Quote Originally Posted by Lady_Silvermoon View Post
How do you not see the conflict between the ideas of "hope everlasting" and "these people have no shot at survival, so it's okay to use them for parts"?
In short, because I don't think the writers saw that conflict (and their outlook is framed as Venat's), so everything in the story has to be viewed through the lens of that not being a conflict.

But also, your wording is a misrepresentation of the outlook, because the game never portrayed Venat's actions as "recycling a doomed race for parts" but as creating a continuation of the same race in a new form that was necessary for their survival. And in the context of the rest of the game's plot, it succeeded.

To be clear, I do not like how Endwalker handled Hydaelyn's actions. But we're stuck with what the writers have written, and it makes far more sense to me to just accept their premise that events needed to happen this way while thinking that they didn't do a particularly good job of writing the specifics.

If I somehow erase the events we were shown from, say, the confrontation at Kairos to the end of our vision in the rift, and just mark it as "blank space, fill with what you think happened based on what you see in the rest of the story" then what we are left with before that blank space is wise and compassionate Venat, and what we have after it is Hydaelyn who has done her best to safeguard the world for 12,000 years and is now quite ready to let it go once she has been able to pass on the knowledge you will need to save it. What goes in the middle? What adds up with the rest of what we know?

I view it in a similar way to the writing of the doomed timeline situation - the writers made poor decisions in this bit, so I will have to rely on what they say in the rest of the story to get the best picture of what they were trying to do here.