Live Letter Thoughts

[Valkyrie_Lenneth]

What they did to the Ancients is something that if it happened IRL would get a person executed. It's called genocide, and yes, it very well should be rectified.

Well, you guys keep using that word, but I don't think it's accurate.


Genocide requires the intent of eradicating a race or ethnicity. The sundering was not meant to do that. It may be the end result, but it was not the intent.

And even then, if you can "rebuild" the ancients via the rejoining, then they aren't eradicated, no? They are simply split.

[Theodric]

Well, you guys keep using that word, but I don't think it's accurate.

It is. As per usual, my advice to you would include the typical suggestion of bookmarking this post. I know some posters really struggle to grasp concepts that have been explained to them many times already.

At any rate, here's the official definition of genocide:



The Sundering fits every single criteria. So...yes, it's an act of genocide. Hide it behind fluffy language all you like though if the protagonists wouldn't accept such a thing happening to their loved ones then there's really no reason for anybody else to either.

[Valkyrie_Lenneth]

It is. As per usual, my advice to you would include the typical suggestion of bookmarking this post. I know some posters really struggle to grasp concepts that have been explained to them many times already.

At any rate, here's the official definition of genocide:



The Sundering fits every single criteria. So...yes, it's an act of genocide. Hide it behind fluffy language all you like though if the protagonists wouldn't accept such a thing happening to their loved ones then there's really no reason for anybody else to either.

You are the most condescending person on here lol.

And I disagree that your definition matches. Venat was not aiming to cause harm, but to save.

gen·o·cide
/ˈjenəˌsīd/
noun
the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group

From Oxford.


Also for someone so tied up about it, you didn't seem to care too much when your beloved Garleans wanted to wipe the beast tribes off the planet.

[Knot_D]

Also for someone so tied up about it, you didn't seem to care too much when your beloved Garlean's wanted to wipe the beast tribes off the planet.

They probably gonna blame Venat for the beast tribe genocide

[hagare]

They probably gonna blame Venat for the beast tribe genocide

They probably gonna blame Venat for EVERYTHING

Things don't appear hopeful to me based on the trailer. Pandemonium looks like more "Ancients bad" while the Scions continue to simp for Hydaelyn* and we're probably going to move Heaven and Earth to rescue Azdaja because after 5k years of being stuck in the void there's no way that Vrtra should have to "forge ahead", that's only for other people not aligned with the WoL.

* This is why there's no such thing as Venat being as bad as the Ascians. I don't see Y'shtola handing the WoL Emet's memory crystal and saying who better to have it than the person he trusted with his legacy. This also implies, as I suspected, that the Omega chain was ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things unless they surprise me with dialog options to reject anything further to do with her.

Ultimately, as long as they continue to paint an entire people of somehow being deserving of genocide, the person responsible for it as some kind of hero, and the themes never applying to the WoL & Friends there's no way for me to take this team's storytelling seriously anymore.

then you'd be better off finding something else

[BaconBits]

They probably gonna blame Venat for EVERYTHING



then you'd be better off finding something else

"The moon could use a 2nd lasering."

[hagare]

"The moon could use a 2nd lasering."

The moon could use some housing.
Though that'd probably give yoshi-P an aneurysm

[ZavosEsperian]

So I come to this thread, and I see we have devolved into the genocide talk of whether Venat/Hydaelyn did commit the act itself.

At any rate, here's the official definition of genocide.

This definition above is the one used by, and is adhered to by, nations who signed and ratified the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Genocide, where this definition is Article II of that convention. By signatories alone, there are 152 nations on Earth that recognize this as the official definition of genocide by UN Convention.

And I disagree that your definition matches.

The definition you elected to pick seems cherry-picked to back your own argument and is an incomplete definition. Other dictionaries, such as Merriam-Webster, would contradict the definition of genocide you accept, as that definition states "the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group". Note deliberate and systematic destruction does not require killing as an element for this to hold true, as you can destroy a group via re-education and sterilization.

To be more specific in Venat's case, her act via sundering Etherys and its peoples would quantify as genocide, since killing people is not a requirement in committing/perpetrating a genocide by most accepted definitions. What she did irrevocably split the Ancients' souls into smaller fragments and opening them up to life's hardships and suffering. By way of sundering the souls of the Ancients, she deliberately and systematically destroyed the Ancients as a race of people, thus the definition of genocide holds. Venat even admits to doing these acts. While the outcome turned out well for the Universe as a whole, it is still indeed a case of genocide. Whether you believe this to be justified is the part that is open to interpretation.

