Jump to content

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


Kage

Recommended Posts

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.

Link to comment
  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

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. 

 

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.

Link to comment

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.

 

Don't you dare jinx my dearest waifu Yugiri! She is most beautiful of all NPCs and I loves her muchest. Gosetsu can get the Moenbryda treatment which will force Yugiri to take his position. Don't forget that she is front and center in one of the official artwork. She has a great role to play yet that hopefully doesn't include dying.

Link to comment

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.

 

Which is perfectly fine, of course! Things would be very boring if everybody agreed with each other and interpreted the more complicated aspects of any given setting's lore the same way.

 

I'm sure this expansion will have a lot of twists and turns to shake things up quite a bit, though!

Link to comment

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

 

Honestly, I'm fully prepared to just play another game on both the 16th and the 20th. As much as I'm excited to see all the new stuff, I'd rather not set myself up for disappointment. >.>;;

 

...and I'm gonna have to figure something out anyway, because I had to look away from the underwater section of this video. Which doesn't bode well for my ability to quest through the area in question...

Link to comment

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.

 

I know you're a huge advocate for everything Garlemald and hope that we see a more three-dimensional side to the Empire, but I have problems with this post. Because, as of yet, there are no shades of grey.

 

1. Garlemald's tragic backstory does not justify its current atrocities. It may make them somewhat sympathetic, but not in the right. They were banished to the northlands nearly 800 years ago. Yes, they've been picked over by larger Ilsabardian nations many times since then, but their retaliation didn't just end with those Ilsabardian nations who hurt them. They exacted revenge on peoples wholly innocent of their history and they seem to take great pleasure in the suffering of those nations.

 

2. Comparing the sins of other nations to Garlemald does not make the Empire's sins any better. Yes, all of the nations have done really shitty things. Does not change the fact that the Empire is neck-deep in evil agenda.

 

3. Two individuals, who have questionably redeeming qualities, being nuanced does not at all mean the Empire as a whole has redeeming qualities or is nuanced. Are there probably plenty of decent individuals who're living in the Empire? Sure! That doesn't mean the Empire itself is good, nor will it ever be good so long as those who are and have been in power for almost the last eighty years remain so.

 

Gaius van Baelsar was a great character. He's definitely the first Garlean who was introduced to us who wasn't cardboard cutout evil. He took in Cid after Midas was blown away. But telling a ragtag group of adventurers where the nearby castrum was and hoping they could stop the entire realm being annihilated by a giant moon so that he could rule over it his way (make everyone slaves) and get back to being the Emperor's pet only really wins him a couple points. He still toppled five nations, let his troops enslave and brutalize his subjects, and in the end was really just power hungry.

 

Regula, while actually possessing some sanity and common sense, wasn't really much more commendable. Yes, he sacrificed himself to spare an echo wielder and provide a better chance at defeating another primal. His reasoning for doing so though is "A gift the emperor may one day have need of in his war upon these untameable eikons..." Under the last emperor, having a gift that would allow one to speak with "beast tribes" was as good as being one, but I guess they've really gotten desperate in their search for a primal-killer that they're willing to make a few exceptions if it'll help Garleans kill things better.

 

4. The road to the Seven Hells is paved with good intentions / "Hell is full of good meanings, but Heaven is full of good works." Besides eikons killing the planet, I'm really struggling to see what other good intentions the Empire has? If they just wanted revenge against the nations that wronged them, they'd have stopped with conquering Ilsabard. If they wanted to stop the primal threat, they would've stopped at conquering Othard. Now they're just ravenous. So at this point, they are just out to commit genocide against any race they deemed detestable.

 

"Education" maybe? Annexed peoples are made to do hard labor. They don't seem to get educated. They do take away every child from annexed families and send them into the northlands to be brainwashed and never heard from again. This practice makes it even harder to trust the opinions of the soon-to-be-seen Ala Mhigan youth allied with Garlemald. There are Ala Mhigans who have only known Garlean rule or just don't want to be liberated, but how much of that is brainwashing and propaganda versus the Empire actually doing something beneficial for them. Technological advances? Besides the military, just how many people (especially annexed) get to actually benefit from these magitek technologies? And is getting to use this tech that may or may not be widely available to those outside Garlemald-proper worth the suppression of your rights, freedom, religion, and culture?

