Quote Originally Posted by ZavosEsperian View Post
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."