What lore do you ignore?

[Cleretic]

Venat even describes herself as a "supreme deity."

Citation needed. (EDIT: Citation provided by Mikko)

[MikkoAkure]

Citation needed.

In the context of preparing the Scions ahead of their fight, Hydaelyn says "should you lack the strength to best a supreme deity, I cannot allow you to make the journey".

The encyclopedia also refers to the concept used to create Zodiark and Hydaelyn as the "deity concept"


Where I disagree with that poster though is that the way they worded "rise to godhood" and everything else looked to me as if they believe Venat becoming Hydaelyn was purposefully trying to make herself into a god for her own personal gain rather than anything altruistic and that she wanted to become a goddess for its own sake.

There have been posters in the past who believed that Hydaelyn was worshiped despite evidence to the contrary.

[Cleretic]

In the context of preparing the Scions ahead of their fight, Hydaelyn says "should you lack the strength to best a supreme deity, I cannot allow you to make the journey".

The encyclopedia also refers to the concept used to create Zodiark and Hydaelyn as the "deity concept"

Thanks, that's one of the few cutscenes that Gamer Escape hasn't transcribed and that I haven't recorded. (Go figure, I don't talk about this enough to need the backing visual.) I think 'supreme' is sort of the operative word here, 'deity' was kind of a given on the Ancient side; like you said, that's just what they called that concept.

It really does show the need to cite your sources, though. The fact Silvermoon just constantly posts completely unverifiable claims without evidence means that even the stuff that is true starts to sound tenuous.

[Lady_Silvermoon]

In the context of preparing the Scions ahead of their fight, Hydaelyn says "should you lack the strength to best a supreme deity, I cannot allow you to make the journey".

The encyclopedia also refers to the concept used to create Zodiark and Hydaelyn as the "deity concept"


Where I disagree with that poster though is that the way they worded "rise to godhood" and everything else looked to me as if they believe Venat becoming Hydaelyn was purposefully trying to make herself into a god for her own personal gain rather than anything altruistic and that she wanted to become a goddess for its own sake.

There have been posters in the past who believed that Hydaelyn was worshiped despite evidence to the contrary.

Meteion is attempting to prevent all suffering in the universe by stopping the cycle of life and death. Her motives are altruistic. We still punched her in the face though.

I'm not saying Venat made herself into a god for personal gain. I'm saying she's wrong. What she's doing is jaw-droppingly evil. And the most fitting punishment I can imagine for her multitude of crimes against humanity is tossing her back into the aetherial sea to be reborn into the world she made. Not as a supreme deity with a bird's eye view of what she wrought, but as a regular person, helpless and confused as her child dies in her arms of a disease with no cure. If the world she built is so much better, than she should have taken a tour to the facilities.

It's one thing for the horrors of life to happen by happenstance. It's another for them to happen by design. No good, loving being invents cancer. Especially not as a bloody character builder.

ETA: Most the villains in FF14 were well-meaning. Thordan, Athena, the Ascians, all attempting to do what they believed to be the greater good.

They were wrong.

She is wrong.

The difference that disturbs me to no end though is while the game recognizes the others were wrong, it doesn't seem to realize that Venat's fascist agenda was also wrong. When Zenos is drawing in the lifeforce of all those people to give himself the resonance, we get that's wrong. But when Venat sets up entire worlds to be smashed back into the Source so that her super soldier can be born, for some reason people can't follow the exact same logic and realize that's also wrong. She made worlds of people for the purpose of being destroyed to feed our strength, both of character and of spirit.

[SannaR]

ETA: Most the villains in FF14 were well-meaning. Thordan, Athena, the Ascians, all attempting to do what they believed to be the greater good.

They were wrong.

She is wrong.

The difference that disturbs me to no end though is while the game recognizes the others were wrong, it doesn't seem to realize that Venat's fascist agenda was also wrong. When Zenos is drawing in the lifeforce of all those people to give himself the resonance, we get that's wrong. But when Venat sets up entire worlds to be smashed back into the Source so that her super soldier can be born, for some reason people can't follow the exact same logic and realize that's also wrong. She made worlds of people for the purpose of being destroyed to feed our strength, both of character and of spirit.

You might feel that you're not saying that Venat made herself into a god for personal gain, but that is how it is coming off to others. Many in this discussion have said now and in the past that the sundering was a horrible act. Yet due to the world we play in and the type of game we are playing they have chosen to come to terms with how it happened in their own way. You and the others aren't wrong in wanting or wishing for an AU where they might have gotten a better ending or lasted longer. Or for wanting the characters to react the same way they did in the past to other events. Yet that isn't what we have been given. Does it suck that for some there is a disconnect that varies in how severe that disconnect is? Well yeah.

It's not the characters fault if the writer(s) didn't stick the landing on how readers should interpret their actions. The same way that people shouldn't get mad at an actor when they're dealing with a bland, lackluster or subpar script. Or a voice actor gives a deadpan performance if they're not given any indication of how their character is supposed to be feeling.

Venat did something that she knew would mean the star could continue. As it didn't look as though there was any way to convince the convocation to not sacrifice soul endowed life to Zodiark for a third time. Especially if we are to assume that everyone at the time still held firm the belief that souls should always be able to return to the sea. You don't replace souls with more souls.

