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

[MikkoAkure]

They just stayed in their meager little echo chamber parroting their ridiculous claims and headcanons

Like your discord you're promoting? If you guys are so upset with the story because of how it treated the Ancients, to the point where you make a discord to talk about her in a safe space even after quitting from the game, then you guys must be real Warriors of Light because Hydaelyn is living rent-free in your head.



Anyhow, I'm not sure what multiple people making often unhinged tirades about how "Venat is actually evil" accomplishes at this point over a year later except to point out the clumsiness of the writing of Endwalker, which almost everyone agrees on anyway. This thread now just feels like a drawn-out episode of The Game Theorists.


I'm not going to argue that the writing isn't awkward because it is, but the whole "Hydaelyn is a genocidal maniac and is the most evil villain in Final Fantasy" angle is an alternative take and obviously not the writers' intention if in-game interactions with her don't end up reflecting that and they gave her her own image song. Despite the fact that we fight both her and Zodiark, Zodiark ended up getting represented as a grotesque tentacle monster with comedically-oversized demonic horns, which generally isn't an artistic choice you go for when you make a character that is supposed to be related to or on the side of "good". While Shadowbringers had a bunch of evil light and angelic imagery, we have no other context for something such as him being a good thing and it's definitely a questionable design choice for your world's god. I would've expected a dark, but equally beautiful Amano design comparable to Hydaelyn but wielding a giant shield. But it works in a meta-sense if you're trying to evoke certain feelings in the players and compare it to Hydaelyn later on.

The plot around Venat ended up being needlessly convoluted when all it required was for us to stay the same line of of events we thought we had in Shadowbringers, which would have had the exact same result at the end of Endwalker anyway. It's also full of confusing plot holes like her whole explanation of not telling the Convocation because "Hermes will go crazy and refuse to offer his insight into Dynamis for Zodiark, who's still needed anyway". And we're still missing swathes of information like the state of the world and the thoughts of the general populace right before the Sundering.

But with all the mess, I don't believe they were trying to make her something else. There's no conspiracy so I don't know what you're all going on about except for bad writing, which again, everyone already agrees with.

Such is the power of Schrodinger's Venat: both trying to prevent the Final Days and preserve the timeline of her brave little spark, even though both are mutually exclusive – this way you can plausibly argue in her favor whatever you are arguing, and she ends up looking great! I love it.

She did need to do both though and neither is mutually exclusive. If Zodiark didn't exist, neither would our timeline and Eitherys would've been destroyed by the Final Days. The splinter in Amaurotine society happened after the 2nd sacrifice. Zodiark is still needed to keep the Final Days at bay and to keep her precious life alive. What would you have expected her to do? And what would the Ancients have done even if they had known about Endsinger hanging out in space? It was already established that they couldn't accomplish much against dynamis and that Zodiark's protection was the extent of their capabilities so they couldn't have "gathered the team" and shot out into space to fight her. The reason is definitely flimsy and it would've been nice if they expanded upon it, but that's the reason the characters in-universe gave who know more about how their universe works than we do.

And if Venat was so wrong about everything and the Convocation/Ascians were right, then why did Emet-Selch rescue us against Elidibus, leading us to kill him and end all possible efforts for a Rejoining and the continuation of his people and society?


The writing for Endwalker and the journey from point A to point B was definitely clumsy at best but bad writing doesn't immediately mean that certain characters were designed to be bad. Or that the writers are purposefully wronging a fictitious group of people who they were responsible for anyway considering Emet-Selch, Venat, the Ancients, and all of their motivations and events came out of the same heads. If this were an actual historical story with real people, things would suspicious for Venat. But this is a fictional story with fictional characters and the most plausible reason for Venat's actions is that her story is full of plot holes while attempting to treat her as a fully sympathetic yet more complicated character and not that they intended on making her genocidal on purpose, so I'm more willing to read the intent of the character than the implications.

Everything felt very rushed and the finale to the decade-long story was quickly wrapped up in an x.0 patch when all other stories get extended to x.3 and don't have as many loose threads to tie up at once. The writers then decided to plunge into time travel, which NEVER EVER works for a story unless it was written specifically for that from the very beginning and all time travel rules are standardized and followed to the letter. The moon didn't get the utilization it deserved based on the hype on promotional material and half of the zone ended up being an oversized rabbit bunker. Some things ended up getting bad explanations like Hydaelyn's "travelers ward" or not getting explained at all like the aforementioned situation before the Sundering.

The Ancients didn't even exist in the original story and the whole game has been the writers trying to build the chocobo cart while they were driving it. They had to come up with a reason why the Ascians were doing what they were doing years after they had already been in the game doing bad things, and make it something people to empathize with to make a compelling villain. Then they had to rectify that with the secret villain they had apparently to have because they mentioned the last boss wasn't meant to be Hydaelyn or Zodiark and all of these moving pieces ended up being too much for them to put together a story that satisfied everyone and doesn't have gaping wide plot holes that we're "not supposed to think too hard about".

Basically everything around Venat and a lot around the events leading up to the Sundering should have been better explained, given better motivations, or should have been completely rewritten in order to have a fully cohesive story. As neat as Elpis was and seeing the big 3, the story around and in it was a complete mess and led to this thread getting as long as it has.


All that said, the expansion was still enjoyable enough. The mini-games at the very beginning and the end of the Garlemald arc were really fun. The characters were done really well. Parts of the story made me scratch my head, but it didn't meander around as much as some other expansions, mostly having 1 main story to tell while hitting Garlemald on the way that didn't feel out of the way.

If the playerbase at large agreed with you that EW was objectively bad and that Reddit and Twitter are outliers, why does the 3rd post in this thread have nearly double the amount of likes as the OP when it disagrees with the OP?

[Graeham]

I feel obligated to interject that the Amaurotines did not sacrifice themselves believing they would be resurrected.

All chara know it can be raising with the spell. Even leaf player is know this. Is weakness but go after the minute. Is why No Shadow God sac strat is work. If Zod eat the No Shadow God it can be using MP to be raising more time.

As far as the sacrifices go, my genuine impression is that the intended "vibe" - once again, the game is, thus far, absolutely unwavering on this point - is that that self-sacrifice of the Amaurotines is meant to be understood as something absolutely noble, breathtakingly heroic, and as Alphinaud's stunned silence reflects, something we understand is a level of "goodness" beyond modern humanity. As far as the precise mechanics, if you want to shoot the breeze about that, I would guess - because this is another thing I don't think the writers actually sat down and mapped out concretely - that while there were probably some mutterings at the time of the sacrifice about maybe, hopefully, finding a way to save the sacrifices someday. It's clear that they were committed sorrowfully, understanding they were being sent to a horrible fate, and Zodiark was designed to keep their souls preserved, after all.

Is good point. The No Shadow God it making smartest plan. Sac 5 No Shadow to making 1 million gil monies. Sac 5 No Shadow to make 10 No Shadow. Keep repeat sac to make profit of the gil monies and No Shadow. Would be most rich country with most people.

But Venar do the loprabbit revolution when No Shadow plan this. So the No Shadow is stuck and only has the 1 million gil monies and no Zod. Is not enough to fight war so is losing. Is like when try to make army to attack but enemy is in the base attack the miner drone and the pylon and the base and can not rebuild. Is force the Solus King to quitting with the gg. Is the cheesie strat like the 6 pool.

They don't even have debates, they're just edgelords who have zero empathy for the people who want their loved ones back and they just complain endlessly, and what precisely did bringing their opinion to the Convocation yield? Nothing, Venat, you little snowflake. Not even going to mention the Anamnesis Anyder dude who is such a massive giga simp I am suspecting him of just being one of her familiars.

The No Shadow God have many of the debate. There is quest about this in Atlantis City. Debate it is needing to make mind strong like the muscle fist. No Shadow God is country of the strong thinking. In the twitch is called the 3head because 3 is more than the 2. Is need to study hard if want to be guild thinker.

Is new mode call the NG+ to watch the questing scene if Tariq forget the Shadowbringing.

I'm not going to argue that the writing isn't awkward because it is, but the whole "Hydaelyn is a genocidal maniac and is the most evil villain in Final Fantasy" angle is an alternative take and obviously not the writers' intention

Main take is Venar is the evil. Original final fantasy story was write by the German writer Matsuo with Venar as badguy. Was inspire by Metal Gear story where big boss is herois turn into the badguy. He call you at start and say to snake to returning to waking sand but is plan world destruction.

