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

[Lauront]

As someone who generally enjoys darker and more morally grey stories, it isn't so much the lack of a happy ending for the Ancients that bothered me so much as the sheer lack of nuance and blame directed at the character responsible for their downfall and destruction. In a game that ordinarily handles heavy topics with a bit more tact, it simply feels incredibly out of place for Venat to be presented in the way that Endwalker portrayed.

[...]

So I have to admit, I was very baffled by the stark contrast between how the Garleans were handled compared to the Ancients. Personally if it wasn't for the Garlean conclusion being better than the Ancient's finale then I would have very likely quit. The only reason I'm giving 6.1 a fair chance is because there is a good story at times mixed in with the rest of Endwalker.

Similarly here.

Where my issue arose was that there never was any justice for them. Never, after being clearly affected by the Ancients and their struggle, did the WoL ever question the person who singlehandedly ended them (Got our one dialogue option and a fat load of good that did). I genuinely think Meteion was a scapegoat to avoid this. No matter how noble Venat's intentions were, no matter how deep her guilt, I simply refuse to believe our character would nod and smile at her, a person who has done so much bad and has never answered for any of it. If the WoL opposes Emet-selch despite understanding his reasoning, why is this treatment not given to the even more dubious person? The initial aggressor? I understand not outright attacking her, because she isn't acting against Sundered life, but anything that isn't this mom-mentor nonsense they tried to sell me. I will never understand that...

But going from Shadowbringers, my feelings were basically exactly as you described. I loved the Ancients, I very much wanted to save them, but still saw it as the narratively correct choice, the choice that reflected writing integrity, so to speak, would be to leave the situation as it was, in all of its bittersweet catharsis. What happened to the Ancients was absolutely terrible, absolutely senseless, and basically irreversible, but that small, precious glint of compassion and understanding between Emet-Selch and the WoL managed to slide through the cracks nonetheless. The understanding that it was terrible and senseless and in a perfect world, we could save both, as both deserved to be saved. Those are the small victories people can grasp from the cold, indifferent nature of the universe that resonate with me - even as things are terrible and unjust and unfair, making those small spaces for kindness and understanding.

[...]

That was how I felt from 5.0, in all my admiration of it. Then the dissonance and injustice flowing from Endwalker's approach to Hydaelyn and the Ancients broke my brain and now I am quietly yet shamelessly internally clamoring for a chance to actually save them, whether through further time travel nonsense or however. Handwave it with more dynamis, I don't care! The writing integrity that mattered to me has already been largely thrown out the window by how 6.0 followed it up, so screw it, give me all the self-indulgent garbage now! I know the story, however the tone might change in response to criticism, will never concede Venat not being a good person, so I want my damn junk food consolation prize! This is what I have been reduced to.

In fairness, although I am an Ascian fan to the extent that I'd like to have seen the rejoinings completed to rectify the huge injustice perpetrated on the ancient world, I was alright with the resolution in SHB because I wasn't really expecting them to 1) spring more AUs/time travel or 2) do away with with the current state of the world via the rejoinings, even if a bloodless method of completing them were to be found (not without another 2.0, anyway.) Plus some manner of reconciliation occurred between Emet-Selch and the WoL - Elidibus's predicament was a little more dire in 5.3 but he got a good send off at least. There was also the possibility that they'd lean more into the WoL's past shard, Azem, and any role they had in assisting the 3 unsundered escape the Sundering (until it turns out Venat did that...), and perhaps finally de-couple the WoL from Hydaelyn, but yes, I thought the position SHB settled on was pretty good for the reasons both of you mention.

I agree that what makes it a really bitter pill to swallow is how they portray Venat in-game and how they close off any negative character responses to her, whatever the true position reflected in the game/interviews. But then to go and introduce yet more time travel, but use it as a time loop so as to avoid too much scrutiny around Venat's actions, rather than as an opportunity as an AU to explore the ancient world more and see how its fate if it avoided the sundering, was just adding salt to the wound...

