Review of 6.3 Story Content

[Midareyukki]

Not you specifically, other people.

Can you give specific examples? I thought the general outlook was that it was positively received, with negative takes on it being pretty sparse. I've seen a lot more disdain thrown at Endwalker, and it wasn't without reason. Usually people point to the exact same topics:

- Hydaelyn's motivation and actions not being satisfactory, with some people feeling it justifies genocide
- Zodiark being curbed early on in the story as the first trial with little build-up, as well as those who criticise it saying that it doesn't do justice to the years of build-up as the end-goal antagonist of the first arc
- Fandaniel being irritating and poorly executed, with him being unsatisfying as a villain. Especially after him usurping Zodiark
- Meteion being an arse-pull with an anvillicious arc whose message ranges from falsely hopeful to insultingly dismissive of people's struggles

I think the only consistent complaint back in SHB that I can remember was Ran'jit's character being poorly executed. Everything else ranged from hype to "not the best execution, but it's passable" like the 2nd arc of Amh Araeng.

[CStrife912]

While I see aspects of the patches being a little underwhelming to what we have before. What I do see is a lot of groundwork for a wider issue, they have gone in since 5.2/3 to now... reworked ARR quests, added trusts to most story related dungeons, reworked trials into solo duties to provide better flow. Reworked how some of the collectible systems work in crafter/gatherers. Reworked spear fishing, adding more diving zones to ARR, introduced new casual content, reworked the PVP system, adding in lots of QoL to the UI with likey more on the way. That is without the visual overhaul in 7.0, I think they have decided to focus on a lot of core systems and new player experience to mark 7.0 as essentially ARR once more in a way. Not maybe on the same sort of scale but I think they are clearly intending spending time reworking core stuff for their next '10 year goal'

[Atelier-Bagur]

Can you give specific examples? I thought the general outlook was that it was positively received, with negative takes on it being pretty sparse. I've seen a lot more disdain thrown at Endwalker, and it wasn't without reason. Usually people point to the exact same topics:

- Hydaelyn's motivation and actions not being satisfactory, with some people feeling it justifies genocide
- Zodiark being curbed early on in the story as the first trial with little build-up, as well as those who criticise it saying that it doesn't do justice to the years of build-up as the end-goal antagonist of the first arc
- Fandaniel being irritating and poorly executed, with him being unsatisfying as a villain. Especially after him usurping Zodiark
- Meteion being an arse-pull with an anvillicious arc whose message ranges from falsely hopeful to insultingly dismissive of people's struggles

I think the only consistent complaint back in SHB that I can remember was Ran'jit's character being poorly executed. Everything else ranged from hype to "not the best execution, but it's passable" like the 2nd arc of Amh Araeng.

Not only the 2nd Ahm Araeng arc with the Talos but also the 2nd Kholusia arc which also had terrible pacing with yet again more Talos stuff.

Then theres also the Raktika part with the Viis and Yshtooa yet again with another fake death, the stuff with Ill Mheg was also pretty annoying. I legit think people oversell ShB and really only remember and like the last bit with Amarout and Emet-Selch because it was such a big twist that it overshadows (lol) everything the msq in ShB was going for.

If were going to be overly critical of EW then yeah its time to be overly critical of ShB and talk about how almost pointless 90 percent of its story was with the concept of Light Wardens just a reskin of the early ARR beats with Scions and the primals.

[Kazhar]

Not only the 2nd Ahm Araeng arc with the Talos but also the 2nd Kholusia arc which also had terrible pacing with yet again more Talos stuff.

Then theres also the Raktika part with the Viis and Yshtooa yet again with another fake death, the stuff with Ill Mheg was also pretty annoying. I legit think people oversell ShB and really only remember and like the last bit with Amarout and Emet-Selch because it was such a big twist that it overshadows (lol) everything the msq in ShB was going for.

If were going to be overly critical of EW then yeah its time to be overly critical of ShB and talk about how almost pointless 90 percent of its story was with the concept of Light Wardens just a reskin of the early ARR beats with Scions and the primals.

People do talk about the pacing of EW but this isn't anywhere close to be a major complaint. (ever heard of Venat and Hermes?) I wouldn't be surprised if, out of the 700+ pages of the lackluster thread, only 20 or less were dedicated to that. More people were annoyed by the fake out deaths, which is indeed a criticism shared with ShB, but the Ultima Thule arc goes above and beyond just Y'shtola dying for 5 minutes, with the entire sequence dedicated to the Scions making long, empty farewell speeches to no one in particular since even they know they're going to come back.
And I would even argue the pacing issues are way more egregious in both cases, so the argument that "ShB did it first" doesn't stand.

