1. #51741
    This is why I thought Stormblood was good, hearing some of these arguments above. Grounded, full of flawed characters. Lost Papalymo in the run up so Lyse had to grow up, which she did pretty badly. Real, human stakes for folks like Raubahn. The Sultana having to grow up. Fordola and her arc. Zenos as a villain (in that expansion) being terrifying but also fairly real.

    In the run up to ShB, Zenos got ressurected, and that's when I felt shit jumped the shark for me. I didn't care for ShB at all. I couldn't care for this random shard other than to get my friends the fuck outta there, none of whom we lost cause I'm so goddamn awesome. Eulmore was like, "fuck these people, let's burn this place to the ground." The Exarch, and his character in general, annoy the ever living fuck out of me - but I'm also a person who can't stand the twins, or Y'shtola's sassy bitch writing, and I prefer the father-daughter dynamic of Thancred/Ryne, or Urangier and his practicality, even if it means concealing things from others. Sin eaters in general were...who the fuck cares. In fact, the whole rise of Zodiark storyline was eyerolling. All of this continued in EW and was just exhausting. I never understood why people suddenly liked Ascians just because of Emet's quirky line delivery. The dude was a monster. Zodiark's cultists were monsters, as were Hydelyn's. Both of those expansions ultimately felt like me (the player) being the adult in the room and having to sort out the shit the tantruming kids (every other character including my own, the WoL) fucked up by being childish. Like, what the fuck was Hermes thinking?

    Give me the real stakes of Hien/Gosetsu/Raubahn/Lyse/M'naago any day of the week. Like, holy shit. The Fall of the Empire? Yes please. In fact, the best parts of EW for me was clearing up the remnants of the Empire in Garlemald.

  2. #51742
    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    This is why I thought Stormblood was good, hearing some of these arguments above. Grounded, full of flawed characters. Lost Papalymo in the run up so Lyse had to grow up, which she did pretty badly. Real, human stakes for folks like Raubahn. The Sultana having to grow up. Fordola and her arc. Zenos as a villain (in that expansion) being terrifying but also fairly real.
    Honestly, the more you go into detail on it, the more I have to agree that I really like the "real, grounded" stories in Stormblood. I really need to go back and reassess exactly why I considered it so low on my expansion tier list. Maybe just because it was sitting there between Heavensward and Shadowbringers.

    I did say during another EW discussion that I always felt like XIV was the strongest when the stories were real, relatable, grounded, personal. Shadowbringers did start to head over that shark for me a bit, but they did a decent job making certain things so personal and emotional that I gave it a pass. But Endwalker took the jump so high that it both literally and metaphorically flew off into space, and the other elements just weren't strong enough for me to excuse it.

  3. #51743
    Quote Originally Posted by Merie View Post
    And Metion is no emet selch. I get what they were going for, but the execution wasn't quite there. It seems the fans agree, because in the post EW fan poll even with Metion fresh in everyone's minds, she got completely destroyed by Emet Selch getting less than a third of the votes.
    But remember that Emet Selch also featured heavilly in the Endwalker story and played a major part in the overall stories inciting incident with Metion. It's not all down to just what he did in Shadowbringers and he's arguably just as fresh in peoples minds but far more familiar.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ghost of Cow View Post
    Zenos really feels like a deconstruction of the old trope of someone who just lives their lives roaming the world looking for battle. Characters like Akuma in SF, or the whole "wandering ronin" thing.
    Akuma actually feels like a genuine threat. He shows up, one shots M Bison then gives you one hell of a boss fight. He's often a hidden boss or intended as an extreme challenge. He's also got personal stakes wrapped up with Ryu, who is the closest thing SF has to a protagonist, and gives us one example of how Ryu might end up in the future. More broadly, the villains of the series want Akuma's power for their own ends and the heroes want to stop him because of the threat he poses.

    Akuma creates conflict with both characters on all sids of the spectrum in the SF universe, and that gives him a lot of presence in the story in everything from a showdown with Ryu in a stormy field right the way through to throwing down at a train station in London with Birdie.

