The Reasoning behind The Sundering? (*6.0 Endwalker Spoilers*)

[MagiusNecros]

Venat/Hydaelyn is a Mary Sue. Her reasoning was if those that attain perfection just want to die then everyone must be unable to attain perfection but always strive for it. While Zodiark was presented as a choice. The sundering caused by Venat was not. She chose that for everyone without even communicating that was what was going to happen. And only a select few were able to avoid it. Elidibus, Hades, Lahabrea.

I find it amusing that Venat/Hydaelyn is always praised for her actions and never reprimanded for them save for the WoL. Because while they say Hydaelyn never tempered anyone I feel that a majority of Eorzeans are tempered to Hydaelyn but not in the typical sense. As to them Hydaelyn never does anything wrong.

[Necrotica]

Venat also decides that 14 worlds full of death and suffering for millenia was better than a 1 time sacrifice of a large amount of life to restore ancient society and have Zodiark as a permanent shield against Metion.

But she KNEW that since Hermes was sad that all of their society was flawed and did not deserve to exist.

[Ilenya]

There's no proof that Zodiark was a permanent solution, though. It's entirely possible that Meteion could have found and affected it eventually, when her Song was that overpowering.

There was also the potential risk of basically Ra-La-ing themselves as sacrifices to Zodiark, but I find that as a whole unlikely.

[Lersayil]

There's no proof that Zodiark was a permanent solution, though. It's entirely possible that Meteion could have found and affected it eventually, when her Song was that overpowering.

There was also the potential risk of basically Ra-La-ing themselves as sacrifices to Zodiark, but I find that as a whole unlikely.

Its very clear that Zodiark was not a permanent solution, as Meteion herself states she had the long term alternative plan of hastening the heat death of the universe. Still, Zodiark turned out to be a very long term stopgap for her immediate threat, and Venat was fully aware of this before committing to her plan. We know of at least twelve thousand years or so of which we suffered no adverse effects from Meteion.

I think its safe to assume that a fully informed and committed Ancient society would've used this time much more productively to come up with a Meteion countermeasure, given what the Sundered did with that same time (even accounting for Ascian meddling).

[Cilia]

The point on perfection wasn't that people should strive for it, but that they shouldn't, because it's an impossible concept. Strive to make the best of what you have, to be better than anything that came before you, but not perfect. Never perfect.

[The Ancients] learned all there is to learn about the nature of sentient life and the fates of the stars themselves.
Once a civilization has fulfilled the basic requirements for survival, it will inevitably seek to eliminate all forms of negativity and achieve perfection.
And therein lies its folly...and its downfall.
For perfection is an unattainable ideal. 'Tis the paradox of the immaculate carrot.
Yet civilizations since time immemorial have deemed the pursuit of perfection as “progress.” They pay no heed to the costs incurred in their futile quest, and all too often become the architects of their own demise, their dreams forever unfulfilled.
What, then, is the alternative? The answer lies in knowing that our existence can never be perfect. To be content with what we have and make the most of it.

Whether you agree with it or not, that's the stance the story takes on civilizations and perfection.

[Lersayil]

The point on perfection wasn't that people should strive for it, but that they shouldn't, because it's an impossible concept. Strive to make the best of what you have, to be better than anything that came before you, but not perfect. Never perfect.



Whether you agree with it or not, that's the stance the story takes on civilizations and perfection.

While I don't disagree that that is a message the story implies, I would like to point out that you quoted a very biased source, being a creation of Venat itself.

[Necrotica]

And like our own society, even if you do not have real threats to survival, you can simulate them for enjoyment. Live in a perfect world? No need to worry about food or shelter? Have whatever you want? Play some games. Log in to an MMO and pretend you are in a world on the brink of destruction and get to save it!

The whole premise that a perfect society will inevitably collapse is nonsense in my view. Aside from a few crazies like Hermes, seems the Ancients were quite content CREATING NEW LIFE. Like holy crap that must have been like playing Spore on steroids. It engaged thought, imagination, and provided struggle as they tried to get them working properly.

