|
The twist is only going to be that we put the crystal in the aethereal sea. "Eric is gonna be Laha!" is in the same vein as "Hydraelyn is evil!" 
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 00:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 11:31 |
|
|
Lahabrea is Zenos that timetravelled and bodyhopped into Lahabrea to test your reflexes actually, every final boss you fight from now on is probably Zenos, but you will never know Dwesa fucked around with this message at 01:05 on Jan 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 01:02
|
|
|
Lord_Magmar posted:The problem with Ericthonius being our Lahabrea is he's already fully admitted to being completely poo poo at any form of creation magic besides chains (and fire/ice apparently). He can't even do actual imprisonment magic without Themis backing him up (and Themis ends up learning it from him). Yea because in anime no one ever has hidden untapped power that bursts forth dramatically when the plot calls for it. I swear you have the weirdest analytical methodology.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 01:14
|
|
|
Something to remind everyone of with Pandaemonium: Alexander started with steampunk goblins, and ended with time travel. Omega started with FFV fanservice, and ended with Sad Alien Robot Pathos. Eden started with a weird knight and primal refights, and ended with The Shittiest Boyfriend. Every single prediction about Pandaemonium is inherently flawed if you aren't trying to predict at least two weird twists ahead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 01:57
|
|
|
I’ve never heard of this Lahabrea/Iggy couple thing before, but holy poo poo is he pretty unbothered by her dying if they were lovers for 10 thousand years. He is literally like, ‘heh, okay but what now.’
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 02:00
|
|
|
ParliamentOfDogs posted:I’ve never heard of this Lahabrea/Iggy couple thing before, but holy poo poo is he pretty unbothered by her dying if they were lovers for 10 thousand years. He is literally like, ‘heh, okay but what now.’ We killed Gaius’s foster daughter and he tried to recruit us
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 02:03
|
|
|
ParliamentOfDogs posted:I’ve never heard of this Lahabrea/Iggy couple thing before, but holy poo poo is he pretty unbothered by her dying if they were lovers for 10 thousand years. He is literally like, ‘heh, okay but what now.’ It's a pretty bad theory, but Igeyorhm has probably died a bunch and he could have just found a new one and bonked her with the convocation stone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 02:22
|
|
|
Cleretic posted:Something to remind everyone of with Pandaemonium:  Good point
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 02:23
|
|
|
Orcs and Ostriches posted:It's a pretty bad theory, but Igeyorhm has probably died a bunch and he could have just found a new one and bonked her with the convocation stone. Didn't we use auracite on her though? So she can't come back?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 02:24
|
|
|
Eimi posted:Didn't we use auracite on her though? So she can't come back? Orcs and Ostriches is probably referring to the memory stone system that they use to replace dead Ascians. Even then, this Igeyorhm’s been around since the failure of the 13th, so she’s practically an original member
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 02:26
|
|
|
Eimi posted:Didn't we use auracite on her though? So she can't come back? One of two things has happened - the ascian memories have been blown out of that soul fragment, and it returns to the lifestream - or - the soul and everything else was destroyed and turned to aether. Either way, there 6+ more shards of that soul running around.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 02:36
|
|
|
I was under the impression the auracite was there to prevent trapped ascians from just reforming in the Rift like they would normally do. Once their aether burns down and they die I figured they just went into the Aetherial Sea like anybody else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 02:40
|
|
|
Runa posted:I was under the impression the auracite was there to prevent trapped ascians from just reforming in the Rift like they would normally do.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 02:48
|
|
|
I just finished the MSQ (credits going now) and it was great. A couple questions: - Are we ever really given an answer as to why *literally every planet* has already fallen to despair/apathy? Seems like you'd randomly come across at least some that haven't reached that point yet. Does the nature of dynamis just cause strong feelings of despair to exponentially go wild and spread throughout the universe if you don't have a bunch of aether to protect your planet? The examples we're shown of other societies don't seem to imply that's the case, though. Or is it maybe that Meteion encountered some of the ones that fell to despair, absorbed their overwhelming negative emotions, and then spread them to the "healthy" societies she encountered (it seems like this is maybe what happened with the last empty town you see in Ultima Thule). - I was under the impression that Venat had some faction behind her (and that this enabled the summoning of Hydaelyn which, while not as powerful as Zodiark, would still presumably require the sacrifice of a bunch of people). But the cutscene just shows what I assume is her doing the summoning. Maybe she had already arranged things with the other people who opposed the Zodiark option? All in all, I think they presented that sort of subject matter about as well as they could. I like when Hydaelyn points out that her goal isn't really good/just and is still damning a bunch of people. I think my favorite scene in the MSQ is the one that follows Hydaelyn while Answers is playing (revealing that Answers surprisingly has lyrics directly describing the main Endwalker themes). Doing the final fights as Paladin convinced me that tank is the way to go for story fights. Not only is it more forgiving for mistakes, but you feel like a badass when you use the shielding moves (like Paladin's thing that protects people behind them). Final trial kinda struck a perfect balance where there were close calls (I think that at least like half the party was new to it, including both me and the other tank - I ended up MTing, not that that involves much in that fight) without any wipes. Zenos fight seems like it could have been a little tough as a DPS. vvv I'm pretty sure most songs we hear in English have lyrics written or partially written originally in English by Koji Fox (and generally have remarkably good lyrics - I kind of feel bad for the Japanese players that most probably don't get to appreciate how well the lyrics work). Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 03:06 on Jan 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 02:59
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:All in all, I think they presented that sort of subject matter about as well as they could. I like when Hydaelyn points out that her goal isn't really good/just and is still damning a bunch of people. I think my favorite scene in the MSQ is the one that follows Hydaelyn while Answers is playing (revealing that Answers surprisingly has lyrics directly describing the main Endwalker themes). Who wrote the lyrics to Answers, anyway? Was it originally in English or Japanese?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 03:03
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I just finished the MSQ (credits going now) and it was great. 1. Current theory is that Meteion had something of a selection/confirmation bias going on. In fact, she probably caused several of those despair-pocalypses herself (both the second and third worlds of The Dead Ends mention her as a catalyst in notes). 2. The post-Elpis scene was not literal, and was instead a symbolic representation of events that Venat experienced. Venat's crew existed and helped her summon Hydaelyn, and the 5.2 scene happened between the conversation with the crowd and the Sundering itself (and indeed, the power-pose we saw might not have been the Sundering in the first place, but just representative of it).
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 03:05
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:Who wrote the lyrics to Answers, anyway? Was it originally in English or Japanese? Answers, like pretty much all the songs, has always been in English.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 03:06
|
|
|
For your first question, Alphinaud speculates your exact guess, that Meteion got unlucky with some of the first worlds she visited, and then inadvertently dynamis bombed the perfectly healthy ones with despair in a feedback loop. The notes on The Dead Ends support this theory. For Venat, that cutscene is not meant to be taken literally
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 03:06
|
|
|
also there’s supposedly interviews going out over the next couple of weeks that discuss the story, I gotta imagine some of them will touch on the dynamis death drive stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 03:08
|
|
|
thetoughestbean posted:We killed Gaius’s foster daughter and he tried to recruit us haven't we since learned canonically that gaius always thought she had bad vibes this isn't a real point i just thought it was funny when they said "no gaius actually, uh. gaius thought she was SUPER weird."
