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

[Turtledeluxe]

She had their direct testimony.

As someone else already pointed out, WoL doesn't know every mechanism at play but an overall idea. They can't instruct Venat how to sunder people right for example.

Regarding the follower count, I never said it was more, I said it was a significant number. That's a fair assumption because summons need a certain level of aether. And besides more people =/= morally correct.

[QUOTE=Theodric;6365959]It kind of does in the MSQ./QUOTE]
No it doesn't. The last two expansions were all about questioning her. You're asking me to live in a time period longer than 5 years ago and well, no. It's a 10 year long dev cycle, expecting perfect consistency is unrealistic.

Citation needed.

Zodiark requires sacrifices and he tempers people who follow him. Given any amount of time at all, any rate of progress, he would consume the world or, at minimum, temper everyone.

Yoshi P in the Q&A.

Just because a character says something to acknowledge an event occurred doesn't mean they're aggressively proud of it. I called it a confession. Implying it was some well laid out plan "Hmm humans will devolve to this point, with this many resources, let me decorate the reflections" is different from "I had no other choice and I did the most powerful attack I could that unfortunately sundered the world".

For instance

Where are the quotes regarding Venat is preserving the timeline and our visit was capable of affecting reality to the degree of avoiding the Final Days?

because if they had been warned

This is total conjecture, so it's not worth arguing. Speaking of being obtuse and hinging arguments, your literal entire post history ITT depends on this conjecture.

She had more knowledge

Yet, still a group.

Must've been absent

I can see threads via search history. You're going to ignore the redemption of Zenos, Emet, even Durante? Their crimes or intended crimes are hand waived away and they get treated like normal people in game, not to mention have fandoms. There's never been an 800 page thread about *ehem* those types of antagonists.

The Omega story asks you who is more justified. How exactly is that condoning her? And it is a test, in a way, because she was making it so that people couldn't rely on Zodiark. What's your point? I've called the sundering reckless and explained that while Venat wasn't entirely malicious, she also wasn't entirely innocent either. How many more times will I need to say it I wonder? The Ancients in general had slightly different set of ethics from our time and being arrogant is fairly common in their behavioral patterns-- Venat is not immune to that. Once again that's the whole point of the conflict itself and even the root cause of the Final Days.