I'm not actively clamouring for an AU but since they seem to go to so much effort, even if just narratively, to "comfort" fans of the protagonists - including the AU Ironworks - yes, I can't say I'd oppose one forming to explore the ancient world more.

[Rulakir]

And then, ironically, they give us an actual portal to the past we can waltz around into whenever... but nothing can ever, ever be changed, okay?

This is the problem. Clarifying my position, the issue is the time travel combined with going from an AU in ShB to a paradox loop in EW. Had I been asked if I was interested in visiting the past with the caveat that I would not be able to change anything I would've said no. As much as I love Emet and Hythlodaeus, I would not have considered it worth it. My only hope/expectation in EW were Echo flashbacks, which I would've preferred because I wanted to see things from an Azem first person POV not as a 'familiar'.

It's the time travel that opened up a whole can of worms. Worse because our actions did matter. Y'all want to talk about injustice? How about the fact that it made the WoL an accomplice to Venat and the sundering as a result of this?

No matter how noble Venat's intentions were, no matter how deep her guilt, I simply refuse to believe our character would nod and smile at her, a person who has done so much bad and has never answered for any of it.

This is a contributing factor into why EW left me feeling unsatisfied.

I'm not actively clamouring for an AU but since they seem to go to so much effort, even if just narratively, to "comfort" fans of the protagonists - including the AU Ironworks - yes, I can't say I'd oppose one forming to explore the ancient world more.

Exactly. When it's the protagonists AUs are fine, when it's the antagonists suddenly time travel can only be in loops.

Adding to my unsatisfied feelings are, once again, the Scions invoke nothing in the way of costs. Thancred even jokes in Ultima Thule that he doesn't have a scar to brag about which, while meant in that context, still applies to the EW journey as a whole. Contrast that to a civilization that was completely eradicated with the added insult that it was 'for the best'.

I've been evaluating my feelings towards FFXIV as a whole because if I remove Ishgard and anything involving the Ascians from the equation there isn't much else I've found of interest save for some parts of the east in SB. Plus, as I was telling Theodric, if I'm not invested in the same characters the writers are am I not doomed to perpetual disappointment? It's bad enough that, like Lurina said (I miss her), EW felt like I wasn't ethically on the same page as the writers. It doesn't inspire confidence going into future storylines.

The Elpis finale is little more than a stylistic and false depiction of the events that took place in a desperate attempt to deflect attention away from Venat being the one to set all the tragic events in the setting into motion.

I'm convinced that cutscene was constructed to evoke feelings of pity for Venat to manipulate viewers into forgiving her.

[aveyond-dreams]

Exactly. When it's the protagonists AUs are fine, when it's the antagonists suddenly time travel can only be in loops.

Adding to my unsatisfied feelings are, once again, the Scions invoke nothing in the way of costs. Thancred even jokes in Ultima Thule that he doesn't have a scar to brag about which, while meant in that context, still applies to the EW journey as a whole. Contrast that to a civilization that was completely eradicated with the added insult that it was 'for the best'.

I've been evaluating my feelings towards FFXIV as a whole because if I remove Ishgard and anything involving the Ascians from the equation there isn't much else I've found of interest save for some parts of the east in SB. Plus, as I was telling Theodric, if I'm not invested in the same characters the writers are am I not doomed to perpetual disappointment? It's bad enough that, like Lurina said (I miss her), EW felt like I wasn't ethically on the same page as the writers. It doesn't inspire confidence going into future storylines.

At present I still believe that Stranger of Paradise handled not only time travel better but actually had the sacrifices made by the main party mean something significant. In Endwalker we had an admittedly beloved fanservice zone that then proceeded to cause innumerable problems and implications, culminating in an extremely weak final zone that once more, reads like a fanfic of comfort characters than a full-fledged story.

I understand that perhaps due to global events there may have been a low mood at the time of writing that made it difficult to part ways with key characters, however the recent interview leads me to believe that this wasn't the original plan and that talented writers ended up having to write plot points that they didn't want to do initially. How is one of the lead writers fully aware that players will hate a certain character, and then is told to include them in the story anyway? This does not make sense.