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 03:10
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I just finished the MSQ (credits going now) and it was great. --It hasn't been spelled out, but I assume the latter. Meteion was seeing everything through the depression lens of her creator looking for a single answer that would fix everything, and when she found pain in the universe didn't look for the hope fighting it but concluded that death was the only universal answer to ending pain. In some cases worlds were already dead, others she watched die, and it's implied that for the third one in Dead Ends she actually caused the existential crisis in the people that made them create euthenasia monsters. From there her cry of despair overwhelmed other worlds (is it implied that her Dynamis-tampering is why the dragons' young hatched deformed? That's what I got). --I think that cutscene is to be taken as metaphor, not exactly how things happened. And yeah, they have recontextualized Answers over and over and over again and it's pretty dang cool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 03:11
|
|
|
Valentin posted:haven't we since learned canonically that gaius always thought she had bad vibes ehhh Gaius had a pretty hosed up relationship with his adopted children given that they were basically slaves that also served as his subordinates. A lot of the weapon storyline is him coming to terms with and trying to make amends for that (plus everything he does is him trying to make amends for the terrible poo poo he did). I don't think you can excuse Gaius' attitude towards Livia with "well her vibes were bad." He just didn't reciprocate her feelings.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 03:16
|
|
|
I mean if you adopt a kid and then your kid wants to date you as an adult you have failed as a parent in at least one very major way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 03:30
|
|
|
Hellioning posted:I mean if you adopt a kid and then your kid wants to date you as an adult you have failed as a parent in at least one very major way. Supposedly he only adopted Livia when she was like, 15-16. Compared to the Au Ra who he actually did adopt as children. At which point from her perspective it’s not a new father adopting her but a handsome older gentleman picking her to be part of his personal squadron etc. Compare and contrast her sister’s experience with Aymeric.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 03:39
|
|
|
Hellioning posted:I mean if you adopt a kid and then your kid wants to date you as an adult you have failed as a parent in at least one very major way. Ah yes, but when it happens in a Japanese story, it's an allusion to the Tale of Genji, where the protagonist raises his adopted daughter to be the perfect wife and then marries her!
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 03:46
|
|
|
Lord_Magmar posted:The problem with Ericthonius being our Lahabrea is he's already fully admitted to being completely poo poo at any form of creation magic besides chains (and fire/ice apparently). He can't even do actual imprisonment magic without Themis backing him up (and Themis ends up learning it from him). Whether Lahabrea is Eric or Eric-dad can be resolved very easily by my wild guess of him being both of them. There's a couple of mysteries in Pandaemonium and that explanation addresses who is our Lahabrea, who is Eric's dad, and what the merging magic Dracula talked about can do. Only thing missing is the apparent tempering. Algid fucked around with this message at 04:14 on Jan 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 04:11
|
|
|
Hellioning posted:I mean if you adopt a kid and then your kid wants to date you as an adult you have failed as a parent in at least one very major way. sometimes a child just has rotten vibes but you're past the 30 day return
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 04:45
|
|
|
Thanks to everyone who pointed out that Hydaelyn scene not being literal; that makes more sense. Been reading through portions of the rest of this thread and the parts where people argue about the Ancients/Hydaelyn's actions and I feel like a lot of people were kind of off-base from both angles (while I think some others understood it the same way I did). I don't think you're supposed to view Hydaelyn's actions as being righteous (she even says herself that her actions weren't just). My interpretation (and one I saw some other people have) is that she came to (probably correctly) believe that the Ancients' society would have ended up like one of the "dead end" societies, largely because their very nature makes any sort of emotional growth difficult (and they were already on the cusp of sacrificing most other life to bring back the other Zodiark sacrifices IIRC). It wasn't an absolute thing, since you obviously had people like Venat and the others who agreed with her, but the aforementioned scene seems to represent her reluctantly coming to understand that the bulk of their society is going to be willing to do literally anything to return to how things were before (up to and including any level of sacrifice of other life). The Sundering could be seen as necessary due to the "making people have limited life-spans" and "making people more open to and capable of manipulating dynamis" elements probably being required to deal with the whole "threat to all life in the universe." But I think the most relevant/important thing is that it's supposed to be a morally ambiguous decision. Venat is basically hoping that beings forced to deal with mortality and hardship will be capable of confronting the Final Days (both the root cause of them and just becoming a society more capable of dealing with bad things), but that's of little consolation to either the surviving Ancients who were sundered or the countless mortals who experienced horrible suffering. Overall, I thought that all this stuff was more well thought-out than I expected. edit: Unrelated to anything else, but a couple days ago I came across the goofy leopard-skin top from the Loporrit fashion quest on one of the NPCs during the Marauder quest line. edit2: And another random thought I just recalled - it's goofy when Hythlodaeus is like "I wish I could have seen the traumatized Emet-Selch who has been around for thousands of generations!" Like what the heck man, lol edit3: And another - I have nameplates turned off and there was a very confusing moment when I visited the Omega weapon robot people (Omicrons? lol) and I saw a large pile of dead bodies and spent like 20 seconds trying to figure out if they were actually supposed to be there. Apparently there was a large group of players just playing dead there for some reason. Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 05:41 on Jan 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 05:04
|
|
|
Were they actually dead (black hp bars)? Maybe those people set their homepoint there and were a Chi corpse pile?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 06:01
|
|
|
Remember that Hydaelyn, by extension Venat, loves the world and life. She loves her people but not above all else the way say... Emet did. When the second sacrifice brought with it teeming new life (Roegadyn's, Miqo'te etc.) And the people of Amaurot would not be dissuaded from "Let's sacrifice that too." She was left with only one real option, to make it so that was never possible again. Importantly, she's actually genuinely too weak to stop Zodiark. She can sunder him, bind him, but she cannot overpower him unsundered. The sundering was simultaneously an action to not allow the Ancients to wallow in despair and treat Zodiark as their blood sacrifice wishing machine, and to give the life newborn a chance to live. It's not one she wanted to take. Her actions had the Ancients agreed with her wasn't going to be "so we all have to divide ourselves and get weaker." It was simply that you can't undo the tragedy that occurred, you have to grow stronger and move on from it, walk forward. Rise above despair. The sundering was a desperate action against a people who had lost their way and become enthralled, if not literally then, metaphysically, by the power of Zodiark. That doesn't mean "Don't make the world a better place." or "We can never be happy." but more "Sacrificing new life to bring back old life in a desperate attempt to literally reverse tragedy is weakness." And, in comparison, is the EXACT opposite stance the people of the 8th Umbral Calamity did. Cid didn't force anyone to take the actions to send the Crystal Tower back in time, they left it open as an option, but that option would be executed by people, it would cost no life beyond the idea that they may cease to be (Which they didn't and dawn broke on their new world too. Because hope is everlasting.) And that is the key difference, the Ancients wanted a return "to the days of old, where the star was a font of love and we knew naught but bliss." They didn't want to have to suffer, or ever know suffering. You can also see a reflection in them in the Ea, the "You would be blissful in ignorance." Lord_Magmar posted:Supposedly he only adopted Livia when she was like, 15-16. Compared to the Au Ra who he actually did adopt as children. Also, like Aymeric, Gaius is such a cut above the rest of the Garlean military it's like... I'd be surprised if he wasn't the crush of teenage girls and boys, he was probably quite the celebrity back in Garlemald. Like he wears the Darth Vader armor and is intimidating, powerful, then he takes it off and oh he's hot too. I'm just saying if there was a Legatus pin-up calender Gaius would probably be repeated multiple times.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 06:20
|
|
|
A lot of people miss that the Hydaelyn scene isn't meant to be literal, it's not the most clear on first glance. It's more obvious when you stop and compare it to events you actually knew happened, and how they fell on the timeline, but it's not conveyed as effectively as it could be Also, Ytlaya posted:edit2: And another random thought I just recalled - it's goofy when Hythlodaeus is like "I wish I could have seen the traumatized Emet-Selch who has been around for thousands of generations!" Like what the heck man, lol I think that's just what their relationship is like
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 06:24
|
|
|
Onmi posted:Also, like Aymeric, Gaius is such a cut above the rest of the Garlean military it's like... I'd be surprised if he wasn't the crush of teenage girls and boys, he was probably quite the celebrity back in Garlemald. Like he wears the Darth Vader armor and is intimidating, powerful, then he takes it off and oh he's hot too. I'm just saying if there was a Legatus pin-up calender Gaius would probably be repeated multiple times. Zenos probably gets featured on the front cover every time though. Also I don't really know where to put this because it's like, weird conceptual ideas for future class buttons/mechanics. But I'd really love if the 91-100 stuff for Samurai involved getting Zenos' abilities. My current thinking is that using Ogi-Namikiri replaces your next Kasha, Gekko and Yukikaze with Zenos Swell, Storm and Sword techniques (as named in Dissidia/his dungeon fight). Then you get a special Iajutsu cast. The Swell, Storm and Sword techniques would in of themselves also be mini-iajutsu with cast-times.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 06:30
|
|
|
Runa posted:A lot of people miss that the Hydaelyn scene isn't meant to be literal, it's not the most clear on first glance. It's more obvious when you stop and compare it to events you actually knew happened, and how they fell on the timeline, but it's not conveyed as effectively as it could be I think it's also just what Hythlodaeus is like. "This sounds fun. Potential consequences? Sounds like future me's problem."
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 07:03
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:My interpretation (and one I saw some other people have) is that she came to (probably correctly) believe that the Ancients' society would have ended up like one of the "dead end" societies, largely because their very nature makes any sort of emotional growth difficult (and they were already on the cusp of sacrificing most other life to bring back the other Zodiark sacrifices IIRC). It wasn't an absolute thing, since you obviously had people like Venat and the others who agreed with her, but the aforementioned scene seems to represent her reluctantly coming to understand that the bulk of their society is going to be willing to do literally anything to return to how things were before (up to and including any level of sacrifice of other life). The Sundering could be seen as necessary due to the "making people have limited life-spans" and "making people more open to and capable of manipulating dynamis" elements probably being required to deal with the whole "threat to all life in the universe. I guess I just can't agree with the idea that loss and difficulty are an essential part of growing emotionally and learning to accept life, which feels so fundamental to the themes and moral framework of the expansion beyond its general "life is worth living" message. If you read through it, I'm sure you saw that I spent a long time in this thread harping obnoxiously about what I feel were technical problems or dissonance with the writing, but I think it ultimately comes down to that. I feel like my experiences have led me to develop a skepticism about common ideas of maturity in a way I've probably been projecting on to the story. I've lost a lot of people and things in my life, but I don't like it's made me stronger as a person, just more neurotic and closed off. And I wonder how much people's ability to handle grief is more a product of having the right support and fundamental character then building internal strength through experience, and that it's just become a cultural norm to convince ourselves it makes us richer or more durable as people because it gives some sense of justice to the world. So seeing that truism employed in such a judgemental way was offputting to me. It's probably unnecessary, but I wanted to apologize for making GBS threads up the thread whenever this topic came up again. Even if some people were being unnecessarily mean, I definitely got way too worked up over the plot of an MMO expansion and said some ridiculous things. PoorWeather fucked around with this message at 09:17 on Jan 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 08:16
|
|
|
PoorWeather posted:I guess I just can't agree with the idea that loss and difficulty are an essential part of growing emotionally and learning to accept life, which feels so fundamental to the themes and moral framework of the expansion beyond its general "life is worth living" message. If you read through it, I'm sure you saw that I spent a long time in this thread harping obnoxiously about what I feel were technical problems or dissonance with the writing, but I think it ultimately comes down to that. As someone who needs anti-depressants to function, who's lost his father etc. lotta regrets, the themes of the story resonated hard for me. And while you're not wrong about the support and fundamental character-building strength... That's not what the game isn't saying. Radz-at-han is an entire SOCIETY based around neighbours coming together to work for a common goal, the Ilsabard Contingent, literally the 10+ minute cutscene where they go over every external thing you've done in the game from raids to loving Eureka, and showing how everyone comes together holy poo poo the Scions are founded on people, multiple times, coming together and bonding through shared trauma. Both Minfilia's Scions after the Circle of Knowing to Alphinaud after the Bloody Banquete.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 10:27
|
|
|
I can't say I'm fond of the reading that says suffering is good for you actually. Like, eat your suffering kids, it'll make you big and strong! I think the better takeaway is the idea that suffering is inevitable and must be borne with dignity. Life is not lived for suffering. Life is lived in spite of suffering - but we choose to live anyway. "This is the essence of what lasts. You trespass on human form and still delight in it. As a human, you can change ten thousand times without ever reaching the limit. Can you count the different things that have made you happy? So the sage wanders in what exists everywhere and can't be lost. He likes growing old and he likes dying young. He likes the beginning and he likes the end. People model themselves on the sage. But why on that to which the ten thousand things are tied and on which every change depends?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 10:38
|
|
|
