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

[Rulakir]

Not sure where you're getting the "this was from Venat's POV" argument from. This was a vision of their own timeline's history given to the WOL -- we have no reason not to trust it as events that happened. And if we do, then that throws literally everything about it into question.

Nothing about that scene follows events as we know them. There was no group of people who sacrificed themselves for Venat to become Hydaelyn and there was no grand battle between Hydaelyn and Zodiark. The sundering also happened after the world had been restored via the second sacrifice (which Venat made no attempt to stop), the Final Days is still occurring in the background when she approaches the group of strawmen who are begging Zodiark to restore their world.

I shouldn't even say it's Venat's POV beyond her low opinion of her brethren because none of that cutscene is accurate to history as we know it. I've heard it called a montage, an abridged version, etc. Whatever it is, it was not literal and certainly not meant to be taken as such.

[Brinne]

That montage is why I'm sometimes willing to go as far as to use "propaganda" in regards to the apologism. A deliberately emotionally stirring, abstracted, "symbolic" version of events meant to justify a violent act where none of the events depicted actually happened as shown.

With that in mind, even putting aside "lol apologism propaganda" hot takes, I've always thought that presentation was at least "cowardly" on a narrative level by relying on faceless strawmen as Venat's opposition and what "forced" her to do the Sundering, making irrational arguments that none of the actual named Ancient characters we know would make. Can't believe these guys, representative of Ancients in general, were so far gone they just forced poor Venat's hand, etc, etc. Try to mentally replace Emet-Selch or Themis in that scene, debating Venat, and boy does it fall apart fast.

[CrownySuccubus]

Yeah, Occam's Razor suggests that that scene was yet another retcon, along side Venat's "faction" sundering the world to keep Zodiark in check, and Tempering being an intentional defect of the Ascian's design instead of what primals inherently do.

Because if this was Venat's own self-propaganda, the "I did this with the blessings of other like-minded Ancients who believed their brothers had gone too far" would have helped her case.

But yeah, the entire scene was just stupid. Like you said, it throws the Ancients under the bus to make Venat "right". If Elpis had done its job properly and actually made the Ancients feel "scary", like intended, that scene wouldn't have been necessary. But no, they had to try one last time to drive in the "Ancients bad" nail and it "succeeded" only by way of character assassination.

Elpis in general was just a disaster of writing. All of the flaws that exist in EW can be traced back to the decision to go there and then come up with some sort of plot device (Memory-Wiping Tech that only Hermes knows about/can use! How convenient!) to justify why the rest of FFXIV still happens.

[Brinne]

Because if this was Venat's own self-propaganda, the "I did this with the blessings of other like-minded Ancients who believed their brothers had gone too far" would have helped her case.

Ah, but if we had seen/been reminded that Venat had a number of supporters among the Ancients, that would have undermined her argument that the Ancients as a race were just incapable of change, all of them just too far gone. And it wouldn't have allowed us the tragic, powerful imagery of her standing all alone against the world and then wading by herself through its mire and plague.

It's less a retcon--the Q&A brought up Hydaelyn having a faction again, IIRC--but it is a very, very deliberately manipulative presentation. Hence, "propaganda" that I can't help but be, uh, pretty grossed out by.

Plus, the sundering happening after Elidibus had exited Zodiark to mediate is also a bad look. I can understand it from a strategic point, what better time to go after Zodiark than when he's sans pilot, but it's also implied they were in the middle of negotiations when she went on the attack.

JUSTICE FOR TH--[gunshot]

[KageTokage]

Ah, but if we had seen/been reminded that Venat had a number of supporters among the Ancients, that would have undermined her argument that the Ancients as a race were just incapable of change, all of them just too far gone. And it wouldn't have allowed us the tragic, powerful imagery of her standing all alone against the world and then wading by herself through its mire and plague.

It's less a retcon--the Q&A brought up Hydaelyn having a faction again, IIRC--but it is a very, very deliberately manipulative presentation. Hence, "propaganda" that I can't help but be, uh, pretty grossed out by.

That's probably the main reason why the live letter Q&As and following interviews just soured my opinion of Elpis further.

As much as they explained in an attempt to make the whole situation seem gray, the in-game presentation is deliberately skewed to make you only put much thought into Venat's perspective on things; to make you feel bad for her specifically for making a "difficult" decision instead of her people and friends she condemned with extremely questionable reasoning/logic.

After seeing several opinions on the matter, it became pretty obvious that it did succeed at making the majority only follow her perspective on things which is pretty...disappointing compared to Emet-Selch's take on the Sundering that comparatively seemed to make many actually consider both sides of the argument.

[Brinne]

I really doubt Themis is related to Venat, but on the remote chance he is, my ascension to maniacal chaos demon with accelerate a thousandfold. If Themis is her son/brother/what have you and Venat still did what she did to him, and we were truly expected to sympathize and side with her, we have transcended from "kinda bitterly funny in an ironic way" to full Fandaniel-ization farce comedy mode. Soon my hold over Zodiark shall be complete! Mine, all mine! Ahahahaha!

As much as they explained in an attempt to make the whole situation seem gray, the in-game presentation is deliberately skewed to make you only put much thought into Venat's perspective on things; to make you feel bad for her specifically for making a "difficult" decision instead of her people and friends she condemned with extremely questionable reasoning/logic.

I could write a lot of words about the narrative's choice to actually, in full sincerity, take the stance of "the real tragedy here is how much it hurts me to hurt you," but.

[CrownySuccubus]

I really doubt Themis is related to Venat, but on the remote chance he is, my ascension to maniacal chaos demon with accelerate a thousandfold. If Themis is her son/brother/what have you and Venat still did what she did to him, and we were truly expected to sympathize and side with her, we have transcended from "kinda bitterly funny in an ironic way" to full Fandaniel-ization farce comedy mode. Soon my hold over Zodiark shall be complete! Mine, all mine! Ahahahaha!



I could write a lot of words about the narrative's choice to actually, in full sincerity, take the stance of "the real tragedy here is how much it hurts me to hurt you," but.

That's Japanese philosophy 101. Japanese society emphasizes the suppression of self, whereupon one is not supposed to speak too much about how something makes themselves feel and instead, direct attention to how someone else feels. It's considered a taboo to even tell someone "No" outright; you always have to mince your words in phrases like "It would be difficult" or "I will put it under consideration" because telling someone "no" supposedly indicates how little you care that it hurts them.

Naturally, it's a system that is highly abusable, since Japan is also strictly hierarchical. Someone who is lower in social standing or in less of a unique position, always has to take the feelings of those above them in mind (and those equal to them, but that's a lesser concern). The constant emphasis on how Venat felt when she sundered the world and how Hermes felt when he...well, basically fisted the universe up its rectum...is a very Japanese thing. It's supposed to be like, "These were very respected and powerful people who held unique agency over every life on the star, so we should be respectful how difficult it must have been for them to do the very stupid things that they did."

[AziraSyuren]

That's probably the main reason why the live letter Q&As and following interviews just soured my opinion of Elpis further.

Yeah, I feel this too. The answers they gave in the Q&As showed that they could've written a much more interesting and less tonally dissonant story instead of doubling down on mommy vibes that get weirder and more uncomfortable the more you think about it. Like I said earlier, it's like how they put most of the things that made Zenos such an amazing character in side materials. They'll probably retroactively improve Elpis a lot in further side materials, but the damage is already done. Most people aren't gonna read those and aren't gonna listen to "no, here's why it's good, actually!" if the reasons for it being good aren't in the main story itself, even if they fully redeem it.

[Rulakir]

Can't believe these guys, representative of Ancients in general, were so far gone they just forced poor Venat's hand, etc, etc. Try to mentally replace Emet-Selch or Themis in that scene, debating Venat, and boy does it fall apart fast.

It completely ignores that "no small number" were against the 3rd sacrifice too. I can't help but be reminded of Sodom and Gomorrah where Lot pleaded with God if he could find just 10 righteous people would he spare destroying the cities. Venat apparently had a lot more than that and it wasn't enough for her.

Plus, the sundering happening after Elidibus had exited Zodiark to mediate is also a bad look. I can understand it from a strategic point, what better time to go after Zodiark than when he's sans pilot, but it's also implied they were in the middle of negotiations when she went on the attack. It lends further credence to the belief that it didn't matter what any of the Ancients did, she'd already determined they needed to be 'reset' for their own good.

It's also why The Plenty irritates me because it's based on the premise that the events at Elpis didn't happen. The Ancients were never going to be the same after the Final Days no matter how hard they tried and we'll likely never know what would have happened had Venat simply been honest with everyone. They built up Ancient society as one that thrived on debate, yet both Venat and Hermes make executive decisions for the whole race with the writers claiming it's just a very Ancient thing to do.

[CrownySuccubus]

It completely ignores that "no small number" were against the 3rd sacrifice too. I can't help but be reminded of Sodom and Gomorrah where Lot pleaded with God if he could find just 10 righteous people would he spare destroying the cities.

To be fair, I find God's methodology there to be stupid, also, but I digress.

I think Venat's faction (if it can truly be called that) was in a pretty hefty minority that would not have been able to stop the third wave of sacrifices. Again, I wish the story had shown us that 1) Venat had told someone (ANYONE) about the truth but they simply ignored it and 2) the faction came to a consensus together rather than Venat making the decision all by herself. But as Brinne said, they declined doing that because the image wasn't emotional enough.

Just bad writing through and thorugh.