 

I would find the Empire so much more compelling if there was just one nation that has actually benefited from imperial occupation. As of right now, there are none. Maybe it'll be Hingashi. What we have seen without fail are nations who've suffered. Dalmasca, Doma, and Ala Mhigo fell in a blaze of magitek destruction. Bozja was later wiped off the map completely. Countless thousands of people incinerated in an instant, and the Empire tries to cover it up. These aren't the acts of a people who want to better others.

 

I think saying that there's even a shred of justification for Garlemald's actions at this point in time is beyond me. The empire as it is now has no shades of grey. It has no good deeds to its name. Good intentions went out the window in 1522, and if not then, then definitely by 1562. That doesn't mean that the Empire won't get some sort of grey scale eventually or somehow purge every last evil part of itself - but at that point the Empire would likely destabilize as annexed nations rushed to liberate themselves from a weakened regime. And it doesn't forgive Garlemald of the sins it committed in the pursuit of whatever it is it was pursuing.

Link to comment

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.

 

I know you're a huge advocate for everything Garlemald and hope that we see a more three-dimensional side to the Empire, but I have problems with this post. Because, as of yet, there are no shades of grey.

 

1. Garlemald's tragic backstory does not justify its current atrocities. It may make them somewhat sympathetic, but not in the right. They were banished to the northlands nearly 800 years ago. Yes, they've been picked over by larger Ilsabardian nations many times since then, but their retaliation didn't just end with those Ilsabardian nations who hurt them. They exacted revenge on peoples wholly innocent of their history and they seem to take great pleasure in the suffering of those nations.

 

2. Comparing the sins of other nations to Garlemald does not make the Empire's sins any better. Yes, all of the nations have done really shitty things. Does not change the fact that the Empire is neck-deep in evil agenda.

 

3. Two individuals, who have questionably redeeming qualities, being nuanced does not at all mean the Empire as a whole has redeeming qualities or is nuanced. Are there probably plenty of decent individuals who're living in the Empire? Sure! That doesn't mean the Empire itself is good, nor will it ever be good so long as those who are and have been in power for almost the last eighty years remain so.

 

Gaius van Baelsar was a great character. He's definitely the first Garlean who was introduced to us who wasn't cardboard cutout evil. He took in Cid after Midas was blown away. But telling a ragtag group of adventurers where the nearby castrum was and hoping they could stop the entire realm being annihilated by a giant moon so that he could rule over it his way (make everyone slaves) and get back to being the Emperor's pet only really wins him a couple points. He still toppled five nations, let his troops enslave and brutalize his subjects, and in the end was really just power hungry.

 

Regula, while actually possessing some sanity and common sense, wasn't really much more commendable. Yes, he sacrificed himself to spare an echo wielder and provide a better chance at defeating another primal. His reasoning for doing so though is "A gift the emperor may one day have need of in his war upon these untameable eikons..." Under the last emperor, having a gift that would allow one to speak with "beast tribes" was as good as being one, but I guess they've really gotten desperate in their search for a primal-killer that they're willing to make a few exceptions if it'll help Garleans kill things better.

 

4. The road to the Seven Hells is paved with good intentions / "Hell is full of good meanings, but Heaven is full of good works." Besides eikons killing the planet, I'm really struggling to see what other good intentions the Empire has? If they just wanted revenge against the nations that wronged them, they'd have stopped with conquering Ilsabard. If they wanted to stop the primal threat, they would've stopped at conquering Othard. Now they're just ravenous. So at this point, they are just out to commit genocide against any race they deemed detestable.

 

"Education" maybe? Annexed peoples are made to do hard labor. They don't seem to get educated. They do take away every child from annexed families and send them into the northlands to be brainwashed and never heard from again. This practice makes it even harder to trust the opinions of the soon-to-be-seen Ala Mhigan youth allied with Garlemald. There are Ala Mhigans who have only known Garlean rule or just don't want to be liberated, but how much of that is brainwashing and propaganda versus the Empire actually doing something beneficial for them. Technological advances? Besides the military, just how many people (especially annexed) get to actually benefit from these magitek technologies? And is getting to use this tech that may or may not be widely available to those outside Garlemald-proper worth the suppression of your rights, freedom, religion, and culture?

 

I would find the Empire so much more compelling if there was just one nation that has actually benefited from imperial occupation. As of right now, there are none. Maybe it'll be Hingashi. What we have seen without fail are nations who've suffered. Dalmasca, Doma, and Ala Mhigo fell in a blaze of magitek destruction. Bozja was later wiped off the map completely. Countless thousands of people incinerated in an instant, and the Empire tries to cover it up. These aren't the acts of a people who want to better others.

 

I think saying that there's even a shred of justification for Garlemald's actions at this point in time is beyond me. The empire as it is now has no shades of grey. It has no good deeds to its name. Good intentions went out the window in 1522, and if not then, then definitely by 1562. That doesn't mean that the Empire won't get some sort of grey scale eventually or somehow purge every last evil part of itself - but at that point the Empire would likely destabilize as annexed nations rushed to liberate themselves from a weakened regime. And it doesn't forgive Garlemald of the sins it committed in the pursuit of whatever it is it was pursuing.

 

Again, much of that is down to personal interpretation and real world modern day concepts of law and morality. In the real world, such things would be absolutely abhorrent and inexcusable. In a fictional setting, though, we have the luxury of being able to tell epic tales and explore all manner of interesting themes and perspectives that wouldn't go down well in the real world.

 

So with all due respect, we'll just have to agree to disagree as well. I'm primarily concerned with looking at Garlemald through the perspective of Garlemald itself - Eorzea is an interesting place, don't get me wrong, but in terms of my investment in my character and the game itself it's Garlemald's story that intrigues me the most. Back when I played WoW my investment was in the ongoing story of the blood elves and the difficulties they faced as a race. I'm a sucker for antagonists and Final Fantasy games have a solid track record of creating some pretty interesting ones.

 

I'm well aware that Garlemald needs to make major adjustments and not everything that they do is great. Perhaps this is just a matter of poor communication on my part but all I'm really getting at is that from their perspective they believe themselves to be just and righteous...and that they didn't just decide to get up and conquer the world for no reason.

 

Would I like a more nuanced Garlemald? Certainly - but it's not as if there aren't existing nuances to be found. Plus when it comes to discussing fictional factions, nations and races there's always going to be a sense of 'tribalism' and bias towards one's preferences to various degrees, I feel. So far we've only really seen Garlemald through Eorzea's eyes - which at times can be rather biased. Understandably so, given the circumstances. Much like Ishgard, though, once we engage Garlemald more directly in the plot I'm confident that we'll see a much different side to Garlemald, even if it's only in the form of a breakaway faction.

 

Heck, I'm all for that - it's pretty much what my character revolves around after all.

Link to comment

Again, much of that is down to personal interpretation and real world modern day concepts of law and morality. In the real world, such things would be absolutely abhorrent and inexcusable. In a fictional setting, though, we have the luxury of being able to tell epic tales and explore all manner of interesting themes and perspectives that wouldn't go down well in the real world.

 

So with all due respect, we'll just have to agree to disagree as well. I'm primarily concerned with looking at Garlemald through the perspective of Garlemald itself - Eorzea is an interesting place, don't get me wrong, but in terms of my investment in my character and the game itself it's Garlemald's story that intrigues me the most. Back when I played WoW my investment was in the ongoing story of the blood elves and the difficulties they faced as a race. I'm a sucker for antagonists and Final Fantasy games have a solid track record of creating some pretty interesting ones.

 

I'm well aware that Garlemald needs to make major adjustments and not everything that they do is great. Perhaps this is just a matter of poor communication on my part but all I'm really getting at is that from their perspective they believe themselves to be just and righteous...and that they didn't just decide to get up and conquer the world for no reason.

 

Would I like a more nuanced Garlemald? Certainly - but it's not as if there aren't existing nuances to be found. Plus when it comes to discussing fictional factions, nations and races there's always going to be a sense of 'tribalism' and bias towards one's preferences to various degrees, I feel. So far we've only really seen Garlemald through Eorzea's eyes - which at times can be rather biased. Understandably so, given the circumstances. Much like Ishgard, though, once we engage Garlemald more directly in the plot I'm confident that we'll see a much different side to Garlemald, even if it's only in the form of a breakaway faction.

 

Heck, I'm all for that - it's pretty much what my character revolves around after all.

 

I've just kinda been lurk reading - but I think all of this is easily solved by stating that from a OOC, Meta, Narrative-Only, Writers-And-Readers-Looking-At-Story-Objectively perspective - we can probably agree that Garlemald likely has good people living in it, but has an extremely villainous government that allows the practice of things like slavery, brainwashing, etc, which is both illegal and abhorrent in our modern real-world lives as well as the fictional Eorzean world.

 

From an IC-perspective, it makes total sense that a Garlean perspective on Garlemald would see the empire in shades of grey or even a positive light.

Link to comment

Again, much of that is down to personal interpretation and real world modern day concepts of law and morality. In the real world, such things would be absolutely abhorrent and inexcusable. In a fictional setting, though, we have the luxury of being able to tell epic tales and explore all manner of interesting themes and perspectives that wouldn't go down well in the real world.

 

So with all due respect, we'll just have to agree to disagree as well. I'm primarily concerned with looking at Garlemald through the perspective of Garlemald itself - Eorzea is an interesting place, don't get me wrong, but in terms of my investment in my character and the game itself it's Garlemald's story that intrigues me the most. Back when I played WoW my investment was in the ongoing story of the blood elves and the difficulties they faced as a race. I'm a sucker for antagonists and Final Fantasy games have a solid track record of creating some pretty interesting ones.

 

I'm well aware that Garlemald needs to make major adjustments and not everything that they do is great. Perhaps this is just a matter of poor communication on my part but all I'm really getting at is that from their perspective they believe themselves to be just and righteous...and that they didn't just decide to get up and conquer the world for no reason.

 

Would I like a more nuanced Garlemald? Certainly - but it's not as if there aren't existing nuances to be found. Plus when it comes to discussing fictional factions, nations and races there's always going to be a sense of 'tribalism' and bias towards one's preferences to various degrees, I feel. So far we've only really seen Garlemald through Eorzea's eyes - which at times can be rather biased. Understandably so, given the circumstances. Much like Ishgard, though, once we engage Garlemald more directly in the plot I'm confident that we'll see a much different side to Garlemald, even if it's only in the form of a breakaway faction.

 

Heck, I'm all for that - it's pretty much what my character revolves around after all.

 

I've just kinda been lurk reading - but I think all of this is easily solved by stating that from a OOC, Meta, Narrative-Only, Writers-And-Readers-Looking-At-Story-Objectively perspective - we can probably agree that Garlemald likely has good people living in it, but has an extremely villainous government that allows the practice of things like slavery, brainwashing, etc, which is both illegal and abhorrent in our modern real-world lives as well as the fictional Eorzean world.

 

From an IC-perspective, it makes total sense that a Garlean perspective on Garlemald would see the empire in shades of grey or even a positive light.

 

Mm! That's pretty much what I was getting at, in less words too. It wasn't my intention to excuse everything that Garlemald does. It certainly needs to change, though as with so many things it's a lot more complicated than many like to credit. There's going to be a lot of death and heartache along the like, for everybody involved. I was reluctant to draw comparisons to the real world beyond references to the British/Roman Empires...but historically 'liberation' has not been a pretty thing at all. I don't expect to be any different where FFXIV is concerned.

 

It's going to be very interesting to see how everything plays out, particularly where the Garleans living in Othard/Gyr Abania are concerned. Perhaps they'll be killed, imprisoned or forced to defect. If they're shown mercy, will it embolden moderate Garleans to speak out against their leader figures?

 

I'm very much of the belief that we need a moderate 'Larsa' type figure inspired by the character of the same name in FFXII's Archadian Empire. I'm sure a lot of people, even the Warrior of Light, would rally behind them.

Link to comment

ALSO, Dogpeople. New beast tribe anyone?

Pretty sure it's a mask. Maybe.

That's what I thought at first, but apparently there's concept art of wolfpeople wholly furred going around. Havent found it myself but 2-3 separate sources have reported it (mrHappy among others)

 

I thought it might actually be a new race planned for us, but given their samey faces, I suspect they're a beast tribe, if so.

Link to comment

ALSO, Dogpeople. New beast tribe anyone?

Pretty sure it's a mask. Maybe.

That's what I thought at first, but apparently there's concept art of wolfpeople wholly furred going around. Havent found it myself but 2-3 separate sources have reported it (mrHappy among others)

 

I thought it might actually be a new race planned for us, but given their samey faces, I suspect they're a beast tribe, if so.

Their tails were wagging. Probably a beast tribe tbh.

Link to comment

I sorta hope they're connected to the ookami/amaterasu mount drops.

 

Even though we already know who are connected to Lakshmi and Susano (I KEEP TYPING SUSANOO THIS IS GOING TO DRIVE ME NUTS), we aren't only going to get just 2 'Primals'...

 

Please Ixion. Please not just as a Dungeon Boss :(

Link to comment

I sorta hope they're connected to the ookami/amaterasu mount drops.

 

Even though we already know who are connected to Lakshmi and Susano (I KEEP TYPING SUSANOO THIS IS GOING TO DRIVE ME NUTS), we aren't only going to get just 2 'Primals'...

 

Please Ixion. Please not just as a Dungeon Boss :(

LOL. I keep typing Susano'o and outing myself

Link to comment

I sorta hope they're connected to the ookami/amaterasu mount drops.

 

Even though we already know who are connected to Lakshmi and Susano (I KEEP TYPING SUSANOO THIS IS GOING TO DRIVE ME NUTS), we aren't only going to get just 2 'Primals'...

 

Please Ixion. Please not just as a Dungeon Boss :(

LOL. I keep typing Susano'o and outing myself

Koji Fox unmasking us one by one..

Link to comment

500x300http://cdn4.dualshockers.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Screenshot-26_04_2015-22_23_56.jpg[/img]

 

Here is your concept art for the Wolf people. They have exactly the same face, and also as Berrod said, tails. So either they are a new playable race that will come in later in the series (you will notice they have more human bodies possibly for this purpose) or they took the idea and adapted it into some sort of beast tribe. I wouldn't be surprised if they are putting them in to test waters on how we feel about them for possible addition in 5.0 either.

Link to comment

I highly doubt it'd be a playable race. Their facial features are too muddled and not distinct enough. There'd be way too little customization... Unless they rushed and put in a kind of low-res model for now, only to update them later? But that'd just be a waste of resources. It's most probable that it's a beast tribe.

Link to comment

There's no way it's coming in Stormblood as playable.

 

But I remember this art. I wasn't connecting the dots about it with the now. I am reminded about how much I liked it.

I'd prefer wolf people over viera.

 

Pls SE.

Same.

 

Bless oukaori for indulging my whims.

tumblr_inline_or8nj3eSiC1rer8xa_540.gif

Link to comment

There's no way it's coming in Stormblood as playable.

 

But I remember this art. I wasn't connecting the dots about it with the now. I am reminded about how much I liked it.

I'd prefer wolf people over viera.

 

Pls SE.

By the Twelve no, I would muuuuch prefer Viera over these guys as a playable race. Sure they'd just be another 'cutesy' race, but it would be interesting to see how they work in male Hydaelan Viera as opposed to the FFXII Ivalicean Viera (who will hopefully be seen in the 24-man).

However, I'd really like a more 'bestial' playable race in the form of the Bangaa from far deep south in the Sagolii or another desert/mountainous region. Would be quite interesting to see an Au Ra's reaction to seeing a Bangaa - or a Bangaa's reaction to the Amalj'aa - in a RP setting of course.

In regards to the wolfmen, I'm all for them being a beast tribe, as it is more likely judging by their identical faces/heights/body models; probably coming from the Doman steppes along with the Xaela tribes.

 

Also - Kage, love that you have the Thaumaturge Bros. clip, was quite happily surprised to see them in the trailer.

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...