    Zenos never feels threatening to the player. He doesn't create any conflict, he merely allows Fandaniel to do whatever he wants. The subplot about him trying to provoke the player into a fight doesn't go anywhere and is interrupted by rabbits. Zenos is almost entirely passive in the story, he allows things to happen but doesn't ever instigate events for himself. He has the goal of wanting to relive that ultimate showdown with the player, but never does anything to force it.

    He spends the vast majority of the story waiting for you to come to him and will blatently only fight you and you alone. That doesn't seem much like a trope deconstruction as it doesn't highlight any of the contractions or expose any of the underlying assumptions of the trope. It seems more like a character without any clear motiviations or purpose thats outlived his role in the story.

  4. #51744
    The Undying Cthulhu 2020's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rigging your election
    Posts
    37,229
    Quote Originally Posted by Yarathir View Post
    Yeah, I rarely see overt Endwalker haters (the type that will pop up whenever anyone has anything to say or ask about the Endwalker MSQ to remind them that they personally thought it was bad, maybe the worst expansion of them all!) show themselves to be anything but sour grapes Zodiark/Emet stans. This is a gross conflation of groups, I'm sure, but I'm talking about my personal experiences, which is, to say, I'm not even remotely going to be ashamed of saying that I've seen a concerted effort by people who were simply unhappy that Endwalker wasn't what they personally wanted/headcanoned and now they feel like they need to mention how bad it was at any juncture.

    Personally speaking? I liked Endwalker a lot, but I don't think it's devoid of flaws either. Nor, however, am I going to pretend that it's somehow not okay that it has flaws that are overlooked in other expansions. Oh yeah, Ran'jit and his Gukumatz bullshit were just absolutely riveting and sensible. Turning into a dragon reaper with no explanation? Fine. Time and dimension traveling several times? Amazing, not a bad word to say about it. Y'shtola lifestreaming herself (as she tends to by instinct nowadays, lol) and just being casually snapped back because? 10/10. The player spending more than an hour in the latter part of Amh Araeng just to get a trolley going and then they just so conveniently happen to get ahold of the knocker that snatched the one huge piece of leonine that Magnus' dead wife left for him? Beautiful. The people of Eulmore just having a quick and complete change of heart after one of their number had dumped people off there to their deaths not even a week before they realize they did the bad? Well, I love the big cat lady, so that's absolutely a masterstroke of writing![/SIZE]
    I'd be more appreciative of them jumping up to scream "Endwalker sucks!" if they'd just be honest about it and say they really liked Emet-Selch and the ascians and wished that had been a plot thread going forward, rather than one they tied up with a neat bow and sent out to pasture.

    Instead they try to make up all this BS about "pacing" and "story jank" and "bad plot threads", every criticism they offer is precise and "smart sounding" enough that most people won't question it, and just vague enough that they don't actually have to provide any proof. And at the end, when you prove that all of their so-called criticism is just smoke and mirrors, they pull the "Well I'm entitled to my opinion and you're a terrible person for telling me I'm wrong!" when the entire discussion was them trying to claim Endwalker is OBJECTIVELY bad, and I think we all know what that word means.

    As I said, I'd be far more at ease if they just admitted they were Ascian stans (or that the story didn't go the way they wanted it, or whatever the real reason is) rather than trying to throw in literary terms they know nothing about.

    And no, Meteion is no Emet Selch. But FF has several different kinds of villains. The two most prominent are the madman and the force of nature. And for as much as people love Emet for being a sassy bitch, they tend to forget that not only is he a mass murderer, but he was also planning to sacrifice every life and every life on all reflections. Meteion was a child that effectively became a force of nature with a pseudo will.

    Not to mention, I'm not going to set my entire impression of an expansion around the main villain. What I consider when rating a game is the entire experience. For me (and countless other people) Shadowbringers and Endwalker were very comparable experiences. Would it have been nice to do Endwalker over two expansions? Sure, but despite what some people claim was something that was meant to happen over two expansions, they did an incredibly good job. I get why some people might think this, because Endwalker does have two very distinct chapters. But I doubt SE kept it on the books for very long as two expansions, if they did it all, since there probably wouldn't be enough drive to create enough action and intrigue in part 1.
    “Terrible things are happening outside. Poor helpless people are being dragged out of their homes. Families are torn apart. Men, women, and children are separated. Children come home from school to find that their parents have disappeared.”
    Diary of Anne Frank
    January 13, 1943

  5. #51745
    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhu 2020 View Post
    I'd be more appreciative of them jumping up to scream "Endwalker sucks!" if they'd just be honest about it and say they really liked Emet-Selch and the ascians and wished that had been a plot thread going forward, rather than one they tied up with a neat bow and sent out to pasture.

    Instead they try to make up all this BS about "pacing" and "story jank" and "bad plot threads", every criticism they offer is precise and "smart sounding" enough that most people won't question it, and just vague enough that they don't actually have to provide any proof. And at the end, when you prove that all of their so-called criticism is just smoke and mirrors, they pull the "Well I'm entitled to my opinion and you're a terrible person for telling me I'm wrong!" when the entire discussion was them trying to claim Endwalker is OBJECTIVELY bad, and I think we all know what that word means.

    As I said, I'd be far more at ease if they just admitted they were Ascian stans (or that the story didn't go the way they wanted it, or whatever the real reason is) rather than trying to throw in literary terms they know nothing about.

    And no, Meteion is no Emet Selch. But FF has several different kinds of villains. The two most prominent are the madman and the force of nature. And for as much as people love Emet for being a sassy bitch, they tend to forget that not only is he a mass murderer, but he was also planning to sacrifice every life and every life on all reflections. Meteion was a child that effectively became a force of nature with a pseudo will.

    Not to mention, I'm not going to set my entire impression of an expansion around the main villain. What I consider when rating a game is the entire experience. For me (and countless other people) Shadowbringers and Endwalker were very comparable experiences. Would it have been nice to do Endwalker over two expansions? Sure, but despite what some people claim was something that was meant to happen over two expansions, they did an incredibly good job. I get why some people might think this, because Endwalker does have two very distinct chapters. But I doubt SE kept it on the books for very long as two expansions, if they did it all, since there probably wouldn't be enough drive to create enough action and intrigue in part 1.
    I mean, the pacing thing isn't bs. It's really good up through the initial "invasion" but then it somehow goes too fast and still makes you feel like there's no rush.

    There's also a ton of filler quests that throw off the overall pacing imo. It's like they wanted it to be longer but instead of making the second half more exciting and playing with the "invasion" more, they filled it with time wasting quests.

  6. #51746
    Quote Originally Posted by Yarathir View Post

    Honestly, that felt totally intentional. Him literally floundering and just do random shit for most of the expansion to show, in no uncertain terms, how devoid of meaning his life really is. Here he is, just going around barely being a presence for a majority of Endwalker, and every time you do see him, all he really has to say is "Hey WoL. Fight?" Any other time, he's just waxing poetic about the meaninglessness of life and how he finds joy only in combat.

    He's a character who lacked any real drive and I felt like his narrative in Endwalker was there to deliberately reinforce this.

    For the love of God, don't fucking bring him back, though.

    I don't know, I don't think he deserved to come back to life and all that kind of stuff when that was the intention.
    He had way too much screentime for something that simple. Not to mention all that super power stuff with the body switch and all that.
    He is basically the reason why we didn't get a proper Garlemald conquest/liberation.
    I can't even express myself properly as to why I don't like him or what kind of guy he is because he is so forgettable and unimportant to the whole story.
    If your character ends up like that, it's better not to include him imho.

    The important question is:
    What did change compared to how it ended in Stormblood? Wasn't he basically "done" as a character back then?
    I did actually even enjoy him because it was a "fresh" point of view.
    No actual agenda, just driven by combat, a prince that has no real interest to lead a country, he'd even kill his father if he could fight strong opponents, and he actually did!

    I don't think EW did add anything to him or that. The whole "I'm a reaper now" switcheroo was also kinda weird.
    If they wanted a reaper to fit with the lore and Garlemald, they should've added a new character.
    Last edited by KrayZ33; 2022-06-09 at 04:42 AM.

  7. #51747
    Quote Originally Posted by Yarathir View Post
    Yeah, I rarely see overt Endwalker haters (the type that will pop up whenever anyone has anything to say or ask about the Endwalker MSQ to remind them that they personally thought it was bad, maybe the worst expansion of them all!) show themselves to be anything but sour grapes Zodiark/Emet stans.
    This subforum hasn't discussed anything relating to the story (that I've seen) for months. I don't care about housing, or end game content, PvP, job balance, etc. I still communicate via PMs with people here, so I peek in from time to time and happened to see the discussion. It wasn't my intention to hash out the story again, we did that back in Dec-Jan, only to note that not everyone loved it and for a variety of reasons. The implication that it's just because it didn't meet player headcanon I find rather disingenuous.

    I still don't know how you can 'stan' Zodiark, but whatever. Emet is my favorite character, but that's common if you look at any popularity polls where he's consistently 2-3x more popular than anyone else, so dismissing opinions based on that criteria seems a bit convenient when it comes to filtering out feedback you don't like.

    I've never thought EW was the worst, it's slightly above SB for me while behind HW and ShB.
    "We must now recognize that the greatest threat of freedom for us all is if we go back to eating ourselves out from within." - John Anderson

  8. #51748
    Quote Originally Posted by Wrecktangle View Post
    While I do agree that being contrarian for the sake of it is a bad look, I don't think having a hot take (something wildly different than the mainstream opinion) is a bad look.

    People praise FFX up and down and I'm an avid SE fanboy/JRPG gamer and I think it's one of the worst JRPGs I've ever played with some of the worst characters, and stories I've ever experienced. Other than being the ultimate rendition of the ATB battle system at the time and having good GFX I can't think of a single redeeming quality. I couldn't even finish the game it was so boring the first time and when they released the HD remaster I gave it a second try and regretted it completely. It was still just as bad as I remember.

    I enjoyed Endwalker, and I legit think certain parts were better than ShB; but there were plenty of parts I didn't care for.
    You and I clearly have been around in different circles, then. I'm used to people bashing the ever loving crap out of FFX and calling it the worst in the series, which as someone whose got a soft spot for the actual worst FF in the franchise (Final Fantasy 8), I was amazed when some folks started going on about how much they loved, cherished, and thought Ten was up there for some of the best.

    I think the thing to keep in mind when discussing things like this is that everyone is always going to have different experiences and different relations to the characters, story, and events. Honestly, as someone whose asked themselves some of the same questions that Hermes as asked himself, I probably felt closer to him than most and I could understand the reasons he went to the extent he did. A friend I know felt strongly for Zenos in Endwalker, because they knew what it was like to have that one thing that really made you feel like living... and then not to have it anymore and having life feel like nothing else.

    Honestly, the thing I think Cthulhu was really going for was the fact that there ARE members who post in this thread and the FF side of this site often whole hate it just to hate it. And there are some who are probably over critical. The problem is justifying it. As Cthulhu said, going and saying 'there's no content, story sucks, yada yada' has to be taken with a bit more grain of salt, because there ARE those people who will hate things just to hate them.

    That doesn't mean you can't dislike it. Lord knows I've never been a fan of Star Wars, for example. But there's quite a difference between 'I didn't enjoy this as much as others did' and 'This is a piece of crap that everyone needs to know is crap so they can stay away from this crap in the future. And it's usually easy to tell whose the later when it comes to stating their opinions.

  9. #51749
    Quote Originally Posted by MsSideEye View Post
    You and I clearly have been around in different circles, then. I'm used to people bashing the ever loving crap out of FFX and calling it the worst in the series, which as someone whose got a soft spot for the actual worst FF in the franchise (Final Fantasy 8), I was amazed when some folks started going on about how much they loved, cherished, and thought Ten was up there for some of the best.