But Yoshi had the jealous so change story and hire new writer to make the Venar good. Is why story course change from Shadowbringing to Endwalking. Is also translation problem is why must use Spanish script to know the real story. Tariq is posting this on earlier page. Chara is upset at the course correction and want to course correct the course correction to go to original story. Otherwise game it go down the hill.

If the playerbase at large agreed with you that EW was objectively bad and that Reddit and Twitter are outliers, why does the 3rd post in this thread have nearly double the amount of likes as the OP when it disagrees with the OP?

This is not true. We have not like OP because silent majority is silence by the forum paladin and twitter croud and pinterest army. We have add the like and will changing balance so guild win like and subscribe battle. Post 3 will be the losing.

[Kazhar]

Like your discord you're promoting? If you guys are so upset with the story because of how it treated the Ancients, to the point where you make a discord to talk about her in a safe space even after quitting from the game, then you guys must be real Warriors of Light because Hydaelyn is living rent-free in your head.

I hate to be the one to explain the joke, but that entire paragraph you're reacting to was most likely a parody of what another user (whose username starts with an S) usually says every single post.

[MikkoAkure]

I hate to be the one to explain the joke, but that entire paragraph you're reacting to was most likely a parody of what another user (whose username starts with an S) usually says every single post.

Buddy. I was singling out part of that to make a joke, not reacting to the whole paragraph. I could've said what I said without quoting him but I thought it was funny this way.,

[AwesomeJr44]

*16 page college essay*

[Brinne]

I'm not going to argue that the writing isn't awkward because it is, but the whole "Hydaelyn is a genocidal maniac and is the most evil villain in Final Fantasy" angle is an alternative take and obviously not the writers' intention if in-game interactions with her don't end up reflecting that and they gave her her own image song.

If all that mattered in storytelling was "intent," there's no point to any further flourish to telling a story beyond providing a bullet list outline of what the "intent" is and nothing to talk about. Hydaelyn is good because we're told she's good, the end. Look, I don't think anybody is questioning that the intent was that Hydaelyn be seen as a good person, and that the entire weight of the game is asking/expecting you to sympathize with her and be on her side. That's... kind of the whole problem. That's why a lot of people get so virulent and wordy about this, because they're aware they're arguing against the intentions of the text, but attempting to point out how it doesn't work regardless. But I can't really be on board with a line of thought that puts forth "ignore what she actually did, ignore her reasons, ignore everything you actually saw and experienced onscreen if you have to - because Word of God says it's good when Hydaelyn does it, she's good. Now stop talking about it."

Execution matters. What actually gets put down in writing, or on the screen, regardless of "intent," matters. Discerning for ourselves via discussion and critical analysis (well, at least that's what happens ideally) what a text is actually concretely saying by pointing out the reality of the picture it paints is not remotely an uncommon thing when discussing stories. I don't think there's a conspiracy happening about what the writers are trying to say, but I do think if one cares about a story, it can be worthwhile to examine what it does, how it does it, and how intention and execution don't necessarily match up. One hopes that the writer-audience feedback loop exists in part to indicate where a disconnect happens within those gaps, and enables a team of writers openly asking for constant feedback to keep it in mind going forward - which we've already seen to some extent with the development of the Omega quests, for instance. Otherwise, some people (weirdoes like me) like discussing and talking about nuances in writing and pinning down specific aspects that work and don't work for them for its own sake, because how storytelling works is interesting to us. You don't have to have the same interest, and that's okay! I have zero interest in tons of the topics discussing other aspects of the game, myself.

The plot around Venat ended up being needlessly convoluted when all it required was for us to stay the same line of of events we thought we had in Shadowbringers, which would have had the exact same result at the end of Endwalker anyway.

This, though, I would specifically disagree with - a framing of "the Ancients died because of a terrible, unplanned, unintentional tragedy" is very different from "the Ancients died because one person (righteously, the story argues) deliberately murdered them." Tragedy versus murder are not the same results to me. The story is not saying the same thing as far as the thematics of what it means to be "worthy to live" at the end of Shadowbringers versus the end of Endwalker - it rather ends up saying the opposite, in fact, because of that distinction between unintentional tragedy we universally have to make peace with the likes of, and a deliberate, narrative-justified murder for a believed greater good. "Bad things sometimes happen for no reason, even to good people" is not the same result to me as "some populations just need to die because they're not good enough."

