What's the point with that quite lackluster story in Endwalker?

[BaconBits]

Varis died just to be a dungeon boss instead of the penultimate boss of a potential Garlean themed expac.

This some bs.

[Teraq]

This is it this is my whole post

[Theodric]

Well, that's disappointing. So as expected we did miss out on a Garlemald focused expansion. The way in which Hermes is described is utterly bizarre as well. I also note that they're being entirely non-committal to the idea of the Ancients being fated to follow the path shown within the Dead Ends. They keep using the term 'might have' instead of 'would have' which, of course, means it would not be a certainty.

Ishikawa, at least, seems to 'get it'. I can't say I'm fond of Yoshi-P's takes on many fronts in that interview. No, Hermes and Venat seeking to inflict genocide upon their own race isn't the same as Emet-Selch seeking to reverse that genocide when it was inflicted upon his people with no forewarning. Nor is it a fair 'test' in any rational, logical capacity. Especially when we know that the Ancients and beings forged through Creation magic are most certainly not the same.

I'm losing count of how many times Yoshi-P confessed to 'crying' over something in the game. Moenbryda had closure back in ARR and not everybody even liked her, so pushing her to the forefront yet again felt strange to me. I like Jullus, though I'm tired of this 'everybody's crying and screaming over every little thing' approach to the game's story.

I'm still not seeing why we missed out on a Garlemald focused expansion. We could have then gotten proper closure for that aspect of the story and then had the Hydaelyn and Zodiark/Ancients arcs conclude in the following expansion.

Meh.

[Lauront]

Well, that's disappointing. So as expected we did miss out on a Garlemald focused expansion. The way in which Hermes is described is utterly bizarre as well. I also note that they're being entirely non-committal to the idea of the Ancients being fated to follow the path shown within the Dead Ends. They keep using the term 'might have' instead of 'would have' which, of course, means it would not be a certainty.

Ishikawa, at least, seems to 'get it'. I can't say I'm fond of Yoshi-P's takes on many fronts in that interview. No, Hermes and Venat seeking to inflict genocide upon their own race isn't the same as Emet-Selch seeking to reverse that genocide when it was inflicted upon his people with no forewarning. Nor is it a fair 'test' in any rational, logical capacity. Especially when we know that the Ancients and beings forged through Creation magic are most certainly not the same.

I'm losing count of how many times Yoshi-P confessed to 'crying' over something in the game. Moenbryda had closure back in ARR and not everybody even liked her, so pushing her to the forefront yet again felt strange to me. I like Jullus, though I'm tired of this 'everybody's crying and screaming over every little thing' approach to the game's story.

I'm still not seeing why we missed out on a Garlemald focused expansion. We could have then gotten proper closure for that aspect of the story and then had the Hydaelyn and Zodiark/Ancients arcs conclude in the following expansion.

Meh.

Indeed. To say I was unimpressed is an understatement. Ishikawa at least articulates the reasons as to why it shouldn't really be "surprising" to Yoshi-P that people don't resonate with Hermes in the way they do with Emet-Selch. He introduces some strawman reason for forgiving Emet-Selch, that I have seen very few people invoke. No, the reason people find him sympathetic is his people survived the Final Days, only to see their world and existences torn apart and with him and two others with absolutely no understanding of why this was done, left to clean up this mess through gruelling methods. Moreover, they credit Hermes with providing knowledge of the Plenty - great, now how about the part where, through his spite-driven test, he tries to obscure all knowledge of this knowing what Meteion would proceed to do? The fact that this could've been spun out into two separate expansions is very much evident. By the sounds of it a lot of re-writes were involved.

This doesn't exactly instil much confidence in FF16 or the story going forward, since the problem appears to be less so Ishikawa, more so Yoshi.

[Theodric]

Varis really was done dirty. I was never under the impression that every last little thing was planned out in advance but...can we get a shift in development so that someone who actually notes plot hooks like Regula's last words is in charge of writing the story? Please?

[Kyohei]

Eh, well the interview just confirms what I thought if anything. Having to rewrite it because no agreements were reached is precisely what I theorised happened when playing msq and seeing the many inconsistencies.

[Yencat]

A FFX reference as the final boss of an expansion? Nah, I think they made the right call on that part at least.

Hopefully they'll still do something else with Garlemald though.

[aveyond-dreams]

A FFX reference as the final boss of an expansion? Nah, I think they made the right call on that part at least.

Hopefully they'll still do something else with Garlemald though.

They literally had us fight the Knights of the Round from FFVII in Heavensward. The response was overwhelmingly positive at the time. Doubtless the same would have occurred if we fought Varis in the form of Anima, who was more respected as an antagonist than Thordan ever was.

[Theodric]

So, with the first story arc concluding with shaming those who decide to not just roll over and die in response to the attempted genocide of their people what are your bets for the next story?

My prediction is that, under Alphinaud's leadership, each nation will be pressured into joining a new organisation known as the Etheirys Economic Forum. Despite widely considered out of touch by the very people that the organisation claims to represent criticism of any of Alphinaud's policies is branded 'misinformation' and the player character is sent to threaten or quietly eliminate anyone who poses a threat to Alphinaud's ultimate goal.

Naturally, due to the sheer scale of the efforts to unite the world under one banner resources are strained but never fear, for even as G'raha sits around eating burgers and Y'shtola indulges in fine wine...the average citizen is stripped of any and all assets that they own, locked up in a small box-like home and force fed insects as they clap and cheer on command to re-runs of the latest speech regarding a 'better tomorrow'.

At some point an antagonist who values freedom is introduced to the story. Seeking to restore society to a point where regular people were allowed to own belongings and consume something other than insects as part of their daily diet, the character succeeds at liberating a handful of nations before ultimately being confronted and put down at Alphinaud's command.

In an interview released shortly after the patch in question, Yoshi-P laments the fact that players sympathise with the character who values freedom over the character seeking to enforce his vision for a 'better tomorrow'.

[Theodric]

At this point it just seems like anyone who enjoyed the story elements of ARR and HW is being thrown under the bus. The finale didn't feel like a proper ending on many fronts and where the game seemed to reward attention to detail it now seems to neglect players who bother to dig beneath the surface and pay attention to the subtle elements.

I'm not sure where they're getting their feedback from, either. People have been doing deep dives into the game's lore for quite some time yet now it seems like any feedback they do get is heavily filtered and entirely limited to what people are posting on Twitter and Reddit. Most of the 'fanservice' certainly reflects that sort of style, too.

Honestly, it was the Garleans and Ascians who hooked me the most back in the days of ARR and HW. I wanted to see where their respective stories would go and the game opted to handle both in a very strange manner.