As for me, were it not for Ishgard introducing much-needed traditional fantasy elements into this game, there is little chance I would have stuck around past level 30. The starter nations of FFXIV are comparatively less interesting than their FFXI counterparts. Though I initially started in Windurst back then, San d'Oria became my eventual home in that game, and Ishgard fills that space for me in FFXIV. The aesthetics of the Garlemald Empire and the personalities of its characters were also quite interesting, and as we drew nearer to Shadowbringers I began to find the Ascians more interesting.

However, Garlemald is now in ruins, the Ascians have no further role to play in the main story, Ishgard's plot points are resolved, and parts of the community seem convinced that the remaining regions of the world map *must* draw directly from their real world geographic counterparts or else it goes against the representation of that real world region. How am I supposed to stick around for a Meracydia expansion that takes us to fantasy Australia or Africa, when that isn't what the majority of fantasy-lovers want to visit in terms of setting? Doubly so when the story would inevitably revolve around more "liberation!" headed by the Scions.


Simply put, I came for castles, dragons, and interesting villains/empires. I am not here to be preached to about morals and despair via someone else's comfort characters.

[Lauront]

However, Garlemald is now in ruins, the Ascians have no further role to play in the main story, Ishgard's plot points are resolved, and parts of the community seem convinced that the remaining regions of the world map *must* draw directly from their real world geographic counterparts or else it goes against the representation of that real world region. How am I supposed to stick around for a Meracydia expansion that takes us to fantasy Australia or Africa, when that isn't what the majority of fantasy-lovers want to visit in terms of setting? Doubly so when the story would inevitably revolve around more "liberation!" headed by the Scions.


Simply put, I came for castles, dragons, and interesting villains/empires. I am not here to be preached to about morals and despair via someone else's comfort characters.

Hear hear! I'm of the same mind on that.

She didn't need to show anyone else's past to Emet-Selch. The main thing she needed to show them was the scene in the room where everything was explained and what happened next; which she was very much present for and thus would have known exactly where to take them to tap into the aetherical remnants for viewing the past events. She knew that Emet-Selch and Hythlodaeus had been wandering around with us down below for at least a day so at that point the many researchers that had seen and spoken with us could have helped with advising Emet-Selch and Hythlodaeus on locations they had seen us in together. It's not a plot hole, it's a plot crater.

And they didn't ask to see our memories of Eorzea or the First when we were telling them everything the first time, I doubt they'd need them to be willing to accept the story the second time around.

One of their biggest mistakes of that zone was taking the time to teach us how everyone could use the environment to see past events and then trying to use memory wiping as an effective plot device 30 minutes later.

Indeed, plus in addition to that there were plenty of witnesses to other incidents, such as those surrounding Hermes's behaviour and his outbursts.

[Theodric]

Simply put, I came for castles, dragons, and interesting villains/empires. I am not here to be preached to about morals and despair via someone else's comfort characters.

Likewise. My reaction to the Scions and the majority of the city state leaders can be summed up by this rather excellent quote:



I've played enough JRPG's over the years to know full well what sort of fun and interesting character tropes can be put into play. Which begs the question - why is it only the antagonists and villains who seem to have compelling motives, high stakes and sympathetic backstories? Even comparing the cast of the typical single player Final Fantasy game, the protagonists were allowed to have flaws, make mistakes and endure meaningful losses.

FFXIV seems to be following a lazy and predictable pattern where anything even remotely gritty or interesting is eroded away. Primals are no longer a threat since there's a cure for Tempering. Limsa is no longer engaging in piracy. There's no longer any border disputes or threats of invasion. No inquisitors left in Ishgard.

I just don't know why the game is so scared to be bold, to allow some characters who aren't perfect to remain that way and at the forefront. I'm tired of our companions always agreeing with one another or sucking up to the player's self insert.

We desperately need some variety. A solid rival figure who isn't a complete psychopath.

[Rulakir]

I understand that perhaps due to global events there may have been a low mood at the time of writing that made it difficult to part ways with key characters, however the recent interview leads me to believe that this wasn't the original plan and that talented writers ended up having to write plot points that they didn't want to do initially.

