Quote Originally Posted by Cleretic View Post
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.