And as far as Metion speeding up the heat death of the universe...I somewhat suspect Etheirys' own sun would burn out ending all life LONG before that became an issue for them. Metion was right in that all things will die. Until they come back with the next big bang. And then heat death. Then another big bang, and so on and so on and on. But that is interesting, not depressing.

[Cilia]

While I don't disagree that that is a message the story implies, I would like to point out that you quoted a very biased source, being a creation of Venat itself.

The Ancients' casual disregard for the lives of their creations, the Allagans' cruel experimentation on others to alleviate their boredom, and the vast majority of Ultima Thule all serve to drive it home. Cookingway just states it plainly.

Besides which, the Ascians are just as biased in their assertion that Amaurotine civilization was perfect.

And like our own society, even if you do not have real threats to survival, you can simulate them for enjoyment. Live in a perfect world? No need to worry about food or shelter? Have whatever you want? Play some games. Log in to an MMO and pretend you are in a world on the brink of destruction and get to save it!

The whole premise that a perfect society will inevitably collapse is nonsense in my view. Aside from a few crazies like Hermes, seems the Ancients were quite content CREATING NEW LIFE. Like holy crap that must have been like playing Spore on steroids. It engaged thought, imagination, and provided struggle as they tried to get them working properly.

And as far as Metion speeding up the heat death of the universe...I somewhat suspect Etheirys' own sun would burn out ending all life LONG before that became an issue for them. Metion was right in that all things will die. Until they come back with the next big bang. And then heat death. Then another big bang, and so on and so on and on. But that is interesting, not depressing.

Simulation is rarely as stimulating as the real deal. With nothing to lose, it's a hollow achievement at the end of the day. That's part of Zenos' whole shtick; he only feels alive fighting the PC because nothing else requires him to gamble his life. Like him or not, there's point to his character.

Perfection is an impossible concept. If your civilization cannot make all of its citizens happy all the time, and possess an answer for any and all threats that could endanger it or said citizens' happiness, is it really perfect? You cannot know the future and there are an infinite number of ways a civilization can fall, ergo there is no such thing as a perfect civilization. Even if you did make such a civilization... what then? That's it. There's no more room for imagination, or advancement, or improvement. A "perfect" civilization can no longer advance, and will thus stagnate until it falls apart from the inside... just like Allag.

(For the record there is a disconnected floating island on Elpis, the Chthonic Horns, where Ancients did research without creation magicks. I find that very comforting.)

We can only guess how long it would have taken Meteion to cause the heat death of the universe, but the point is Zodiark could not protect them forever. The sun would die before she got through, maybe, but they could always just do an exodus like Hydaelyn had planned. (Might mean abandoning the souls in Zodiark since he's the will of the star, but you gotta do what you gotta do.) Following the Big Bang with another Big Bang would require an antithetical Big Crunch, which isn't supported by most modern science. (And yes, I'm aware this is fiction, but the heat death of the universe is an idea derived from modern science.)

[Necrotica]

So shouldn't we double sunder the planets to stop our society from becoming like the Ancients? And then Triple sunder those sundered worlds just to be even more safe?

Society is going to advance. What in the heck was Venat trying to accomplish? She very specifically left Zodiark's shield in place. She understood that was a good thing. She was not against the aether shield.

She was against life being sacrificed for the sake of other lives being improved. So guessing she was vegan. Or really more like Peta. I am going to kill all these mortals in a different way so you can't kill them for your own benefit.

[Lersayil]

*snip*

Something I take issue with is the definition of perfection. The game argues against eliminating any and all negatives in society including feelings. A society without any adversity will probably stagnate and fall. But then, is that society actually perfect if it cant sustain itself? Leaving low level adversity, just enough to engage thought doesn't have to be as affective as actual real suffering and major societal issues. It just has to be engaging enough so society can push on existing. This is the train of thought the game only partially covers. I would argue that the Ultima Thule was the perfect example of imperfect societies. They were all flawed in their own perceived perfection, and the Scions reject them as such. Could you argue with their train of thought if it was actually perfect?

Venats answer to the problem of inevitable strive for perfection wasn't an answer at all. It just pushed the world back a couple thousand years in progress. It was avoiding the problem, not facing it. Worse, it was denying a whole race of people to face the problem, to make an informed decision, and to possibly come up with a solution (or die trying).