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

[CrownySuccubus]

I…already said who it was. Again can’t get any more specific outright specifically naming names which i don’t like to do considering how bendable the tos is, but by saying regulars in this thread including myself idk how else to say it.

Pretty sure it's not against TOS to quote someone. Especially when you told me "it's easy" to find. Well,. I legit looked, and I didn't know what you were talking about. Even Brinne isn't sure who you're talking about. But if we're both gonna end this line of conversation confused, then that's fine, I guess.

I don't think even you know what argument you're trying to make at this point.

I'm pretty sure I was rather clear. Do you know what "Weasel Words" are, and why they're a bad way to argue?

----

Incidentally, I apparently need to tick "Democaracy" off the bingo card too.

[redheadturk]

Because there was no reason for you make such a statement other than as an oblique attempt undermine the argument, which I think you know.

I'm baffled as to why anyone in this thread would continue to try to do this when the very reason this thread exists, and why we're here, is to refute the notion that popularity or majority mindsets are automatically correct, or that seemingly minority opinions are unequivocally wrong for being just that.

I don't even think we are the minority. I think that we are the majority [as is demonstrated by Yoshi having to explain himself in a special live letter] but even as a majority the moment we step into the safe spaces of those who like the game we get downvote nuked into oblivion.

[tokinokanatae]

The reason for pointing out that an opinion is a minority one in this context isn't to say that it shouldn't be expressed, it's to allow for realistic expectations of how the complaints might be addressed.

If the majority of the playerbase has a positive response to Venat and Endwalker as a whole, this means that it's less likely for them to do a massive walkback of the narrative complaints the dissatisfied players have. Instead--as we've already seen--they might decide to allow more player flexibility in how to respond when Venat is mentioned, or they might decide to allow more positive responses to characters like Themis. Likewise, even though Garlemald subplots are unpopular overall, they might still have the budget to add a few sidequests for the minority that is interested in that part of the game.

It's when you begin to delude yourself that you are a majority opinion that you become the architect of your own frustration with the game. If you think there is a silent majority clamoring for a lavish cutscene repudiating Venat or another Garlemald expansion, then you'll just be more and more angry when you see SE "ignoring" the majority that only lives in your own head.

[Rulakir]

I don't and never did expect them to walk back the elements that bothered me in 6.0, in that respect I was pleasantly surprised by the Omega quest chain. These are the same people who know Minfilia isn't a popular character and yet there's not a single dialog option that will elicit a negative response to her, even "..." is positive. My hope is that they simply don't do this again in the future. My continuing to be a paid subscriber is tentative now based on whether I'm going to feel like I'm not ethically on the same page as the writers, which includes the continued glorification of Venat and condemnation of the Ancients.

I would've had a lot less issues with the narrative if 1) there had been actual nuance surrounding Venat and 2) they hadn't portrayed the Ancients as having somehow deserving of being sundered, like that was a kindness or favor to them. It's what sits most at ill with me.

The way they handle Pandemonium, considering I'd argue Elidibus is probably the most tragic character in the game (followed closely by Emet), and the troubling implication that Azem is aware of their sundered self from the future are also points of concern. I've said before, I consider Azem working with Venat in any knowing capacity to be character breaking to me as it's antithetical to the characterization of the Azem soul up until the point of trying to portray Venat as all things great and wonderful.

So, I'm basically in 'wait and see' mode. It's unfortunate because as a WoW refugee and relatively new player I thought I'd found a new home with FFXIV and, all things considered, I don't have gripes with the rest of the game which is why my posts are predominantly all story/lore related. However, the MSQ being a big part of it and being as immersive as it is it's definitely problematic if I continue to feel this disconnected from the story and character I'm playing, which only started in 6.0.

[Theodric]

From what I've seen, some people are very choosy when it comes to declaring the weight of what a 'minority opinion' actually is. Nor do I think there is any particular reliable measure of it in a community notorious for shouting down and sabotaging opposing opinions.

It's a lot like how the social media sphere is very loud and very active but often finds itself completely out of alignment with the views of regular people who have more important things to worry about than whatever social media is whipping itself up into a frenzy over on any given day.

Furthermore, Garlemald has a decent amount of fans. It just so happens that any time it is brought up those who dislike it feel compelled to ignore that personal tastes differ and they have to go off on a tangent each and every time it is mentioned even in passing. As such, all but the most stubborn of fans ceased to bother talking about it in public.

Something which - up until Shadowbringers - applied to the Ascians as well. Which ties rather well into this thread's purpose. By existing and remaining active more people emerge with the confidence to weigh in with their own thoughts and feedback.

Either way, I don't care much about 'managing expectations'. I'm putting my thoughts out there in the hope that they're taken on board. If not? So be it - there's other games to play if 6.2 does not show an improvement.

Some of us have been here before. World of Warcraft had a lot of players who insisted that any criticism of the direction of the story or other elements of the game came from a 'minority'. The result was that it went from having ten million active players at its height to fading into relative obscurity.

[CrownySuccubus]

Furthermore, Garlemald has a decent amount of fans. It just so happens that any time it is brought up those who dislike it feel compelled to ignore that personal tastes differ and they have to go off on a tangent each and every time it is mentioned even in passing. As such, all but the most stubborn of fans ceased to bother talking about it in public.

To be fair, along with G'raha Tia, you mention Garlemald "in passing" a lot. It's often one of the first things you mention in a thread, so there's no surprise that people respond to it.

[Theodric]

To be fair, along with G'raha Tia, you mention Garlemald "in passing" a lot. It's often one of the first things you mention in a thread, so there's no surprise that people respond to it.

I post about a great many things. I did just win a bet with a friend in regards to stating that, once again, a long post of mine would be trimmed down in order for a certain someone to focus almost exclusively on the mention of Garlemald, though.

As an aside, here's something else I talk about a lot - cats:

https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...Coon-minion%21

[KizuyaKatogami]

It's not okay, though. As myself, Brinne and Midareyukki just said, it's not a particularly strong argument regardless of whether you're criticizing the game itself or G'raha in particular.

Right but the thing is i’ve seen those same types of arguments said in here occasionally by those posters and many people in here in general. Which is why i bring up it seems the case is its okay to bring it up for x argument but not y.

[Brinne]

Right but the thing is i’ve seen those same types of arguments said in here occasionally by those posters and many people in here in general. Which is why i bring up it seems the case is its okay to bring it up for x argument but not y.

Please feel free to call me out if you catch me doing this! I am also human and sometimes cranky and don't fully think out what I write on the fly!

[KizuyaKatogami]

Okay? Some guys said some things somewhere at some time, I guess. Not sure how we're supposed to comment on that.

This coming from the person who linked someone else’s old posts?