    I think the thing to keep in mind when discussing things like this is that everyone is always going to have different experiences and different relations to the characters, story, and events. Honestly, as someone whose asked themselves some of the same questions that Hermes as asked himself, I probably felt closer to him than most and I could understand the reasons he went to the extent he did. A friend I know felt strongly for Zenos in Endwalker, because they knew what it was like to have that one thing that really made you feel like living... and then not to have it anymore and having life feel like nothing else.

    Honestly, the thing I think Cthulhu was really going for was the fact that there ARE members who post in this thread and the FF side of this site often whole hate it just to hate it. And there are some who are probably over critical. The problem is justifying it. As Cthulhu said, going and saying 'there's no content, story sucks, yada yada' has to be taken with a bit more grain of salt, because there ARE those people who will hate things just to hate them.

    That doesn't mean you can't dislike it. Lord knows I've never been a fan of Star Wars, for example. But there's quite a difference between 'I didn't enjoy this as much as others did' and 'This is a piece of crap that everyone needs to know is crap so they can stay away from this crap in the future. And it's usually easy to tell whose the later when it comes to stating their opinions.
    I don't know that I agree with the hate to hate it notion. Sure SOME people just want to see the world burn; but I've been accused here countless times of "hating" FF14. I don't hate it. I'm overly critical of it because I care about it. Generally when someone makes an inflammatory post with a less popular opinion instead of getting enraged like some posters here, I simply ask questions. Sometimes you get a good dialogue; sometimes you don't, sometimes other posters won't even let you because they're so enraged.

  10. #51750
    The thing about the, "You just hate it to hate it" thing is that it seems to be repeated so much as an (apparent) knee-jerk reaction to criticism that everyone just starts taking it as the truth.

    I've seen very little of what I would take as "hating it to hate it" in this forum - Mostly from that Mario(?) poster - everyone else seems legitimately interested in the game, whether it be because of story, gameplay, or something else. Trying to shout down criticism at every turn really isn't productive or helpful to anyone.

  11. #51751
    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    One thing about FFXIV that grinds my gears is having to go completely out of game to even know there's new patch content out. Like, I'm never in Old Sharlayan or Radz-at-Hahn, so how would I know there's a new tribal faction dailies, or new custom deliveries, or a new Hildebrand side quest? I have so many side quests unfinished that new ones popping up make no impression on me.
    An annoying example of this: There's apparently new MSQ quests in this patch, but for the love of god I can't figure out how to unlock them. There's no indication from the main MSQ tracker how to do so, and no breadcrumb indicating otherwise.

    But the patch notes say once "XXX quest is completed" you should be able to start them. So I try and look up this quest. But there's no good databases, and even Garland Tools only has "A Dream in Flight" listed as an orchestrion roll. I guess that's what I have to unlock? It's awarded from a quest for finishing the Omega raid series. How would I know this in-game? I started playing in December, I haven't done most of the old raid series from previous expansions.

    Just super frustrating to lock things behind content from previous expansions on the assumption you've already done it, without indicating for those of us who haven't what needs to be done.

  12. #51752
    Quote Originally Posted by Wrecktangle View Post
    I don't know that I agree with the hate to hate it notion. Sure SOME people just want to see the world burn; but I've been accused here countless times of "hating" FF14. I don't hate it. I'm overly critical of it because I care about it. Generally when someone makes an inflammatory post with a less popular opinion instead of getting enraged like some posters here, I simply ask questions. Sometimes you get a good dialogue; sometimes you don't, sometimes other posters won't even let you because they're so enraged.
    It's not so much about agreeing with the notion more like having to admit that it does exist. Whether it be for something as small and silly as a bad romance novel about Sparkly Vampires or something as big as political discussions, there are going to be people who will aggressively and loudly shout out to anyone in ear shot about how bad X is and how you shouldn't go anywhere near it.

    As far as being overly critical, I pose this then if you don't mind: Does the parts your over critical about ruin the whole? Does the blemish of, say, the moon not really being all that impactful despite how much build up we've had to it ruin Endwalker for you? It's the difference between 'I didn't like X or Y brought down my overall enjoyment' VS 'Oh yeah, this expansion sucks overall' and then using that previous X/Y as an example of why it sucks. It's like that Venat discussion that made me join the forums here in the first place, the points that people were putting forward were not only willfully ignoring what was presented in the game itself, but made you question what they're even doing in the 14 side of things in the first place if they're getting so much about everything so incredibly wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ghost of Cow View Post
    The thing about the, "You just hate it to hate it" thing is that it seems to be repeated so much as an (apparent) knee-jerk reaction to criticism that everyone just starts taking it as the truth.