[Midareyukki]

Not only the 2nd Ahm Araeng arc with the Talos but also the 2nd Kholusia arc which also had terrible pacing with yet again more Talos stuff.

Then theres also the Raktika part with the Viis and Yshtooa yet again with another fake death, the stuff with Ill Mheg was also pretty annoying. I legit think people oversell ShB and really only remember and like the last bit with Amarout and Emet-Selch because it was such a big twist that it overshadows (lol) everything the msq in ShB was going for.

If were going to be overly critical of EW then yeah its time to be overly critical of ShB and talk about how almost pointless 90 percent of its story was with the concept of Light Wardens just a reskin of the early ARR beats with Scions and the primals.

I personally haven't seen the amount of vitriol thrown at EW be thrown at those scenes in SHB. That's the thing o: Like, sure, I do remember people say that the bit with the Talos was annoying, Magnus was really off-putting, Y'shtola's tenth fake-out death being just more of the same... But none of that carried the same amount of disdain Endwalker is receiving.

I think that's the difference and why you're seeing such a double standard.

Because it's as I said. SHB's scenes ranged from good to mediocre with weird execution. And those scenes were quite minor.

Contrast that to the major players in Endwalker: Fandaniel, Zodiark, Hydaelyn and Meteion.

[Atelier-Bagur]

Then why say I am one of the people overgeneralizing endwalker?

Werent you also one of the people in the other story thread whom supported aveyond's takes and what not?

Oh whatever, I did make a mistake by not fully reading what you posted here so my bad.

[Saraide]

Werent you also one of the people in the other story thread whom supported aveyond's takes and what not?

Oh whatever, I did make a mistake by not fully reading what you posted here so my bad.

Yea you got the wrong guy, I like the endwalker story a lot.

[Kaurhz]

On the topic of ShB story and pacing, I am going to go ahead and say a lot of it was due to it being a fairly contained story. Further, I will also say that the post-story of Shadowbringers had some very severe pacing issues, and I do mean really severe.

Many of these pacing issues which I would argue ended up cascading into Endwalker.

[Atelier-Bagur]

People do talk about the pacing of EW but this isn't anywhere close to be a major complaint. (ever heard of Venat and Hermes?) I wouldn't be surprised if, out of the 700+ pages of the lackluster thread, only 20 or less were dedicated to that. More people were annoyed by the fake out deaths, which is indeed a criticism shared with ShB, but the Ultima Thule arc goes above and beyond just Y'shtola dying for 5 minutes, with the entire sequence dedicated to the Scions making long, empty farewell speeches to no one in particular since even they know they're going to come back.
And I would even argue the pacing issues are way more egregious in both cases, so the argument that "ShB did it first" doesn't stand.

Yet people still use ShB for being better even though it did the exact same thing as EW but somehow people are pretending that Shb was perfect? What?

[Kazhar]

Yet people still use ShB for being better even though it did the exact same thing as EW but somehow people are pretending that Shb was perfect? What?

Not even prime forum scapegoat aveyond ever said ShB was perfect.
I can't talk about what other people feel, but when I say ShB was better, I talk about aspects which I care about. It had a much stronger antagonist, I liked the central theme much better, the main cast (despite being the exact same) was more compelling and the climax was absolutely great. Also, none of the things I truly hated about EW were present at the time so it's a definitive plus.
Was it a flawed expansion? Absolutely, but I don't think there's anything contradictory with liking one but hating the other.

Also the people being overly cynical over Venat and Hermes? How about how manipulative Crystal Exarch and Emet-Selch were over the WoL and the Scions

Crystal Exarch being a bit manipulative isn't anywhere close to the scale of what Venat and Hermes did. And the whole time he wanted to sacrifice himself anyway, he never had any intention of harming the WoL. You could argue the scale is similar with Emet-Selch but the main difference is that the story never pretends he's not the villain. (Alphinaud celebrates his death with his happiest face, did the same happen with Venat?)
Many of those who are the most critical of the story said they would have been fine with Venat's portrayal if she wasn't framed as an all-loving hero. There's nothing contradictory with the same people being fans of Emet-Selch.