Ilberd

[Enkidoh]

I think a lot of people just refuse to consider that maybe, just maybe, Garlemald is more complex than being another dull and stereotypical 'evil empire'. Very little in this game's lore has ever been presented as purely 'good' or purely 'evil'. Why would they make Garlemald the exception, especially when they've already taken steps to make the place morally grey rather than morally black?

I've also said this before but...Eorzea really isn't in a position to take the moral high ground. It's not as bad as Garlemald, sure, but that doesn't mean much when Eorzea is typically presented as a terrible place to live - and not just because of Garlemald being the 'aggressor', either, before that card is pulled out again.

Heck, the recent patch pretty much revolved around Aymeric refusing to address his people's legitimate concerns and ensuring that the flawed status quo of inequality continues...and that his people focus their attention on Nidhogg rather than each other due to 'national pride'. That isn't too different to how Garlemald operates - and it may very well have been how Garlemald first began taking the steps towards taking a more direct approach to acquiring more power and influence.

As for not being able to 'sympathise' with Garlemald, I thoroughly contest that. You don't need to approve of everything that a nation or society does in order to sympathise with them. For all we know there's a fairly good reason as to why Garlemald is so aggressive - if they were pushed around, for example, and it turns out that initially they weren't the aggressors and were pushed around back when they were a weaker nation then that changes quite a lot of things. Putting that aside, however, since it's only speculation...

...we can go right back to the clear similarities between the Garleans and the Romans. Say what you will about the Romans but for all the bad stuff they did they accomplished an immense amount of brilliant stuff that influences us to this very day.

That may be, but SE themselves have never shown themselves as taking that view, always referring or depicting the Empire as nothing other than evil, all conquering warmongers utterly convinced of their own superiority, where as the Eorzean citystates at least, have admitted their faults and failings and stated that despite their differences and problems, they have only ever had their peoples' best interests, safety and happiness at heart. They only wish to be left alone to deal with their own problems themselves, to live and die by their own hand, their own will.

Garleans though (as in, those still loyal to Garlemald, I'm talking about those who have defected to Eorzea) have never once admitted that Garlemald's pragmatic view might actually be wrong and utterly self-serving, regarding themselves as smugly superior to everyone else, and that only they have the answers to the problems plaguing Hydaelyn - which is pretty clear they do not, save for occasionally digging up ancient Allagan relics that they don't even understand and bringing the entire world under their jackboot through both the olive branch and the sword. "Might makes right" is pretty much their attitude, regarding everyone else as "savages" (which, as Mark Twain famously mused, is the biggest hypocrisy out), I'm going to keep regarding Garlemald and their agents as clear-cut 'Evil Empire' antagonists who stand in the way of peace in not just Eorzea, but all of Hydaelyn.

[Zohar_Lahar]

That may be, but SE themselves have never shown themselves as taking that view, always referring or depicting the Empire as nothing other than evil, all conquering warmongers utterly convinced of their own superiority

I see you have not played Final Fantasy XII.

[Enkidoh]

I see you have not played Final Fantasy XII.

Uh, I was referring to FFXIV and the Garlean Empire, not the use of Empires in the FF series in general (yes I know the Archadian Empire in FFXII is not quite so clear cut as antagonists - I finished FFXII years ago), so I stand by my comments.