Can we get choices that really matter and have a effect?

[Iscah]

To add to this (thaaaank you, forum 3000 character post limit)...

Editing your post after you make it will bypass the character limit.

If you go over the limit, just cut the entire text, type something short like "editing..." and then edit and paste the text back in.

[Gula]

I mean, literally everything else about this discussion aside... the simple truth is that it is not technologically feasible to make an MMO that supports even two wildly divergent stories, much less a whole slew more.

Let's never forget dubbing each of these scenarios in in multiple languages, making sure the localization is all on point, and hundreds more hours from the writers to make sure everything is on point and air tight from ARR to current. And side quests. Literally, thousands upon thousands of side quests. For all scenarios.

[Lersayil]

No, it's not. Defining good and evil is the basis of morality.

In the end, FFXIV is a game where you will beat the enemy, and if the enemy ends up being spared/justified in the story because of moral relativism, then that would just make for a poor story in my opinion. So far, I don't think FFXIV has gone that route, and I hope they never do.

I don't think I am. I am speaking of the idea that you recognize that other people may have different moral viewpoints and then try to limit the application of your own moral viewpoint so as to not impose on theirs. That idea is what I reject.

If I am opposing someone because that person is doing something that I think is wrong, then it is irrelevant if they think they're doing something right because they have a different moral worldview/circumstances unless they can convince me to adopt their moral worldview or they can convince me that they are not doing what I think they're doing.

If that's not what you mean by moral relativism, then please explain.

Moral nihilism, to me, seems to be about rejecting all moral values because there is no meaning to any of it in the end. I would also disagree with it, and do think moral relativism is one step closer to nihilism, but that's not what I was discussing specifically.

You are thinking of normative moral relativism a more specific, more narrow flavour, based on the assumption that no side is ever objectively wrong, thus everyone should try and dance around each other. By default moral relativism is just acknowledgment, that your morality is not absolute. Right and wrong are very subjective terms, and only apply to the specific subset of people you share your morality with. Doesn't mean you shouldn't shiv the MF thats doing your homies disjustice, or that you should in any way compromise the values you hold.

Its about knowing and admitting, that what you are doing is your decision, based on your own will and values, and other people can, and will oppose you for it. And them doing so, doesn't make them objectively wrong or evil. Its just two different wills / perspectives clashing. How such conflicts are then resolved (discussion, combat, avoidance) is mostly irrelevant to the philosophy.

Moral relativism doesn't excuse or forgive anyone of anything. You own your actions, and the consequences that follow.

I don't think we're quite in disagreement on the morality part (even if our perspectives seem to be different). My issue is with the choice of words. Slapping someone with the "evil" descriptor is akin to using the word "heretic" non-ironically. Its a one word way to shoehorn someone into a narrow, antagonistic role because they don't match your world views. Its alienating, dehumanizing, and dismissive... basically the opposite of what the writers are trying to do with their villains in the game lately. People throw it around way too freely, both related to the story and real world scenarios.

[Alleo]

as for zenos he just wanted a play mate to fight with he wasnt evil or good he was chaotic neutral

Zenos is seen as a monster even by his own father, a man that is himself not an angel...Zenos goes out of his way to just randomly kill people that have done mistakes or that annoy him...

Yoshida himself has stated that they created Zenos as character that should be hated and he is put into the absolute evil category by him.

But like others have said there is not need to talk about this further. If someone says minor changes but then talks about joining the Ascians...

[KalinOrthos]

But I'm done I'm just done I'm so tired of self rightous jerks casting judgement on a opinion because the masses can't understand it. I'll just write my own story and one day learn to make a private server that I can put a real in depth story that doesn't force their morality on others.

"I'm going to make my own theme park! With blackjack! And hookers!"

Joking aside, yeah, OP is either an edgy high schooler who thinks the world JUST DOESN'T UNDERSTAND DAD ITS NOT A PHASE, or just never grew up from that point, grammatically, mentally, and emotionally. I'd pity him if his moral compass wasn't so completely broken.

[PyurBlue]

I mean, literally everything else about this discussion aside... the simple truth is that it is not technologically feasible to make an MMO that supports even two wildly divergent stories, much less a whole slew more.

It is possible, just not with FF14's way of story telling. It's too rigid. You can have a more sandbox MMO where the player has more agency and creates their own role in the world. That's honestly what I expect from MMO story telling, but it's not what SE wants from FF14.

Something that FF14 can do is give us elements of the story to control. They've already done this, though perhaps not in any major way. We did get to choose which Grand Company to side with, although this doesn't effect the story much except the initial GC quest location. SE could expand on choices like this. Ultimately they will connect back to the main story at the same point, but the details surround our character can change like they did in Shadowbringers depending on whether or not we did the CT raids.

[Gula]

It is possible, just not with FF14's way of story telling. It's too rigid.

It is a JRPG with a pre-written story as played by you. The same goes for just about every Final Fantasy. Sure you can have Cloud spend 5 hours snowboarding but at the end of the day he's gotta go after Sephiroth. You, the player, can select choices that sympathize more for the Garleans, but at the end of the Eorzean day, you are playing a Warrior of Light that will do what is right.

[PyurBlue]

It is a JRPG with a pre-written story as played by you. The same goes for just about every Final Fantasy. Sure you can have Cloud spend 5 hours snowboarding but at the end of the day he's gotta go after Sephiroth. You, the player, can select choices that sympathize more for the Garleans, but at the end of the Eorzean day, you are playing a Warrior of Light that will do what is right.

Right, that's how SE has decided to write the story. A more varied story isn't impossible to implement, but it wouldn't work with SE's game design. Their rigid form of story telling isn't totally incompatible with branching stories though, the branches would just have to be limited to details in the middle of the story rather than drastically changing the outcome.

[Gula]

Right, that's how SE has decided to write the story. A more varied story isn't impossible to implement, but it wouldn't work with SE's game design. Their rigid form of story telling isn't totally incompatible with branching stories though, the branches would just have to be limited to details in the middle of the story rather than drastically changing the outcome.

Square Enix didn't write it. Oda and Ishikawa wrote it with the occasional guest star as well as the writers in their department for side quests ect. I believe they should be properly credited because of what they write and how they write it is also different. Such as the differences between YoRHa, Ivalice and Crystal Tower.

[AngelCheese77]

Alas, unless we were to write our own stories (as some have pointed out) or make our own games, choices for our character are limited to what the writers make them.

Granted, there are quite a few places in the story where I would not have chosen any of the given responses, so I went with the "best" one for me. My issue is there are not enough emotions portrayed in cutscenes (not counting a "special" one in ShB if you say the right response before it). I don't know if this is because the Japanese culture isn't big on showing emotions like hugging or crying in public or not (could be wrong), but there are multiple times I just wanted to hug a character, or scream in someone's face ... not just frown or nod my head. Ugh

Also to note, there are some people who would like to help the "bad people" (remember that good and bad are subjective to those who are such. My "good" is someone else's "bad" let's say). I felt for Emet-Selch and what he way wanting to do, but not in the way he was doing it. I understood the reasonings behind the beast races summoning their Primals, but knew what they did was wrong because of the outcome and the chaos it caused.

Heroes to some are seen as villians to others.