This seems to be a growing sentiment. I can't help but wonder what we would've gotten without covid, but I also suspect there's more to the meddling than that.

How am I supposed to stick around for a Meracydia expansion that takes us to fantasy Australia or Africa, when that isn't what the majority of fantasy-lovers want to visit in terms of setting?

I don't know what 'fantasy Australia' is supposed to look like. :P Africa could be cool, it's certainly been done before (Quest for Glory 3: Wages of War) and we do lack for a proper Egyptian aesthetic.

Simply put, I came for castles, dragons, and interesting villains/empires. I am not here to be preached to about morals and despair via someone else's comfort characters.

Amen. I'm hoping the preachiness of EW is a one and done.

[PawPaw]

Amen. I'm hoping the preachiness of EW is a one and done.

Uhhh, isn't the next theme "values" or something? I'd say find your spot in a pew now because the preachiness has probably only just begun.

[CrownySuccubus]

This seems to be a growing sentiment. I can't help but wonder what we would've gotten without covid, but I also suspect there's more to the meddling than that.



I don't know what 'fantasy Australia' is supposed to look like. :P Africa could be cool, it's certainly been done before (Quest for Glory 3: Wages of War) and we do lack for a proper Egyptian aesthetic.





Amen. I'm hoping the preachiness of EW is a one and done.

I think there's a lot of misunderstanding about how much potential fantasy Africa could have. As most probably know, Africa is a huge continent with vastly different kinds of civilizations and levels of society. Unfortunately, it's also been the subject of centuries of misinformation, both unintentional and malicious.

For example, there's a lot of overlap between the ancient world and many African nations. The Greeks, Roman and Egyptian societies regularly had contact and trade with sub-Saharan African nations. The Greek hero Perseus married Andromeda, queen of what the Greeks called Aethiopia. We don't know if this was the same as modern day Ethiopia, but it was somewhere within the same ballpark. To the Greeks, Aethiopia was sort of a catch-all term for most areas south of Egypt. But we do know it was within the sub-Saharan portion of the continent because the term Aethiopia specifically meant "Dark Skin".

Even within the middle ages, there were lots of rich African nations with wealth, power and military might on par with the mostly Christianized Europe. We know this because there were accounts of kings like Mansa Musa -- possibly the richest man who ever lived, in terms of wealth inequality. Mansa Musa traveled from Africa to Mecca spending so much gold that he single-handedly destroyed the European economy for years. They had knights and guards that seemed even more impressive and disciplined than most seen in Europe at the time.

Naturally, not ALL of Africa was like this...but again, it's a big continent. Similarly, not every place in Europe and Asia were as prosperous and civilized as Rome, Greece or China. FFXIV's fantasy Rome is a technologically superior polar state. Its fantasy Greece is an ancient, even-MORE-advanced utopia filled with giant wizards. They can do literally ANYTHING they want with a fantasy Africa.

[aveyond-dreams]

This still does nothing to fundamentally solve the issue that I prefer a European/Asian setting over an African or American continent one. I do not want to play a game in the setting depicted in that image. This is the picture that sold me on Stranger of Paradise, with Castle Cornelia rivalling even Ishgard in terms of beauty and iconicness:

[CrownySuccubus]

This still does nothing to fundamentally solve the issue that I prefer a European/Asian setting over an African or American continent one. I do not want to play a game in the setting depicted in that image. This is the picture that sold me on Stranger of Paradise, with Castle Cornelia rivalling even Ishgard in terms of beauty and iconicness:

I don't know what to tell you, then. Thanalan, a near-Eastern/Arabian setting has existed from the beginning. In addition to Gridania. Each expansion save Heavensward has brought up more non-European settings, and they've been terrific.


If not having one specific thing not cater to your specific tastes turns you off, that's just a shame. I'd personally rather the devs keep giving us places like Gyr Abania, Doma, the Azim Steppe, the Ratika Greatwood, Ahm Araang, and Thavnair.