[Teraq]

and they gave her her own image song.

Well, my favorite character had his fight song written by Soken during chemo. OOOOOOOooOOh!

This, though, I would specifically disagree with - a framing of "the Ancients died because of a terrible, unplanned, unintentional tragedy" is very different from "the Ancients died because one person (righteously, the story argues) deliberately murdered them."

This, exactly, changes so much about the entire framing of the story, it was basically my deal breaker for the Final Days plot.

Well, in case any of you hadn't heard yet, Endwalker broke a lot of my deals, really, it's a bit of a shame, that.

But, yes. If it wasn't clear already (I'm not sure how it wouldn't, but…), I'm fairly sure everyone here knows what was intended. I mean, we all heard the christian rock in space to which everyone's boomer mom would post an inspirational quote superimposed over a sunset on Facebook, too. Unfortunately, the first version of it that plays at the start of the zone is less dissonant than the writing.

(Can you imagine being one of the Unsundered, thinking, for the past twelve thousand years, that the near-extinction event that befell them was a random natural tragedy, and then finding out it was in fact instigated by a couple of them? Speaking of dissonant writing and Ultima Thule…)

[MikkoAkure]

This, though, I would specifically disagree with - a framing of "the Ancients died because of a terrible, unplanned, unintentional tragedy" is very different from "the Ancients died because one person (righteously, the story argues) deliberately murdered them." Tragedy versus murder are not the same results to me. The story is not saying the same thing as far as the thematics of what it means to be "worthy to live" at the end of Shadowbringers versus the end of Endwalker - it rather ends up saying the opposite, in fact, because of that distinction between unintentional tragedy we universally have to make peace with the likes of, and a deliberate, narrative-justified murder for a believed greater good. "Bad things sometimes happen for no reason, even to good people" is not the same result to me as "some populations just need to die because they're not good enough."

And this is the approach I disagree with.

It's one thing to critically discuss a piece of writing that absolutely failed to deliver its message cohesively and another to make a take on the story that you are fully aware and have admitted is not what was intended and to completely sprint with it, using buzzwords like "narrative-justified murder", "evil", or "worst villain in FF" that have a tendency to bait emotional responses both in support and against your posts.

I am with you in that I don't like how they changed the framing of the end of the Ancients, and I would like to discuss what they could've done differently, where they went wrong, and ask what they were thinking and what caused them to write it this way. But I'm not about go full in on ripping open the plot holes and tugging at the threads while running down the hallways screaming that Venat is a traitor to her race. Going full into extremes doesn't leave room for critical discussion and just causes a shouting match where no one budges and no one is convinced of anything.


The whole arc is over and it's probably not coming back and we're probably less likely to get any further clarification on things as the story moves forward with something completely new. That's what makes it even more baffling why people dwell on this to the point where it seems like they make it a part of their personality and go as far as making a discord to keep talking about it amongst themselves. The game has moved on without you.

[jameseoakes]

The whole arc is over and it's probably not coming back and we're probably less likely to get any further clarification on things as the story moves forward with something completely new. That's what makes it even more baffling why people dwell on this to the point where it seems like they make it a part of their personality and go as far as making a discord to keep talking about it amongst themselves. The game has moved on without you.

Honestly that's a really spiteful comment, I really hate this push that came into FF14 discussion where were told what we can and can't talk about. Yes it bothers me that a story I invested in over the years turned to eugenics is good, it's a evil and I will talk about it as long as I am subbed

[MikkoAkure]

Honestly that's a really spiteful comment, I really hate this push that came into FF14 discussion where were told what we can and can't talk about. Yes it bothers me that a story I invested in over the years turned to eugenics is good, it's a evil and I will talk about it as long as I am subbed

There is no simple "talking about it". Like I said in the rest of the post, it's just people repeating the same points over and sitting in their extremes with nothing new to be said. I'm not policing what you can and can't talk about, I'm pointing out that people just keep repeating the same thing expecting a different result, which is the definition of insanity.

It would be different if there was actual discussion that could go back and forth but you yourself are sitting in a world where to you the story turned into "eugenics is good", which again like I had said, doesn't exactly leave room for actual discussion except to have the serpent eat its tail and the cycle continues.

We're just saying things at each other and not with each other at this point and there's nothing new to say and there never will be without new content, which is doubtful.