    I've seen very little of what I would take as "hating it to hate it" in this forum - Mostly from that Mario(?) poster - everyone else seems legitimately interested in the game, whether it be because of story, gameplay, or something else. Trying to shout down criticism at every turn really isn't productive or helpful to anyone.
    I would honestly look over some of Val's posts again in this case, because there's a lot, and I do mean a LOT of negativity that comes from them bout 14. Can the 'hate it to hate it' response be seem as a reaction to criticism? Of course, but just because it can be used for that doesn't make it any less true for some people. I point to my response above about sparkly vampires as a good case in point there.

  13. #51753
    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    An annoying example of this: There's apparently new MSQ quests in this patch, but for the love of god I can't figure out how to unlock them. There's no indication from the main MSQ tracker how to do so, and no breadcrumb indicating otherwise.

    But the patch notes say once "XXX quest is completed" you should be able to start them. So I try and look up this quest. But there's no good databases, and even Garland Tools only has "A Dream in Flight" listed as an orchestrion roll. I guess that's what I have to unlock? It's awarded from a quest for finishing the Omega raid series. How would I know this in-game? I started playing in December, I haven't done most of the old raid series from previous expansions.

    Just super frustrating to lock things behind content from previous expansions on the assumption you've already done it, without indicating for those of us who haven't what needs to be done.
    I don't think there are any new MSQ quests.
    "stop puting you idiotic liberal words into my mouth"
    -ynnady

  14. #51754
    Scarab Lord Kaelwryn's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Divinity's Reach
    Posts
    4,417
    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    An annoying example of this: There's apparently new MSQ quests in this patch, but for the love of god I can't figure out how to unlock them. There's no indication from the main MSQ tracker how to do so, and no breadcrumb indicating otherwise.

    But the patch notes say once "XXX quest is completed" you should be able to start them. So I try and look up this quest. But there's no good databases, and even Garland Tools only has "A Dream in Flight" listed as an orchestrion roll. I guess that's what I have to unlock? It's awarded from a quest for finishing the Omega raid series. How would I know this in-game? I started playing in December, I haven't done most of the old raid series from previous expansions.

    Just super frustrating to lock things behind content from previous expansions on the assumption you've already done it, without indicating for those of us who haven't what needs to be done.
    There aren't any MSQ in minor patches, beyond .55/.56 when they stagger the .5 msq because we have something like a 6mo gap between the final major patch and next expac. All content released in minor patches is side content. So if the MSQ tracker has nothing, it means you're done with msq for until the next major patch. The patch notes for EN for the omega side story are unfortunately translated from the JP name of the final quest of the Omega Raid series. It should be "To Kweh Under Distant Skies", which is what it is in english. For content the omega side story it makes sense that it requires the raid series done because its a continuation/follow up to it. There's no reason for you to do it if you haven't done that side series.

  15. #51755
    Quote Originally Posted by MsSideEye View Post
    It's like that Venat discussion that made me join the forums here in the first place, the points that people were putting forward were not only willfully ignoring what was presented in the game itself, but made you question what they're even doing in the 14 side of things in the first place if they're getting so much about everything so incredibly wrong.
    This goes both ways. There's a few posters on the official lore forum, one of whom fancies himself a lore expert and even makes videos, who seriously have a processing issue between what the game presents and what makes it into their brains. He frequently accuses others of manufacturing "fan fiction" while being the biggest proponent of it himself. Conveniently ignores well thought out responses citing sources that disassemble his headcanon, but will continue to push his interpretation as fact with an overwhelming sense of smugness that most people find off-putting. He's become rather a running joke in some circles. Not the only one, of course, but it's just amusing to me how many people know without having to explicitly tell them.
    "We must now recognize that the greatest threat of freedom for us all is if we go back to eating ourselves out from within." - John Anderson

  16. #51756
    Psst, if we really want to start a big party, we could start arguing over what Hythlodaeus' shade truly meant when he mentioned that the Convocation's and the ancients' consensus as a whole was to help the star until it was on the point of bursting with vitality so that they could sacrifice a portion of its life energy to Zodiark to bring back the comrades (75% of their original population) they lost in the initial two sacrifices. And why that was, at least at the time of Shadowbringers, the impetus for Venat and her group to interfere and summon Hydaelyn.

