The missing mood in the existential horror of the last zone of the game (spoilers)

[Turtledeluxe]

The writer wanted us to see this moral issue. That or this was the sloppiest of quest writing.

Correct, which is why I find the OP post both overdramatic and slightly accusatory. They're trying to say a mood was missing, that the writers failed to give the situation gravity or nuance, that the cast are complicit in horrible evil, and the word "miss" is explicitly used as though it's something you may have missed. Regarding Karen as a personal attack is valid, I suppose. It's commonly referred to as someone who is complaining without a genuine reason, and I just think quite frankly that's what is going on here. The topic relies on people not remembering what actually happened and what conversations were actually had.

The reason we are dismissing the endless as being less alive directly contradicts why we would listen to them. If the reason for validating wiping them out is valid as stated, then listening to them and wiping them out makes no sense as a duplicate's argument wouldn't really matter.

I'm just not sure about this. "You're going to erase them anyway, why meet them?". I definitely agree that it's stupid pacing-- hence why I said we should have gone to LM much earlier in the narrative. I believe we should have learned about what the Endless are much differently than we did. This is one of many things that makes the story feel poorly written, but it's not a moral issue. I don't think we opt to meet them to hear their arguments but rather because Wuk Lamat just has an obsession with meeting people directly to fully understand any given situation. Like I keep saying, these things are addressed in the conversation where Cahciua first asks for erasure. The reason is given. Not liking the reason is fine, I just don't like the idea that if someone felt it to be sufficient reasoning wasn't paying attention or has a moral deficit. I can understand the awkwardness of it-- they're just fake enough to erase but not quite fake enough to talk to. I guess? Being copies doesn't make them totally worthless, because it's nice to interact with people you have lost and hear their perspective.

I seem to have miscommunicated here: I meant no one in this thread. Sphene had to be stopped. My problem is why commit a genocide on the route, just because Cah said it would help? Why not investigate a way to shut Sphene down, and maintain the servers until a better solution could be had? It seems terribly hypocritical to the message of Dawntrail’s plot and indeed all of the WoL’s story to date. By the most generous of estimates the souls here have fueled this for over 100,000 years factoring for time dilation, so why rush now?

I'm not sure what you mean. Sphene was urgently fusing to replenish their aether. Are you saying it would be ok because it would just take one plundering and give us 100k years to figure out a new solution? Again, I don't think one is better than the other. And that's what makes it not an issue of moral relativism. And that's why I generally don't like threads like this.

[Sivante]

Correct, which is why I find the OP post both overdramatic […]

I think complaining out of disappointment in the franchise and story is an entirely valid reason. The fact that we can have an in-depth discussion like this confirms the OP’s accusation that the writers failed to give the situation gravity or nuance. They did point out things they wanted us to see that validate moral complexity, but they also dusted it under the rug.

I feel that’s a valid complaint, don’t you? We do seem to agree the pacing and story pushed along too readily to cover the ground neatly. Getting to LM at the half mark would have potentially amended that, as you pointed out.

The spirit of the story intended does not at all align with the story they presented, from what I am gathering of it.

I'm just not sure about this. […]

Take it as food for thought then. I won’t hammer on it, but it doesn’t seem entirely logical to me as it’s presented in the story. You’re right in that Cah presents a reason, I jus tdon’t find it entirely valid or sensible. Emet gave a reason, that doesn’t make his request valid. But the story does force us to validate these decisions in a way that opens up the discourse for judgement of that decision.

I'm not sure what you mean. Sphene was […]

I was referring to the lack of time issue you brought up before: we had time. We had a lot of time. Presumably there’s still souls in the system currently feeding the process, so we could have in theory stopped Sphene, and let the current ‘batteries’ run out while we figured out an issue. We would have (in theory) literal millennia on hand to troubleshoot a solution. Instead we adopted the erasure of the entirety of the servers for a cheap advantage that may not have been necessary or honestly even helpful, we’ll never know.

There’s the moral point. We wiped the servers without knowing if it was necessary or even helpful, on an assumption from a flawed entity. That’s very much an issue of morality. Sphene was inherently immoral for her conclusion no doubt, as she believed she had to kill people to keep the servers and decided to do so.

But we may have other options. Instead of pursuing or investigating with what opportunities availed us we adopted the same truth as Sphene despite her blatant insanity, and a history of out of the pocket answers to problems in the past being our specialty.

It was Emet-Selch all over again. Only this time we are Emet. Both parties fighting for the continuity of larger groups of people. And remember what Emet-Selch said when we deemed him to be a villain.

“But yes, moral relativism and all that. Case in point--I do not consider you to be truly alive. Ergo, I will not be guilty of murder if I kill you.”

[Turtledeluxe]

The fact that we can have an in-depth discussion like this confirms the OP’s accusation that the writers failed to give the situation gravity or nuance. They did point out things they wanted us to see that validate moral complexity, but they also dusted it under the rug.

I disagree. I think it proves that there's a story that happened, but people wish it happened differently. There was a mood presented, there were reasons presented. You can not like it, but I think saying it wasn't there or even "swept" is misleading.

I was referring to the lack of time issue you brought up before: we had time. We had a lot of time. Presumably there’s still souls in the system currently feeding the process, so we could have in theory stopped Sphene, and let the current ‘batteries’ run out while we figured out an issue. We would have (in theory) literal millennia on hand to troubleshoot a solution. Instead we adopted the erasure of the entirety of the servers for a cheap advantage that may not have been necessary or honestly even helpful, we’ll never know.

Sources needed. How do we know when the aether was going to run out? Given that Sphene is currently in a process to urgently acquire new aether, what reason do the cast have to believe they have 100k years to problem solve after stopping Sphene?

There’s the moral point. We wiped the servers without knowing if it was necessary or even helpful, on an assumption from a flawed entity. That’s very much an issue of morality.

From what's written in the dialogue stupid as it is, there was "no other way" to preserve the Endless. Whether that's because Sphene didn't know of a way or because the technology literally can't function another way is unclear. But she did say it. She tells us she's going to immediately plunder other worlds and disappears. Cachiua points out that the system is problematic because it requires living soul aether to function. We agree and shut it down. If you have to argue that Sphene doesn't know what she's talking about, that someone would have had expertise to find alternative fuel, like I said that all falls into the realm of theory. So it's not a moral point. In your version of the story it is, but the story itself makes sense in this regard. It's in the story -- "other forms of aether don't cut it. It's all in the conversation where Sphene goes up into the void looking hole in the sky and additionally, when Cahciua explains the erasure in LM.

It was Emet-Selch all over again. Only this time we are Emet. Both parties fighting for the continuity of larger groups of people. And remember what Emet-Selch said when we deemed him to be a villain.

“But yes, moral relativism and all that. Case in point--I do not consider you to be truly alive. Ergo, I will not be guilty of murder if I kill you.”

If you ignore all the scenes they wrote, then sure. I didn't though. I actually listened when they discussed how there isn't an alternative solution to its current fuel source and that the only way to be to plunder other worlds. Shutting them down was seemingly inevitable and we did it early because it's a video game frankly, and expansions tend to wrap up shortly after the final trial.

Ultimately all you can say is "well they didn't investigate it themselves". I think the conversations with Sphene and Cachiua count as investigation. I have no reason to believe anyone the cast can find an alternative fuel to soul aether.

[SongOfTheWind]

I am deeply uncomfortable in a way I do not think Square Enix intended, playing a WoL who committed a genocide (again, my perspective) and then had a happy-go-lucky montage of tacos and a happy ending. There is a word for that behavior: psychopathy. I’d be delighted to play a WoL that is canonically a psychopath, but again I doubt this is intended.

I came to the same word when was thinking how it all reads. I am curious how it was possible to achieve as I also think it was not intentional. It almost feels like different people were writing different bits without any agreement between themselves and then it all came together in this weird abomination of a plot.
Maybe I am missing something, but I think jp players have many similar complaints to en players, but Endless fate issue doesn’t seem to come up in conversation. I really wonder how they feel about it.

[Sivante]

Sources needed. How do we know when the aether was going to run out? Given that Sphene is currently[...]

It could have, it couldn't have. We don't know, that's the point. We potentially had thousands of years, or we could have days. We never tried to figure it out. Sphene is urgently trying to gather more, yes, but has been for some time; yet the Living Memory is still functioning. So clearly there's some amount of energy in storage, it's just a matter now of how long it will last. If she was direly low she wouldn't have the power to fight us, so clearly she wasn't running on E now was she?

If you ignore all the scenes they wrote, then sure. I didn't though. I actually listened when they discussed how there isn't an alternative solution to its current fuel source and that the only way to [...]

Unreliable narrator on one side, fox in the hen house on the other.

We could have listened to Emet-Selch when he said there was no other way. We could have listened to Asahi when he said there was no other way. We could have listened to Ardbert when he said there was no other way. The entire FFXIV plot is founded on us defying the 'there is no other way' statement, and there are nigh countless examples of it across the story. Cah and Sphene were both limited to their own technology, their own means. If you want to say it's illogical to presume we could find another means, then suit yourself but I find that itself to be illogical in a story in which that is the primary function of the WoL and the artists formerly known as the scions.

You seem quite pleased to follow the story as you've determined it to be presented and accuse others of not having listened to the cutscenes or side-content as you've done so twice now. I'm happy you enjoyed the story, enjoy it.