Personally, the story has resonated with me in a lot of aspects I've been dealing with my mental health, and I think something people are missing is that what the game says is not "suffering is good actually", but... "overcoming suffering is good actually". It's about being able to move past it and finding enjoyment in life. It's as Venat says in that cutscene: finding the light amidst all the darkness. And obviously if you are still suffering then the message will probably not resonate with you. Also there's a lot of people that harped about "the game says we shouldn't erradicate suffering!" and to that I give what my psycologist gave me... if you focus only on making sure you never suffer, you're not really living, you're just not dying. Because anything in the world can make you suffer. That's not to say we shouldn't try to erradicate illness and poverty, just that there's gonna be other things to replace them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 10:47
|
|
|
GiantRockFromSpace posted:Personally, the story has resonated with me in a lot of aspects I've been dealing with my mental health, and I think something people are missing is that what the game says is not "suffering is good actually", but... "overcoming suffering is good actually". It's about being able to move past it and finding enjoyment in life. It's as Venat says in that cutscene: finding the light amidst all the darkness. And obviously if you are still suffering then the message will probably not resonate with you. Exactly that. It's not that we should strive to suffer or do nothing if suffering or that we shouldn't strive to eradicate suffering. But life sucks, people die, people we care about. Injustices occur. But the only way to be someone who never suffers is to be someone who does not care. You become numb to peoples misery, you give no damns about yourself. Because otherwise the plight of others will cause you suffering, hardships will cause you suffering. quote:I’ve rattled around long enough to have learned one thing: the universe is cold, and cruel, and violent–but only if you choose to look at it that way. For every act of aggression there are a thousand acts of kindness. For every hateful word, a million declarations of love. The good always outweighs the bad I think for me one of the best moments in the expansion was when the woman threw the rock at the Blasphemy. Because even though she died, even though she'd lost her husband, even though she was scared... you never go quiet. You rage against the dying of the light. quote:Even should you lose all that is dear to you. Even if it should cost you your life... You bear the burden and fight on, kicking and screaming until your last breath is spent! Suffering is a part of life, but you can make drat sure it never wins.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 10:56
|
|
|
I thought the point was that suffering was an unavoidable part of the universe and you have to accept it happens and deal with it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 10:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 11:31 |
|
|
In all seriousness I think that the events of the last few years have told very much on a lot of people and that's part of why the "Suffering is necessary/good for you/makes you stronger" theodicy is something some people react so badly to. Look, suffering mostly just fucks you up. It's not suffering that makes you stronger, and you arguably can't really "beat" it - it always wins. Matsya's friend goes down throwing a rock, but she still goes down; the monster wins. She dies horribly. The moral victory doesn't matter - the only real victory is that she saves her child. What makes people stronger is love and connection and support. Good times make strong people, not bad times. And we've been subjected to some amazingly bad times. It's not unreasonable for people to feel like maybe we deserve to aspire towards paradise. Or that a perceived condemnation of paradise, even a temporary one, is ultimately mostly sour grapes. But that's why I think EW puts such an emphasis on the brighter moments. The Ancients' world was a good world. The present day Etheirys is (or can be) a good world. The destruction of these places does not undermine their essential goodness, it just means that sometimes, eventually, pain happens and all you can do is pick up the pieces. The World Unsundered was already destroyed when Venat struck it down. It wasn't going to come back, no matter how much it deserved or didn't deserve to exist, unless the Ancients could have dealt better with their grief. But I get why people reject that. The whole idea that Suffering Makes You Strong or Is Necessary is one of those positions that's more convincing as a thought experiment about philosophical points than as a reflection of individual experiences. That's why it always gets abstracted into increasingly rarefied definitions about insecurity or conflict instead of "everyone needs to get periodically beaten up by life and suffer misery and despair to toughen them up." Contracting the plague doesn't make you tougher. It just hurts you. If there's a problem with Endwalker, in my opinion, it's that it occasionally feels like it's passively punishing people for suffering from depression, trauma or anxiety or other forms of neuroatypicality. But that's also really not, I think, meant to be seen literally so much as symbolically. Jetrauben fucked around with this message at 11:36 on Jan 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 11:21
|
|