  17. #51757
    Quote Originally Posted by Yarathir View Post
    Psst, if we really want to start a big party, we could start arguing over what Hythlodaeus' shade truly meant when he mentioned that the Convocation's and the ancients' consensus as a whole was to help the star until it was on the point of bursting with vitality so that they could sacrifice a portion of its life energy to Zodiark to bring back the comrades (75% of their original population) they lost in the initial two sacrifices. And why that was, at least at the time of Shadowbringers, the impetus for Venat and her group to interfere and summon Hydaelyn.
    Why are you doing thiiiiiiiiiissssss?!

  18. #51758
    The Undying Cthulhu 2020's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rigging your election
    Posts
    37,229
    Quote Originally Posted by Onikaroshi View Post
    I mean, the pacing thing isn't bs. It's really good up through the initial "invasion" but then it somehow goes too fast and still makes you feel like there's no rush.

    There's also a ton of filler quests that throw off the overall pacing imo. It's like they wanted it to be longer but instead of making the second half more exciting and playing with the "invasion" more, they filled it with time wasting quests.
    I don't get what was "filler" about the invasion here. You got to fight hoards of monsters once you got back to Garlemald. And then once you head back to Thavnair, there's even more there. I don't know what you would have considered "worthwhile", but saving refugees from their former comrades turned into monsters, and chasing after endangered civilians and saving them, that pretty well shows the impact of what's going on when you get through all of the events. None of it was "wasted", it conveys how the apocalypse is affecting various people. "Go kill 12 boars for their asses" with no real compelling reason why you should do that is filler. Saving people as the WoL I'd argue is not.

    But then again, I tend to get the feeling people throw "pacing" "Filler" "plot threads" around haphazardly as they do, making it clear they don't truly know what those things mean in the context of a story, in an attempt to describe why they don't like something.

    What people need to realize is that when you start using literary terms to describe a work, you are trying to describe something on an objective basis. And when your literary critique actually hits the ears of a literary critic, it sounds really... desperate? It's ok to not like something. I just wish people would stop trying to assign objective basis into their opinions.
    “Terrible things are happening outside. Poor helpless people are being dragged out of their homes. Families are torn apart. Men, women, and children are separated. Children come home from school to find that their parents have disappeared.”
    Diary of Anne Frank
    January 13, 1943

  19. #51759
    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhu 2020 View Post
    I don't get what was "filler" about the invasion here. You got to fight hoards of monsters once you got back to Garlemald. And then once you head back to Thavnair, there's even more there. I don't know what you would have considered "worthwhile", but saving refugees from their former comrades turned into monsters, and chasing after endangered civilians and saving them, that pretty well shows the impact of what's going on when you get through all of the events. None of it was "wasted", it conveys how the apocalypse is affecting various people. "Go kill 12 boars for their asses" with no real compelling reason why you should do that is filler. Saving people as the WoL I'd argue is not.

    But then again, I tend to get the feeling people throw "pacing" "Filler" "plot threads" around haphazardly as they do, making it clear they don't truly know what those things mean in the context of a story, in an attempt to describe why they don't like something.

    What people need to realize is that when you start using literary terms to describe a work, you are trying to describe something on an objective basis. And when your literary critique actually hits the ears of a literary critic, it sounds really... desperate? It's ok to not like something. I just wish people would stop trying to assign objective basis into their opinions.
    And here we go with the, "If you criticize any of it, you're dumb and just don't get it."

    Seriously, how do you write three paragraphs railing at someone for not liking something as subjective as pacing? This is why no one can talk about anything in here.

