that you said plus the fact that her back up plan, if all her original plans went sideways, was literally to say screw all the Reflections and save only the people of the Source. If we hadn't gone digging into the why of what was causing the Final Days (because we rightfully thought leaving the Star and letting the Reflections die was stupid), we would have been leaving without ever learning of Meteion too. That means that it only would have been a temporary fix.

I dislike basically everything Venat did in the end. From Sundering the planet, to never telling her people the truth, to setting up gods and a system that makes it so the world HAS to follow the measures she put into place so that it doesn't end up destabilising in its broken state. She was an narcissist that imposed her will on everyone, and she will never sit well with me. Her response to Hermes idiotic plan should have been to tell the Convocation and set Hermes in the jail he belonged in. Not help destroy her people.

I just wish the story would actually call her out on it. I don't expect the future to change or anything, but have the Scions and other people actually maybe condone what she did instead of acting like she's some paragon of love and virtue and not just as bad as half the villains we have fought against.

[ZavosEsperian]

I just wish the story would actually call her out on it.

I do not disagree with this. I do not have any issues with Venat in the position she is if there was a counterbalance outside of the Ascians, mainly because the Ascians are a biased party to this topic. To me, I believe a counterbalance, potentially from a scion member, would be something I would find acceptable. There are many issues in terms of how Venat is portrayed and admittedly this is but one example. Other examples come from a lack of clarity of events pertaining to the period between our departure from Elpis up to the sundering along with the intentional open-ended interpretation of time travel the writers placed into the story, as they have by omission stated this was done intentionally via Live Letter.

[Cleretic]

I personally am more of the opinion neither side was morally correct as both sides are various blends of grey to me.

I have the same feeling. As I mentioned before: It's an ugly situation, with no objective moral right answer even if you look at every single fact; all you can do is decide where you're comfortable, and try to reckon with what that means. I have my own answer, that I've come to terms with and could explain... but won't, because the only person that answer truly matters to is myself, and because doing so frequently devolves into personal attacks. At least the guy that used to call me slurs has been banned.

By the way, I asked you earlier for 'my behavior on the forums' that has you so heavily against me; can you elaborate on that? I do like being able to improve on my faults, but that does require knowing what they are in the first place. I made a guess earlier, but I still don't think that's the one you're thinking of.