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

[Brinne]

The part that precedes your post is huge here, I believe. The Ancients' plan after the summoning of Zodiark was to create a huge amount of life purely to sacrifice it to Zodiark in order to bring back their initially sacrificed brethren. THAT would be genocide, and on a scale that makes the remaining half of the population post-Zodiark-summoning look like a grain of sand in comparison. The simple reality is that a lot of people were going to die no matter what happened. Venat chose to sacrifice the smaller number in order to save the significantly greater amount of life that would have been killed had she not done what she did.

Venat sundered everything, including the would-be sacrifices. "That light split the world, and every life upon it." The argument she had to sacrifice the Ancients to save the "new life" doesn't work because she condemned the new life in the exact same way that she did to the Ancients.

Her goal was never to defend or protect the sacrifices. It was pressing an ideological point, preventing her fellow Ancients whom she loved so much from going down the "path of weakness," and, being generous, her chosen strategy to hope that some form of life would exist in the future. Not anything living in the world at the moment of the Sundering. She killed them all. In this way, she certainly was "the light of the future."

To put it bluntly: quoting the game, the Ancients were willing to sacrifice "a portion of the new life" if it meant they could save their people trapped within Zodiark. Meanwhile, Venat was willing to sacrifice every single life on the planet if it meant she could kill the Ancients, too.

[Jagick]

*Big Snip! Except...*
(Going to note, again, that Hydaelyn tempering makes EW make sense.)

This reminds me of the Reaper indoctrination fan theory to try to explain the god awful ending to Mass Effect 3. It was a great theory but Bioware was pissed and petty so they shot it down. I also found myself thinking we're probably tempered by Hydaelyn way back the earlier expansions. But of course I'm sure that it's not that, that would make too much sense. As such, I expect SE to deny that as well, because then they would have to outright admit Hydaelyn was manipulating and using us every step of the way.

[SentioftheHoukai]

Both of y'all are way too relevant.

Both of y'all are way too relevant. REMIX

One more point to add to all this, the Warrior of Light is ostensibly the author of the newly implemented "Unending Codex". Specifically, lore-wise its a book/diary we're writing at the urging of our very own Tataru Taru recording all the notables and deeds of the Star that is Eitherys (not that the friendly neighborhood WoL would ever let their precious Sundered call it that!).

Anyway, you know what they say. "History is written by the victors."

We are the victors of this conflict, the Ancients are the ultimate losers. Considering some of the things stated in said Codex (Hydaelyn being the Will of the Star, Hydaelyn being the one who forestalled the Final Days, Venat being a "woman who loved all life everywhere", etc.) its abundantly clear how we're intended to feel about her, in the end. We, the Warrior of Light, Saviour of the Star, Protagonist-kun of this MMORPG are literally writing the Ancients and their deeds out of Eitherys' history.

So much for all of our broken promises of "Remembering them. Remembering that they once lived." For a supreme deity that supposedly didn't consider herself a goddess, Hydaelyn's PR department sure is profiting off the royalties of the Mythos the Sundered built off of her. Even after her very death, we retain every Blessing she ever gave us. Denying all logic and lore in game. Eitherys' denizens have no respect for those who came before, how can they be trusted with the fates and welfare of those who come after?

[Vyrerus]

Venat chose to sacrifice the smaller number in order to save the significantly greater amount of life that would have been killed had she not done what she did.

Venat lowered the life expectancy of everything on Etheirys, including the Souls not yet vested in flesh, by several orders of magnitude. She then split it all into 14 distinct lives, introducing death at 14 times the new life expectancy for everything, down to the smallest insect. In your inane reinvention of the trolley problem, she kept her finger off the button.

As for what you refer to as an absolutist comment that serves no purpose, the entire post I responded to was an absolutist take with regards to social constructs. It pointed out the absolute absurdity inherent in that take. You might want to get your nose checked out.