  20. #51760
    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhu 2020 View Post
    I don't get what was "filler" about the invasion here. You got to fight hoards of monsters once you got back to Garlemald. And then once you head back to Thavnair, there's even more there. I don't know what you would have considered "worthwhile", but saving refugees from their former comrades turned into monsters, and chasing after endangered civilians and saving them, that pretty well shows the impact of what's going on when you get through all of the events. None of it was "wasted", it conveys how the apocalypse is affecting various people. "Go kill 12 boars for their asses" with no real compelling reason why you should do that is filler. Saving people as the WoL I'd argue is not.

    But then again, I tend to get the feeling people throw "pacing" "Filler" "plot threads" around haphazardly as they do, making it clear they don't truly know what those things mean in the context of a story, in an attempt to describe why they don't like something.

    What people need to realize is that when you start using literary terms to describe a work, you are trying to describe something on an objective basis. And when your literary critique actually hits the ears of a literary critic, it sounds really... desperate? It's ok to not like something. I just wish people would stop trying to assign objective basis into their opinions.
    To be fair, if you are just following the MSQ and not doing the Role quests at all, going straight through the story without stopping, the 'Final Days' does kinda feel like it doesn't have that much of an impact on anywhere else. Thavnair and Garlamald are the only places we see the Darkened skies and Blasphamies running about, and while those two do show just how horrible it could be, we don't really get to see this effect anywhere else within the game. I don't agree with the idea of the invasion being 'filler' but I can understand how someone might get that with the actual impact being limited to a very small section of the story and having an entire zone (Elpis) being completely unrelated to that in terms of seeing how it's effecting the world.

    As far as pacing is concerned, that's a much more subjective thing for some folks. I can see why some people might not like how Endwalker puts the breaks on some moments in it's story, giving us moments to breath and kinda absorb everything. The Loporits entire point was just that, since you had the double wammy of both Garlamald's story AND Zodiark so the developers were wanting to give you a lighthearted, sillier moment to balance out the horrific. But I do know there's some friends of mine who were like 'We shouldn't be effing around with these dumb rabbits, we've got an apocalypse to stop!'. I think in that case it was more of a matter of urgency that was felt by some players that some parts of the story gives us that other parts ignore for the sake of giving the players breathing room. I think, maybe, if the Metion/Premonition on the Moon bit happened after the Loporits, it may have flown better for some people, but in my opinion that's a pretty narrow complaint, imo. Honestly, nothing in Endwalker ever felt like the whole Trolly bit in Shadowbringers, which WAS very MMO 'go here and kill X' quests for a bit that hurt that zone for me.

    In the end, everyone is going to have their own bias. The point of any review, or feedback for something like a story is that you should try to remove that bias as much as possible, giving your thoughts on something without letting your emotions over ride that. Not an easy thing to do and something that most people can't even conceptualize. It's even harder for something like 14 which has made more than it's fair share of players cry.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ghost of Cow View Post
    And here we go with the, "If you criticize any of it, you're dumb and just don't get it."

    Seriously, how do you write three paragraphs railing at someone for not liking something as subjective as pacing? This is why no one can talk about anything in here.
    While I do feel Cthulhu here did kinda miss the point, since pacing can be different for people, I think pacing is also probably one of the weaker points to actually stand on when it comes to calling something out. Can you say something is slower to start as a negative? Sure, but that doesn't really detract from it if the rest of the story is good. And that's kinda what he's trying to say, I think: He dislikes people using their own dislikes of something as a fact. If three people out of one hundred readers found a story slow, that might speak more to their own personal issues with the story than the rest of those hundred who praise it as a well placed read.

    Endwalker, while not without it's faults, is regarded almost universally well by it's playerbase and most people who aren't even into 14 like a lot of folks, myself included, have praised its story. Does the one lone voice going 'Hey, this is bad' mean they're automatically wrong? Not at all. But there has to be some real reasons with solid examples, thought, and explanation behind them for some to be even willing to listen to that voice. And even then, you're going to likely get into an 'agree to disagree' situation.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •