RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes

Hilde · **06-07-2017, 05:36 PM**

It might've already been said but she's the face of FFXIV, it's highly unlikely she'll be axed.

Erah'sae · **06-07-2017, 05:36 PM**

I think I saw Ixion in there. Â This pleases me.

Berrod Armstrong · **06-07-2017, 06:19 PM**

Lakshmi is so pretty...jeez...

Mercer · **06-07-2017, 06:24 PM**

Oh boy, more Estinein!

Recoil · **06-07-2017, 07:45 PM**

IXIIIIONNNNNN!!!

Sounsyy · **06-07-2017, 08:51 PM**

As a former screenwriting major, a general rule of thumb is that if a character death is teased in a trailer it's always a red herring. Be concerned for the characters that are only shown briefly.

Krile, for instance. @4:08, the door closing on her is quite ominous. She has a peaceful yet resigned look on her face. She's a Lalafell, and we've had at least one important Lalafellin NPC killed off in ARR and HW. And it's the only time she shows up in the trailer.

Alisaie and Yugiri both have similar defeated/blood splattery snippets @4:26. I expect a lot of character injury coming out of what will probably be a doomed Ala Mhigan Resistance vs Garlean Empire battle. Even WoL gets knocked down @2:04 continuing @5:11.

I don't expect they'll kill off more Scions this quickly though. Papalymo's death already felt cheap. At this point, bleeding Scions is just getting old. They seem to be the only characters SE is willing to kill off. Hopefully they'll get more creative. /stares at Yugiri. Yeah, sorry Yugiri, you lead your people to safety, you returned with us to the Far East so we've upheld our bargain to help take back your home, and now that we've access to Othard you don't serve much narrative purpose anymore. . . We have Gosetsu now.

V'aleera · **06-07-2017, 09:05 PM**

(06-07-2017, 03:14 PM)Graeham Wrote: Garlemald ends up becoming more justified

I'm genuinely curious as to what it would take to make an unapologetically genocidal, aggressively expansionist empire that utilizes chattel slavery "more justified".

Cato · **06-07-2017, 09:20 PM**

(06-07-2017, 09:05 PM)V Wrote:
(06-07-2017, 03:14 PM)Graeham Wrote: Garlemald ends up becoming more justified

I'm genuinely curious as to what it would take to make an unapologetically genocidal, aggressively expansionist empire that utilizes chattel slavery "more justified".

Shades of grey, which exist unless you willingly choose to ignore the passages in the Encyclopedia Eorzea detailing the reasons behind Garlemald's rise to prominence in the first place. There's also the simple fact that both Gaius and Regula have been painted as very nuanced. The latter even going so far as to sacrifice himself to aid the Warrior of Light and some of his closest allies.

They're very much a case of well intentioned extremists, defending their own interests above all else - which is something equally applicable to many countries in the real world throughout history. In particular, this is the case with the Roman Empire - which to this very day influences much of the world's culture in terms of art, language, theatre and architecture. The same can be said of the British Empire as well and there's parallels/influence drawn from both where Garlemald is concerned.

Does this mean that Garlemald is completely justified? Not at all, there's a lot that needs to change and the rot needs to be cut out. All the same, there's already evidence of factions within Garlemald that desired a more diplomatic approach and a lack of over-extension. I doubt we've heard of the last of them, even if they were supposedly purged.

There's also the Archadian Empire in FFXII, which will hopefully serve as heavy inspiration for a redeemed Garlemald moving forward once we start heading deeper into their territory and seeing things from their perspective. Given the abundance of references to FFXII in the game already, though, I'm fairly confident that they'll go down that route at some point - it's but a matter of when.

Ishgard wasn't exactly shown in flattering light but they still managed to add many shades of grey to the place. Heck, they've even added shades of grey to the Ascians, particularly Elidibus. Plus the lyrics of the Revolutions song strongly imply that war has a heavy cost and that there's two sides to every story.

Max · **06-07-2017, 09:29 PM**

i doubt they'd kill y'shtola off. i agree with others saying it's a red herring for another scion
hopefully thancred or alphinaud

Kilieit · **06-07-2017, 09:33 PM**

Real talk... if they kill off Thancred I'm going to - well, I'm not going to fib and say I'll unsub. But I'll have trouble finishing the MSQ.

It took me so long to get through 3.0, even though I knew he would reappear in 3.1...

I agree Shtola is a red herring, though. If nothing else because I think it'll have more impact on the WoL to see another comrade almost die when their shield faulters and a weapon goes through their gut, causing blood to seep from their mouth... than if said comrade actually dies (which I feel will just be like "welp, that happened again, everything's horrible, what's new").

V'aleera · **06-07-2017, 09:41 PM**

None of that really answer my question, though. I didn't ask "how can Garlemald be shown as anything more than morally pitch black" I asked what it would take for them to be given the moral high ground over the Eorzean nations.

I also think it's pretty disingenuous to consider Eorzea's actions at Baelsar's Wall to be "aggression". The Empire attacked Eorzea, has actively deployed raids and incursions into Eorzean territory, and has at no point (to my knowledge) formalized any peace accords with any of the nations of Eorzea. Wars don't end just because both sides decide to take a break; don't start what you can't finish.

Gen Quickpaw · **06-07-2017, 09:54 PM**

ALSO, Dogpeople. New beast tribe anyone?

Cato · **06-07-2017, 10:41 PM**

(06-07-2017, 09:41 PM)V Wrote: None of that really answer my question, though. I didn't ask "how can Garlemald be shown as anything more than morally pitch black" I asked what it would take for them to be given the moral high ground over the Eorzean nations.

I also think it's pretty disingenuous to consider Eorzea's actions at Baelsar's Wall to be "aggression". The Empire attacked Eorzea, has actively deployed raids and incursions into Eorzean territory, and has at no point (to my knowledge) formalized any peace accords with any of the nations of Eorzea. Wars don't end just because both sides decide to take a break; don't start what you can't finish.

I believe we've had a very similar discussion before in the past, though - and it was obvious back then that we wouldn't see eye to eye on the subject. Whether or not Garlemald is justified is open to personal interpretation. Much as it is the case with Ishgard and various other factions. So I imagine it's best to just agree to disagree rather than risk dragging the thread off course.

To answer your question, though? Garlemald lashed out because its people were attacked and forced to carve out a living in what is essentially a wasteland. When they finally ended up gaining the power to defend themselves they fought back expanded from there - now they're struggling to deal with Eorzea and pockets of resistance elsewhere.

As I said, a lot of their actions have been questionable and there's no excusing them but all the same it's not as if they're without purpose. They're not doing bad things for the sake of being evil (bar, perhaps, individuals such as Livia and Zenos who appear to take pleasure in violence). They're described as being very grim, serious and driven by efficiency.Â

I'm rambling though. As far as 'moral high ground' goes, I feel like any given nation doesn't necessarily need to focus on worrying about that if it's survival and prosperity is at sake. At least when it comes to fictional settings. I'd say Eorzea loses it, though, if it ends up causing Garlemald to collapse to the point where there is a massive loss of life across the board, the quality of life for the survivors declines rapidly and technological advancements are set back quite a bit for everybody involved. A lack of mercy and diplomacy would certainly factor into it, as would ignoring the simple fact that some people do not want to be 'liberated' and are content with the status quo. In the event that Eorzea seeks to match or surpass Garlemald in terms of might then that, too, would factor in due to hypocrisy.

Though as I said, agreeing to disagree is probably the best course of action.

V'aleera · **06-07-2017, 11:29 PM**

Yeah, if your position is that matching the previously demonstrated force of your aggressor is hypocrisy I don't think we're going to agree on much.

Aaron · **06-07-2017, 11:45 PM**

All this hype and the only content any of us will be facing on release day is the D/C Boss of Congestion.

« Next Oldest \| Next Newest »
Pages (4): « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »

ENG Stormblood Launch Trailer - Spoiler-y???!!!

RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes