I've been watching a friend stream his playthrough of endwalker and I cannot for the life of me see how Venat sundering all the ancients makes sense. They were able to successfully stop the final days by having Zodiark create a shield of aether to protect etheirys and forestall the final days. Wouldn't sundering etheirys and zodiark into 14 separate shards (the source and its 13 reflections) theoretically give each shard only 1/14th of zodiark's aether which might not be enough aether to stop meteion's attack? Sure you can say that each shard had less aether making dynamis more available for the inhabitants to use against the dynamis wielded by meteion, but how much positive dynamis would people on an individual shard expect to have just after having experienced the initial onset of the final days and then having their world suddenly sundered into pieces?
Also there are more inconsistencies between the way shadowbringers and endwalker illustrate the sundering. In shadowbringers we see the cutscene with Emet Selch telling us that after order was restored the sundering happened when Hydaelyn battles Zodiark, but in endwalker we see the cutscene with venat in amaurot during the final days walking around and then sundering the world before zodiark even restored order and also without even having to fight zodiark. What also struck me as odd was that during that same cutscene venat says that they were able to forestall the final days by summoning zodiark, but blasphemies are still popping up everywhere and killing the ancients. Also isn't venat already supposed to be hydaelyn at this point? From the looks of it, she looks just like plain venat walking around but then she has the ability to sunder?... Why exactly did the writers suddenly decide to retell a different version of events in endwalker? It seems like an accidental and careless retcon.
Also why the heck weren't Elidibus, Lahabrea, and Emet Selch sundered? Is that explained in the game later at all?