My own personal opinion on the matter would say no particular party in the story has the right to commit the act of genocide even if the outcome was positive. As such all of these parties would be in the wrong. Emet, Hermes (using the Meteia as the instrument of destruction), and Venat all perpetuated the act of genocide at some point in the story. Any empire that did as the definition from Article II states also committed genocide.

As far as MSQ related stuff is concerned, I'm interested on seeing where the story goes. I do actually want some clarification on Venat between where we encounter her in Elpis up to the point she elects to sunder Etherys. Without that information, it is difficult for me to ascertain all of the things Venat did or did not do up until that point, as I would assume she, as a former bearer of the Seat of Azem, would probably try to avoid the foretold destruction of her people caused by The Final Days and avoid making the decision to sunder Etherys without exhausting all other options.

[Jojoya]

So in catching up with all the posts since I last read the thread:

While a few people are still trying to engage in discussion of things that happened in the Live Letter (mostly Island Sanctuary), most are intent on pursuing their personal agendas still.

aveyond-dreams has basically expressed the wish that for FFXIV to be a pure high fantasy game despite the Final Fantasy franchise having a history of being a mix of high fantasy and low fantasy.

The Team Zodiark versus Team Hydaelyn war continues with genocide back on the menu as one side submits a definition as evidence but in doing so reveals its hypocrisy.

At any rate, here's the official definition of genocide:



The Sundering fits every single criteria. So...yes, it's an act of genocide. Hide it behind fluffy language all you like though if the protagonists wouldn't accept such a thing happening to their loved ones then there's really no reason for anybody else to either.

By that definition, so do the actions of the Convocation of FourteenThirteen.

They had the intent to destroy a part of their own people for the sake of summoning Zodiark. They did so.

After they did that, they had the intent to destroy a part of their own people to repair the damage to Etheirys. They did so.

After that, they had the intent to destroy multiple forms of newly created life on Etheirys to try to bring back those who were killed the first time around. Venat stopped that via the Sundering.

So why do people want to venerate the group that succeeded in 2 acts of genocide and were about to commit multiple genocides while demonizing the individual that stopped that massive wave of genocide by sundering the world to create multiple copies of all life, which probably might be considered genocide since with the knowledge we gave her she knew that some would survive but many others would die though her intent was not to actually destroy everything but rather to try to preserve what then existed?

Something seems fishy, especially when the reality is none of these things happened. It's just a fictional story created for entertainment and a lot of people are taking it way too seriously to the detriment of their mental health.

[aveyond-dreams]

So why do people want to venerate the group that succeeded in 2 acts of genocide and were about to commit multiple genocides while demonizing the individual that stopped that massive wave of genocide by sundering the world to create multiple copies of all life, which probably might be considered genocide since with the knowledge we gave her she knew that some would survive but many others would die though her intent was not to actually destroy everything but rather to try to preserve what then existed?

Because Venat refused to tell people the truth, setting the stage for the Convocation to summon Zodiark and so on. We do not view her as a savior, and are unlikely to be convinced she is one. The official definition of genocide has already been stated, and it is applicable in the case of the ancients. Continuing to paint her as a herois while painting the ancients as evil and arrogant is tiresome to those of us who are fans of them. This doesn't make for a story that we want to see through to the end, and remains a source of concern about the upcoming raid questline.

She also did not create "copies" she reduced everything to this:



This is not a copy paste job. This is to date the sole depiction of the aftermath of the Sundering (canon, written by Ishikawa) and Yoship has already stated that Hyurs, Elezen and the like evolved from this into the respective races thus Venat is not their "mother." The fact that they are bringing both her and Meteion up again has us worried for how prevalent that will be in the MSQ, so forgive us we express our concern with how they've handled things thus far and may continue with in the future.

Fundamentally fans of the Ascians, Zodiark, Emet-Selch and all understand that yeah, they did some wrong things and indeed inflict a genocide on multiple planets. But so did Hydaelyn, and she is hailed as a herois for it, with the game intent on pushing that notion repeatedly. They raise her up at the expense of the antagonist faction that many came to love, so it is any wonder why maybe we feel like this a bit one-sided?