The point is there is moral relativism, there always was, and it's been repeatedly placed across the story. I'm not emotional that they violated the consistency of the story or that they put themselves into a moral quagmire: I am disappointed by the failure to meaningfully engage with having done so and reflect meaningful consequences when that has been a central theme in the story up until now.

We did what Emet-Selch wanted to do in the story as told, then we patted ourselves on the back. So long as they commit to that story I'm fine with it. So I return to my previous statement, all else aside; If we use the logic of a villain to take a course, that is a step into villainy.

If they tied the story up in this sense because 'video game reasons' then the story isn't better for having a reason behind it. You opened up by saying you did not see these issues with the story as told and I will for a third time congratulate you, I'm happy for you. I did, others have, and I would argue it's part of the intended point that people have discussions like these.

Moral relativism, and all that.

[Turtledeluxe]

It could have, it couldn't have. We don't know, that's the point. We potentially had thousands of years, or we could have days. We never tried to figure it out. Sphene is urgently trying to gather more, yes, but has been for some time; yet the Living Memory is still functioning. So clearly there's some amount of energy in storage, it's just a matter now of how long it will last. If she was direly low she wouldn't have the power to fight us, so clearly she wasn't running on E now was she?

So you're arguing that the Scions should play guessing games in the face of mass murder to appease your own wishes for how the story played out.

could have listened to Emet-Selch when he said there was no other way. We could have listened to Asahi when he said there was no other way. We could have listened to Ardbert when he said there was no other way. The entire FFXIV plot is founded on us defying the 'there is no other way' statement, and there are nigh countless examples of it across the story. Cah and Sphene were both limited to their own technology, their own means. If you want to say it's illogical to presume we could find another means, then suit yourself but I find that itself to be illogical in a story in which that is the primary function of the WoL and the artists formerly known as the scions.

There is no other way to cause a Rejoining other than the method Emet presented. I'm not sure what you referring to. You are probably trying to compare something that isn't even comparable. We didn't listen to him-- we fell for a trap about saving the world that worked and then we defeated him over an explicit disagreement about Rejoinings.

The Scions are predicated on problem solving, that isn't evidence of an alternative to soul aether or expertise in solving any given problem.

seem quite pleased to follow the story as you've determined it to be presented and accuse others of not having listened to the cutscenes or side-content as you've done so twice now.

That's the premise of the thread but the people who liked the OP and the OP are the ones who missed key dialogue. Again claiming you don't like it is distinct from misleading people and saying it's not there at all.

The point is there is moral relativism, there always was, and it's been repeatedly placed across the story. I'm not emotional that they violated the consistency of the story or that they put themselves into a moral quagmire: I am disappointed by the failure to meaningfully engage with having done so and reflect meaningful consequences when that has been a central theme in the story up until now.

Just because there are examples of moral relativism in the game does not mean every given situation is one where we had a choice between good and evil. If you have to rely on assumptions and the arguments presented thus far, it's your choice but it doesn't negate the dialogue in the story. That's the problem. If you want to say G'raha could have solved it, for storytelling purposes you need a clear and non ambiguous precedent. That's how writing works. Not "I have a feeling he could have". More like "But G'raha has done this before". And he hasn't. He hasn't done anything remotely close.

Which is why I keep saying I have no issue with theories, I just don't agree with them. And I still think the OP is super biased.

I also just want to make a general statement that if devs follow this line of thinking, ie "Scions have solved problems so they're obliged to solve every problem as peacefully as possible", that is when this game will become unplayable. As of now the storytelling just has lots of generic issues. That kind of ridiculousness will just make it worse.

[Sivante]

So you're arguing that the Scions should play guessing games in the face of mass murder to appease your own wishes for how the story played out.

I think you know that's a mischaracterization of what I'm presenting, so I'm not going to address it. If not, feel free to assume it is; I'm exhausted at attempting to explain the issue and this is just a bad faith argument.

There is no other way to cause a Rejoining other than the method Emet presented.

Source please. No pun intended. Where is it stated there's no other way to cause a rejoining? I know Emet said it, but I'm asking for a source we can trust.

Secondarily, I'm comparing Emet's mentality, as I explicitly said, to our mentality, as I explicitly stated. 'They aren't human ergo it's less bad to kill them' being the justification for wiping a group out.

The Scions are predicated on problem solving, that isn't evidence of an alternative to soul aether or expertise in solving any given problem.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, again. There was no alternative to life until ressurection was a thing. Y'shtola was dead and there was no coming back until there was. Lyse's homeland belonged to the Garleans until it didn't. These are not off-shoots and I could go on forever with them: these are plot-points in which something unexpected happened because the Scions/WoL made things happen where it was otherwise impossible.

