Final Fantasy Soft vs Enix

[Abriael]

Re: the Iceni, I'd re-read your Tacitus, or summary thereof.

Tacitus isn't the only source, and there are tons of books written on the topic.

Don't worry about that; I have no national pride. Personally, I consider the notion foolish; each to their own though. Also, my ancestors didn't so much oppress and control the native Britons as indiscriminately rape and murder them quite literally into the Dark Ages. I don't revere those roots.

Glad that we agree on something.

Naw, civil discussion requires manners. Despite my attempts to provoke some from you it's not occurred.

I would say countering the arguments and not the person is included in the definition of "manners" during discussion. Despite my attempts to provoke that in you, it's not occurred.

You can compare FFXIV grass to real grass. You can compare Garlemald to Rome. To come back at me with "you can't" gets us nowhere. Let's leave it alone now.

I guess you can "compare" yes. I used the wrong term. You can indeed compare them and notice that they were completely different in their political stricture, ethos, values and behavior towards the conquered.

[Mjollnir]

Tacitus isn't the only source, and there are tons of books written on the topic.

Ok, now you've displayed a basic misunderstanding of how history works.

I would say countering the arguments and not the person is included in the definition of "manners" during discussion. Despite my attempts to provoke that in you, it's not occurred.

So you feel that I shouldn't comment on the tone of your posts, just the content? I explained earlier why I thought that was necessary. I stand by that, so I guess this is another thing we disagree on.

I guess you can "compare" yes. I used the wrong term. You can indeed compare them and notice that they were completely different in their political stricture, ethos, values and behavior towards the conquered.

Eorzea has not been conquered. It is being threatened. It does not want to be conquered, it wants to remain free. It's people would consider their lives under Garlemald oppressed and controlled. And, speaking of Tacitus, here's a nice summary on that Wikipedia which describes a similar dynamic (hint: it makes mention of Rome).

[Abriael]

Ok, now you've displayed a basic misunderstanding of how history works.

I would say not considering multiple sources is a basic misunderstanding of how history works.

So you feel that I shouldn't comment on the tone of your posts, just the content? I explained earlier why I thought that was necessary. I stand by that, so I guess this is another thing we disagree on.

Then you may want not to paint yourself as paladin of courtesy, since you can't avoid resorting to personal attacks, which are the very opposite of courtesy.

Eorzea has not been conquered. It is being threatened. It does not want to be conquered, it wants to remain free. It's people would consider their lives under Garlemald oppressed and controlled. And, speaking of Tacitus, here's a nice summary on that Wikipedia which describes a similar dynamic (hint: it makes mention of Rome).

As a matter of fact part of Eorzea has been conquered (Ala Migho for instance), and in the conquered areas the Garlean empire behaved in a way that's radically opposite to how the Roman Empire behaved in the same situation. Let's not even go into the genocidal aspirations the empire has, that never were part of Roman philosophy.

Again, different political stricture, values, ethos and behavior towards the conquered.

If you want a semi-fitting comparison, you may want to look much nearer in history, which is normal, considering that the FANTASY backstory of Eorzea is built on modern values to appease to a modern public, and not ancient historical ones.

What the writers took from history is the flavor, and nothing else.

[Mjollnir]

!

I disagree with pretty much everything you've said about the topic, your reasoning and your comments regards myself and I've explained why in detail. I've got nothing more to add now.