A game for 4 year olds

[Kozh]

The idea that anyone is actually better off as colonial subjects has some pretty troubling real life implications

You mean real life implications that sometimes, the colonized nations were worse than the colonizer? Because that happened. And frankly, rather than plain "oh all the provinces rebelling", I prefer if there are some provinces who want to stay under the empire for all those reasons you listed. They don't have to be unambiguously good even, let them have conditions (for example regarding the second class citizens thing).

snip

Eorzean's crime is definitely the same as garlean's crime. Their number is lower than garlemalds? Perhaps. But killing 100 people or 1000 people, the sin is still the same.

Your example Eorzea's second chance only happened because of WoL, and even then it was very recent. In arr we still have limsa in war with the sahagin because they broke the treaty.

If you don't remember, their crimes don't/didn't stop there either. Gridania still haven't addressed their racism against duskwight (and moon at iirc?), their wood wailers are r*ping poachers. Limsa used to be a pirate nation that attacks everyone. Ul'dah still corrupt as hell, and let's not forget the whole sildih business too. Not to mention when they ask us to stop the giants from seeking revenge after being slaves and buried alive. Then there's ishgard who was on war with the dragons for a thousand year. They make peace with dragons? Cool. Doesn't change the fact that they still kill loads of dragons and they're the one who started it in the first place. Ala mhigo had their famous autumn war.

What I want to say is, they're not perfect right? The same as garlemald as of now. But if the game can gave them second chance, why not doing the same for garlean empire?

"In what world would it then make sense for the Garleans after everything they’ve done to suddenly make everything OK and keep their empire just because they have a new leader?"
Because they don't need permission from anybody to rebuild their empire? As alphinaud said, the alliance won't force them to abandon their way of life.

I'm not asking for everything to be perfect. Heck even asking garlemald to be empire again can be good for potential conflict in ilsabard. People won't trust them easily? that's okay too. I just want them to have their dignity, rebuild their empire, and not to have all that happened off-screen.

Hypothetical question; if in the future the game actually gave us garlemald expansion where they're to rebuild their empire and for some provinces agree to still be under them (let's say for example, because of their technological advantage and economic reason), in a well written and logical story, will you still against it?

[DPZ2]

Hypothetical question; if in the future the game actually gave us garlemald expansion where they're to rebuild their empire and for some provinces agree to still be under them (let's say for example, because of their technological advantage and economic reason), in a well written and logical story, will you still against it?

First, 'rebuild their [60 year old] empire' is probably never going to happen.

The Garleans I've encountered along the way could do just as well in a Republic (as was the case before Empire), or anything less threatening. Empires are built on the backs of conquered nations. I can't see the advantage for a now freed state to allow the Garleans to exert the same level of control as before.

So, no Empire building ... that way leads to one of the freed states deciding to take advantage of the desolation of Garlemald to become their next conqueror.

I can see no 'logical story' coming out of such a situtation -- only doom, disaster and despair for Garlemald and its peoples.

It is no longer the story of the Warrior of Light at that point. It will be hidden off screen, as was Ala Mhigo for the most part.

[Cleretic]

So, no Empire building ... that way leads to one of the freed states deciding to take advantage of the desolation of Garlemald to become their next conqueror.

I should point out that this sort of story has been approached around Garlemald a couple times. Bozja definitely paints Gabranth as essentially trying this, and both the Doma and Ala Mhigo parts of the Stormblood patch content have 'let's not leave ourselves open to tyrannical rule again' as a significant element. So it's clear where the general mindset is around the problem, as well as it being clear that we've gone through this song and dance before. (And for people who think the game is 'too pro-democracy' or whatever, I should point out that Doma grapples with that question while remaining a feudal lordship because Doma's relationship to the problem is different to everyone else's.)

Also, I should point out: a lot of the people who tend to be fairly pro-imperialism or the like are usually picturing themselves as the empire in the equation, rather than the conquered. This game tends not to.


Concluding the Garleans' story more than it has been so far is kinda weird, because yes it should be done, but it's hard to figure out where or how. It's not a story that suits the broad, often grand and combat-heavy approach of the MSQ, because honestly, most of the playerbase isn't super interested in that sort of dense politics with very little action (same reason why we won't get a war tribunal to determine guilt for people like Fordola). But at the same time you don't necessarily want it to be too far out of the way, so the all-roles capstone probably won't be where it's best explored. The tone is DEFINITELY not light or comedic, so Hildibrand's out, as is most likely a tribe quest even if I think that'd nail it (while tribe quests can deal with heavier subjects, they fly better being light-hearted).

Ideally they'd be best off with a slightly more extended wrapup that we just happen to be present for, similar to the EW role quests (the capstone was indeed Garlean, but was way too brief and focused on the Blasphemy). It's kinda hard to imagine where exactly that sort of approach might fit though, especially in a patch cycle where all the major content tentpoles are already accounted for.

[MikkoAkure]

Eorzean's crime is definitely the same as garlean's crime. Their number is lower than garlemalds? Perhaps. But killing 100 people or 1000 people, the sin is still the same.

Again, it's not the same and you're making a false equivalency. Garlemald was destroying lives and cultures on a global scale for no reason. Before now, Eorzea was a backwater fighting regional conflicts between multiple people groups with swords and arrows for 1500 years. Garlemald has been bombing cities from the sky for 60 years to get revenge for something that happened 600 years ago and then expanded beyond that to destroy countries that had nothing to do with them at all.

Your example Eorzea's second chance only happened because of WoL, and even then it was very recent. In arr we still have limsa in war with the sahagin because they broke the treaty.

The treaty was broken with the Kobolds, not the Sahagin. The Sahagin have been enemies since before 1.0, they and their Serpent Reaver allies have been pillaging for years and burned down the village the fishing guild lalafell woman came from.

If you don't remember, their crimes don't/didn't stop there either. Gridania still haven't addressed their racism against duskwight (and moon at iirc?), their wood wailers are r*ping poachers.

Going to need a source on this last bit because I don't remember that.

In any case, the recent Saints' Wake event had a Gridanian Elezen married to a Moon Keeper Miqo'te. In a world where inter-racial marriages are frowned upon, let alone one between a Wildwood and a Moon Keeper, that's a big deal. But the likely case is that the writers don't care about that plot thread anymore and we won't see racial tensions as much going forward anyway.

What I want to say is, they're not perfect right? The same as garlemald as of now. But if the game can gave them second chance, why not doing the same for garlean empire?

My point in my previous post when I brought up the Eorzean nations is that they had full-on arcs where they're shown to be really crappy, try to be better and end up slipping, but then overcome their issues and resolve their problems or at least get on the way towards doing so. It took a decade of this to get to where we are now. During all that time, Garlemald has been shown on screen and painted as the "well we may suck, but they're worse" crew. It would be extremely cheap to the majority of the playerbase who have been around since the very beginning, are deeply engaged with the story, and aren't edgy imperial fans to have Garlemald just say "oops, sorry", put another Galvus on the throne, and keep the empire around.

Hypothetical question; if in the future the game actually gave us garlemald expansion where they're to rebuild their empire and for some provinces agree to still be under them (let's say for example, because of their technological advantage and economic reason), in a well written and logical story, will you still against it?

If it was well-written, sure I'd still play it, but it would be a disappointment in that there's so much else to do for a whole expansion and I'd rather the game do something new with the close of the previous story instead of going back to the previous story again to give us more Garlean drama as if we haven't had enough. I'd support a side story where we help them since there's a lot left over to be done and I want to know more about the empire, but I don't see us getting anything more than a side-story arc devoted to it, if that, let alone a whole expansion about rebuilding.

The empire is gone. Provinces are in open rebellion and the military can't do anything about it. The 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 10th legions have surrendered in EW and the 10th was supposed to be the last hope for Garlemald so who knows what the state of the others is like. The threat of the military was the only thing that kept the whole engine running and now that's gone and the capital has been destroyed, it's only a matter of time before the rest collapses like dominoes.

Considering that not even Landis was considered a suitable location for the Garlean refugees in the role capstone quest, there's probably no place for them to go and the provinces are lost. The royal family has been wiped out and they've already been stated to be moving on away from that with Fourchenault going to find the surviving senators. The capital is under occupation and while they're still letting them decide their own fate and path forward, the matter of defense is currently handled by the occupation, which isn't exactly a strong point to maintain an empire from.

From a gameplay perspective, we already have a Garlemald zone and it's a wasteland filled with monsters and ruins as well as an occupying force that are all tied into the local sidequests so Garlemald won't end up being completely fixed ever anyway.

Another thing to remember is that the game is written by people who are pulling from their own cultural experiences. Japan was fully occupied for 7 years and its empire was dismantled and the parts returned to the original owners. The same will probably happen to Garlemald and the writers could be drawing from that time period.