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

[Brinne]

Than why did she even write him?

This might sound weird, but a writer's perspective is going to be a little different from a general audience's perspective. I have no problem understanding Ishikawa on this level, personally.

For example: when I'm constructing story ideas (regardless of if they actually get written, I'm your classic lazy procrastinator), I find a pattern that a lot of my protagonists struggle with a flaw of Passivity. I am fully aware that, generally, most audiences find this repulsive as a character trait and most characters that explore it get a pretty large hatedom if their media catches on. But the writer's heart wants what it wants, and I still love the characters I've formed around that idea and wouldn't compromise them.

Or, for the aforementioned "my favorite character of all time," when details were first revealed about them in the story, there was so much hate directed toward them in the fanbase because a lot of their psychology wasn't necessarily something a general audience could immediately relate to - but for those of us who could, it became so meaningful to us that there may have been multiple weeks-long exchanges of fifteen-page essays obsessing over this character. The author obviously poured a ton of heart and soul into that character and their nuance, because they felt it was something worth exploring and sharing, regardless of if a majority of people would find it "likable."

It's not really as simple as "if you think people won't like this character, then change them." Especially since I would imagine Ishikawa figured, mostly correctly, that liking or hating Hermes wasn't going to be a make-it-or-break-it aspect for most people in the overall story.

[jameseoakes]

This might sound weird, but a writer's perspective is going to be a little different from a general audience's perspective. I have no problem understanding Ishikawa on this level, personally.

For example: when I'm constructing story ideas (regardless of if they actually get written, I'm your classic lazy procrastinator), I find a pattern that a lot of my protagonists struggle with a flaw of Passivity. I am fully aware that, generally, most audiences find this repulsive as a character trait and most characters that explore it get a pretty large hatedom if their media catches on. But the writer's heart wants what it wants, and I still love the characters I've formed around that idea and wouldn't compromise them.

Or, for the aforementioned "my favorite character of all time," when details were first revealed about them in the story, there was so much hate directed toward them in the fanbase because a lot of their psychology wasn't necessarily something a general audience could immediately relate to - but for those of us who could, it became so meaningful to us that there may have been multiple weeks-long exchanges of fifteen-page essays obsessing over this character. The author obviously poured a ton of heart and soul into that character and their nuance, because they felt it was something worth exploring and sharing, regardless of if a majority of people would find it "likable."

It's not really as simple as "if you think people won't like this character, then change them."

I think the problem is, is that the story seems to expect us to like him but then he's nothing but a slimy creep which makes some of the bits feel really bad