[Theodric]

A good test as to whether the cost of something is acceptable or not is to inflict it upon the protagonists and everything around them. If they wouldn't stand for it, then there's no reason for anybody else to do so either. We already know that if someone came to the Scions and said that the people of Limsa Lominsa needed to die in order to stop a greater threat then they would stop at nothing to find a third way forward and fiercely oppose such a plan.

Of course, quite often the very same people who defend Venat and like the Scions mysteriously are firmly against the idea of any meaningful harm befalling their favourite characters. Funny, that. They're perfectly happy to demand that everything else is inflicted with disproportionate suffering and trauma, though - especially if it's a character or faction that they detest!

[Lauront]

Venat lowered the life expectancy of everything on Etheirys, including the Souls not yet vested in flesh, by several orders of magnitude. She then split it all into 14 distinct lives, introducing death at 14 times the new life expectancy for everything, down to the smallest insect. In your inane reinvention of the trolley problem, she kept her finger off the button.

As for what you refer to as an absolutist comment that serves no purpose, the entire post I responded to was an absolutist take with regards to social constructs. It pointed out the absolute absurdity inherent in that take. You might want to get your nose checked out.

On top of this, she deliberately attempts to spare Emet, knowing how that will go - and if she thought that might turn out differently, observed reality would inform her otherwise in short order. That, plus all the worlds lost in the time it took to eventually reach the WoL's era, is an immeasurable loss of life and infliction of suffering, and it's not like the sundered (generally) have some deep, abiding respect for other lives - definitely not even the kind the ancients (generally) had for their living creations; they are more prone to vices like war, which even involves life forms similar to themselves, and will use beings such as animals, arcane entities etc. as and when they please, to meet their ends. Certainly, as far as Hermes's "test" was concerned, he considered them to have failed it as well - to the extent that that "test" was worth anything. The best defence Yoshi could advance of her is a desire to try keep the timeline consistent, because it is far from clear that all she did was 'necessary' in any absolute sense, as opposed to necessitated by the pathway she committed herself to. How would things have ended, had she been candid with her people, which is the least she owed them?

Instead, we get lukewarm defences comparing her to SHB Emet-Selch and "I guess she's an ancient huh".

[Rulakir]

This reminds me of the Reaper indoctrination fan theory to try to explain the god awful ending to Mass Effect 3. It was a great theory but Bioware was pissed and petty so they shot it down. I also found myself thinking we're probably tempered by Hydaelyn way back the earlier expansions. But of course I'm sure that it's not that, that would make too much sense. As such, I expect SE to deny that as well, because then they would have to outright admit Hydaelyn was manipulating and using us every step of the way.

Hydaelyn, of course, doesn't have any of the downsides of being a primal.

By the way, why you no join our critically acclaimed discord? :P

[Jagick]

Hydaelyn, of course, doesn't have any of the downsides of being a primal.

By the way, why you no join our critically acclaimed discord? :P

I usually tend to be a person that lurks and reads a lot but doesn't actively converse, at least not often, and someone mentioned that being active was a requirement of said server. Seems better for me to just lurk this thread and chime in every now and then!

[Lauront]

It's not a requirement as such; we just put in place a reception area as some people were joining and then lurking without ever saying so much as a hello.

[Striker44]

Venat lowered the life expectancy of everything on Etheirys, including the Souls not yet vested in flesh, by several orders of magnitude. She then split it all into 14 distinct lives, introducing death at 14 times the new life expectancy for everything, down to the smallest insect. In your inane reinvention of the trolley problem, she kept her finger off the button.

As for what you refer to as an absolutist comment that serves no purpose, the entire post I responded to was an absolutist take with regards to social constructs. It pointed out the absolute absurdity inherent in that take. You might want to get your nose checked out.

And a "reduced" lifespan is still much better than an enormous number of people with no lifespan at all because they were murdered as a sacrifice. I'm guessing you ignored my actual point because you realize you can't refute it. Thanks for playing