[Cleretic]

It's not the characters fault if the writer(s) didn't stick the landing on how readers should interpret their actions. The same way that people shouldn't get mad at an actor when they're dealing with a bland, lackluster or subpar script. Or a voice actor gives a deadpan performance if they're not given any indication of how their character is supposed to be feeling.

I'd also argue that it's not a fault of the writers that they didn't create a world with an unambiguous happy ending for everyone. Which really does seem to be an argument being made: that the Ancients deserved a happy ending, and so them not getting it is from varying angles both the other characters' fault for not giving it to them, and the writers' fault for not doing it.

Whereas the truth is that there's a hell of a lot of stories that just don't and shouldn't end with 'the villain is dead and the good guys all live happily ever after'. Amaurot's story is one of a tragic death of a society that doesn't deserve it, and Endwalker's story is one of grappling with death and grief in all its facets. Sure, maybe not all of those elements of either story stuck the landing, but the fix isn't to take away the fact that Amaurot died in the first place.

Is Heavensward bad for not letting us revive Harchefaunt?

[Lady_Silvermoon]

I'd also argue that it's not a fault of the writers that they didn't create a world with an unambiguous happy ending for everyone. Which really does seem to be an argument being made: that the Ancients deserved a happy ending, and so them not getting it is from varying angles both the other characters' fault for not giving it to them, and the writers' fault for not doing it.

Whereas the truth is that there's a hell of a lot of stories that just don't and shouldn't end with 'the villain is dead and the good guys all live happily ever after'. Amaurot's story is one of a tragic death of a society that doesn't deserve it, and Endwalker's story is one of grappling with death and grief in all its facets. Sure, maybe not all of those elements of either story stuck the landing, but the fix isn't to take away the fact that Amaurot died in the first place.

Is Heavensward bad for not letting us revive Harchefaunt?

You really can't tell the difference between "all stories need happy endings" verses "I am disturbed what this story is trying to slip past as right and good is fascist propaganda." I'd be like making Zenos the hero of Stormblood and having all the Scions look at him adoringly as he murdered people for the sake of genetic superiority. That's be weird right? It'd be okay to point out that's maybe not a good thing, right?

I've made it blatantly clear me issue with Endwalker is to agree with Venat's actions, you have to agree with some pretty horrific concepts, like some lives aren't worth as much as others, like it's okay to take everything from a people if you believe you can make better use of it and these are the exact arguments I've been seeing trying to defend the mass murder of 10 worlds. Because even if you're willing to do all kinds of backflips to act like what she did to the Ancients wasn't genocide, she unquestionably set up several shards to be destroyed, on purpose. That's a lot of death for a loving mommy to cause.

[Cleretic]

You really can't tell the difference between "all stories need happy endings" verses "I am disturbed what this story is trying to slip past as right and good is fascist propaganda." I'd be like making Zenos the hero of Stormblood and having all the Scions look at him adoringly as he murdered people for the sake of genetic superiority. That's be weird right? It'd be okay to point out that's maybe not a good thing, right?

I've made it blatantly clear me issue with Endwalker is to agree with Venat's actions, you have to agree with some pretty horrific concepts, like some lives aren't worth as much as others, like it's okay to take everything from a people if you believe you can make better use of it and these are the exact arguments I've been seeing trying to defend the mass murder of 10 worlds. Because even if you're willing to do all kinds of backflips to act like what she did to the Ancients wasn't genocide, she unquestionably set up several shards to be destroyed, on purpose. That's a lot of death for a loving mommy to cause.

Oh, I'm not even talking about you at this point, although you are the most recent person I've seen raise it. I've seen it a lot. And I think it betrays something under the surface; not one of the first complaints, but one underneath. I don't know what it could be, and I'm not about to speculate for anyone; I don't have enough of a hint to even begin to guess.

[Nayukhuut]

I'm not saying Venat made herself into a god for personal gain. I'm saying she's wrong. What she's doing is jaw-droppingly evil. And the most fitting punishment I can imagine for her multitude of crimes against humanity is tossing her back into the aetherial sea to be reborn into the world she made. Not as a supreme deity with a bird's eye view of what she wrought, but as a regular person, helpless and confused as her child dies in her arms of a disease with no cure. If the world she built is so much better, than she should have taken a tour to the facilities.

It's one thing for the horrors of life to happen by happenstance. It's another for them to happen by design. No good, loving being invents cancer. Especially not as a bloody character builder.

You know, up until now I had been holding on to comfort that Venat's punishment for her crimes was to be wasted away entirely, but I like your idea better. If her world was really that much better, then she should have been forced to live in it too. Even better if she kept her memories.

Ahh, and as for her making herself a goddess, I would like to point out that not only did she do that, she also created constructs to act as even more gods for us. Gods that we have to pray to lest the broken world destabilise, because shockingly, the Star doesn't seem to like being broken into pieces. And yes, I know they are gone, but they left a machine behind that prayers are being directed to. One wonders what would happen if the population of Etheirys ever took up atheism.