That's the premise of the thread but the people who liked the OP and the OP are the ones who missed key dialogue. Again claiming you don't like it is distinct from misleading people and saying it's not there at all.

Alright, so long as we call it dialogue and not the truth. We'll agree that you say it's there because you trust the NPC and I'll say it's not, as there was no verification. We're now equally accurate.

Just because there are examples of moral relativism in the game does not mean every given situation is one where we had a choice between good and evil.

I welcome you to find a discussion about genocide, the topic at hand, in the broader public that does not attach itself at some point to morality. No, not every situation is good vs. evil or about morality, but this one is.

I also just want to make a general statement that if devs follow this line of thinking, ie "Scions have solved problems so they're obliged to solve every problem as peacefully as possible", that is when this game will become unplayable. As of now the storytelling just has lots of generic issues. That kind of ridiculousness will just make it worse.

I agree. Provided they are willing to lean into the murder and ethically gray side of the WoL and Scions I think the story would be better for it. But I don't think they will, and I don't think they intended to here.

[Sivante]

I came to the same word when was thinking how it all reads. I am curious how it was possible to achieve as I also think it was not intentional. It almost feels like different people were writing different bits without any agreement between themselves and then it all came together in this weird abomination of a plot.
Maybe I am missing something, but I think jp players have many similar complaints to en players, but Endless fate issue doesn’t seem to come up in conversation. I really wonder how they feel about it.

I'm curious as well. I lack the original cultural implications from Japanese as well as the language implications the original script would give, and I'm hesitant to think it was really written this sloppily. It cannot be intentional, I imagine, but here we are looking at it. It does very much feel like multiple different writers butting up against each other doesn't it?

Hearing from a JP player on it would be a super interesting endeavor. Sadly I know none that can tolerate my brand of insanity.

[Chiru_Kai]

Have you ever played SOMA?
Or looked up anything related to the "Chinese Room" thought experiment?
Consciousness is hard to determine.

I think the Endless are so-called "philosophical zombies". You can look up that term as well if you're interested.

The gist of it is this: mere memories, just *appearing* as conscious, does not truly make you conscious. It doesn't make something alive.

Think of it this way: imagine you build a massive, powerful computer. You can simulate anything you want with it.
Now simulate an apple. By all known forms of data, it is an apple.
... but you still can't eat it, because it's a simulation, it's not real.

And if you can't even do that with something as basic as an apple, what makes you think any computer can do that with *consciousness*, and that it is somehow "real"?

[Sivante]

Have you ever played SOMA?
Or looked up anything related to the "Chinese Room" thought experiment?
Consciousness is hard to determine.

I think the Endless are so-called "philosophical zombies". You can look up that term as well if you're interested.
[…]

And if you can't even do that with something as basic as an apple, what makes you think any computer can do that with *consciousness*, and that it is somehow "real"?

I'm familiar with the Chinese Room and the origin of Soma, as well as the game. I'd also throw Nier Automata and Hate Analog story into that mix. I think it is my familiarity with these media that makes me so critical of how this was handled. (Despite that, seriously, give Nier a shot if you haven't. Never cried so good.)

I would agree they are close to philosophical zombies, but there's an issue in that they are learning and feeling; or rather, expressed to be doing so.

There's the added complication of them having stated that life aether was pulled from the people and used to create these simulacrum, and we don't know how limited they are. If Cah is so limited, why does she express emotions as she does? Why help us? If she isn't capable of sentience, she wouldn't be problem-solving and helping us in theory. If she isn't capable of emotion, well there's nothing to prove or disprove that she's just acting that role, to your credit.

But Sphene isn't using data and electricity here, she's using actual life aether. Which ... in theory, creates and maintains life. Which would make these creatures sentient, living beings, wouldn't it? The apple comparison is good, just multiply it by an entire world of god-like tech, capable of building ground that isn't real, but can be walked on. Popcorn that isn't real, but can be eaten.

We've blurred the visible line between 'simulation' and 'reality.' Star Trek's holo-deck comes to mind, where-in they had a simulation that escaped the deck and the entire episode was about if he was truly alive, etc. (Moriarty, in this case. Spoiler alert on a ... 10 year old plus episode?) Cogito ergo sum being a large part of that mess.

If Cah is capable of thinking, she meets the cogito ergo sum supposition, and therefor is sentient, which means they should be listened to but they should not be killed. If she's not thinking, how did she come to the conclusions and considerations she did? If she was simply simulating thought, she shouldn't be listened to anymore than you would take life advice from ChatGPT.

The problem comes with Cah being the primary exposition for this point in the story, but Cah being inherently bias to the situation due to the very implication she speaks. Sidenote, Chiru, very good examples for thought you've provided. Thank you!