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

[CrownySuccubus]

Pretty much every leader figure the game has had our character interact with has gone one of two ways - either they've been killed or they've conveniently done exactly what the Scions have not so subtly nudged them into doing.

I'm already dreading the idea of Alphinaud and Alisae seeding the idea that Garlemald should do away with the idea of an Emperor so it can instead become a democratic republic again. An act which simply serves to strip away a lot of the established flavour...and it'd be further salt in the wound after the region wasn't even given the dignity of an actual expansion largely focused on Garlemald and Garlemald alone.

I also don't really consider the mere existence of a monarchy to be a 'dictatorship' or worthy of scorn. They're a key part of my own country, culture and ancestry and a large part of why I enjoy fantasy settings.

A monarchy and a dictatorship are not the exact same thing. "Dictatorship" is merely a word. It refers to a government in which one individual holds most or all of the executive power. That's what Ishgard, Eulmore, Gyr Abania and Garlemald were, and what Doma currently is. Their leaders had the final say on just about all government action or policy. A monarchy that is also dictatorship is called an "Absolute Monarchy".

Gridania, Uldah, Limsa and Hingashi just barely do not fit the technical definitions of "dictatorship" since their leaders can't just do anything they like and usually have to run their ideas by committee.

That being said, absolute monarchies and dictatorships have lots of fundamental problems that are basically proven by history. I really don't care whether or not they're included in a fantasy game with gods and demons and magic, but within the real world, I'm going to treat any form of monarchy and/or dictatorship with a wide berth. And the exact circumstances behind the falls of Ishgard, Eulmore, Garlemald, and Gyr Abania are exactly why.