Building a better Alphinaud

[CrownySuccubus]

I don't think I could fundamentally disagree with a post more. Since when are politicians realists? What a bizarre thing to say.

....Is the term "Realpolitik" new to you?

Also, real life, modern career politicians are probably the definition of "realists", in terms of someone who is concerned with the here and now instead of wide-eyed ideals. The only thing they really care about is winning elections, acquiring and maintaining power, and keeping campaign money coming in. They certainly won't toe too far out of party lines at the risk of losing its support.

Also, we were shown a world and people who made something better. They were torn apart by an ideologue that the game lauds as a heroine and laughably held up as "what not to do" despite the fact that the entire supposed purpose of the protagonists is about reducing suffering and trying to make a better world for everyone. Are we the baddies now?

In the context of the current game timeline, that's irrelevant. I dislike Venat's logic as much as anyone, but the point of our discussion was The Source as it exists now. Even if we object to how we got here, and the game's attempts to justify it, its relevance on modern Source politics is already a bridge that's been burned.

Black and white morality, a group of protagonists who always win, never suffer setbacks or losses, don't question their beliefs/values because they're inherently 'right', enemies who are utterly defeated with a moral message at the end, do you know what that is? It's literally Saturday Morning Cartoon crap. You can think it's complete nonsense all you like, but it's a programming formula for small children despite FFXIV being rated Teen (at least in the US).

As Brinne said, do I think the WOL and the Scions could stand to be challenged more on various points? Sure. Do I think there should be more tangible consequences and less plot armor? You betcha.

But do I think the overall morality, as presented, is "Black and White" and thus "for kids"? Absolutely not. As has already been said, Garlemald's MSQ quests were pretty well-done in terms of moral ambiguity and grayness. There were no easy answers and no correct answers.

But "no easy answers and no correct answers" is not the same thing as "no wrong answers". The existence of complicated, nuanced problems in the world (or a fictional world) does not change the argument that some people are just villains and some ideologies are just wrong. Personally, I'd find a plot in which the bloodthirsty, fascist, theocratic, dictators are just poor misguided souls who need to hear Talk-no-Jutsu to stop being bad more unrealistic. Some people simply do NOT want to engage or want to live and die by the sword.

It's almost ironic the phrasing you chose for this statement is a slogan from a kid's cereal.

It's actually from TV Tropes, who like to make puns.

[Brinne]

re: cynicism and idealism, for me, the "sweet spot" would be not compromising how grim and harsh reality is, and how people are - and depicting it starkly - and then considering "all right, so what should we do about it?" and coming to an answer informed by kindness - still, without looking away from that the kindness in and of itself doesn't guarantee any better results.

"Depicting the harshness of reality" is why In From The Cold was so effective to me - those poor Garlean soldiers hyping themselves up and being good people, risking themselves to help you, saying the "right words" about how if they work together, they can get through this - and then all being casually slaughtered anyway. This is what happens. This is what a lot of traumatized people carry. Bad things happen to good people for absolutely no reason, and looking away from that and denying that, softening that, is irresponsible and harmful.

But I like the response to that to skew more idealistic - to suggest that it is possible to others to stop looking away, and encourage compassion and empathy. To still be able to find glimmers of light in a fundamentally meaningless world. As I've said, Endwalker came so close to nailing a message that's incredibly dear to me, and then whiffed so horrifically I ended up utterly repulsed instead (at least in terms of the primary thrust of the MSQ - some of the side content captures it well.) Shadowbringers, in terms of acknowledging the tragic, unfair horror of the conflict between the Unsundered and the Sundered, and the senseless, horrific, wrong, fate of the Ancients - and then encouraging compassion, even if you can't fundamentally change the situation and the stakes - was close to perfect for me.

This is another part of why Garlemald's storyline worked for me as well. The twins failed, in ugly ways, and people died senselessly as a result. Sometimes people will choose death rather than help. A mind immersed in propaganda is often excruciatingly hard to deprogram, let alone with being psychologically comforting, reassuring their targets that "you're the real victim here, always." The twins reel from the impact of that and how they misunderstood, and have to think about how they respond - which is ultimately, that they still want to help, even if these people hate them for it.

Do I think the twins overall, and this process, could have done with more elaboration and nuance, in an ideal world? Yes, of course. I would have loved to see more active personal struggle instead of a couple scenes of quiet reflection. But for what it is, and given the limitations of the story structure, I appreciated it.