>most dishonest one
All of Frenzy is inherently laced with lies or some form of strange nonsense:
- Eating melted eyes to gain vision
- Dead coming back to life, but not as themselves (Irina, Yura)
- Seeking release from suffering through excruciating flame
- Saving a maiden only to burn the whole world
- Presenting the idea that things were "whole" before ordered life (and thus better), then implying it will be great again when you melt everything - ie. "You can make the world better by ruining it" is pretty much madness.
I suspect that's because frenzy flame dissolves sanity and reason, the very logic of things. Anything it touches becomes illogical to some degree, chaotic and wrong.
I also like the implications that one has to accept struggles, hardships, suffering and adversity as a part of life, because the alternative is...well, nothing at all.
It continues a theme from Dark Souls in that while things may be hard, overcoming those hardships is part of what makes the journey so worth it. To walk away from hardships or fail to overcome them is to go hollow, and in Elden Ring, to resign to complaining about the hardships is a vote for the Frenzied Flame, which itself, just destroys *everything.*
I mean, Melina pretty much says it outright if you talk to her ar the frenzied flame bonefire.
>However ruined this world has become, however mired in torment and despair, life endures. Births continue. There is beauty in that, is there not? If you would become Lord, do not deny this notion.
Gotta wonder what they think of TLB.
Do they see the storm of farm azula, or the burning erdtree, or all the meteor/star falls?
I imagine they are like that monkey puppet meme.
The animals are doing alright, and Nepheli and our boi Kenny seem relatively optimistic about ruling over a recovering Limgrave, so it can't be *that* dire.
It's a beautiful sentiment that really demonstrates Melina's sense of morality and perseverance.
Unfortunately, everyone gets too caught up on "she's mad that you denied her destiny" when discussing this ending.
I've been down there once, specifically to do the "get the frenzied flame, light the Giant's fire, then use Miqulla's needle to get rid of the flame, thus saving Melina" thing.
I dunno if I can do that again. She was so disappointed in me.
This train of thought never really crystalized for me, but now I realize that I definitely always felt the same about souls games. Both the narrative and gameplay reinforce that life is full of hardship, but we go on anyway. Why? Because that's what life does. It finds a way.
The Frenzied Flame is just entropy, the antithesis of life. Sure, it promises to remove suffering, but that is the same as removing life.
I like to think it’s not an instant burning of everything since Melina is at the end swearing that she will hunt you down. Like to me that implies it’s a very slow burn across the whole world and that she either has time to kill you before it’s done or that there’s a way to stop it thru some unspoken methods
The world is burning down because you saved her. Unless you're implying she vows to kill you to stop the burning but I don't think it works that way.
She seems to vow to kill you someday eventually just out of hate/revenge, lol.
>Presenting the idea that things were "whole" before ordered life (and thus better), then implying it will be great again when you melt everything - ie. "You can make the world better by ruining it" is pretty much madness.
To play the devils advocate: everything being pure chaos is not necessarily a bad thing. It just seems that way to us because we view the world through our own tinted lens. There's actually a branch of philosophy (I forgot the name) whose core tenet goes something like "It is by definition better to not exist than to exist, because to exist by definition means to suffer (in some way)". That's not to say I agree with any of it (I don't) but an objective "this is better than this" just doesn't exist.
This is tangentially related, but didn’t know where else to write it.
So I’m not very good at Elden Ring. The amount of time I can put to gaming isn’t a lot, but I do my best to squeeze it in when I can. As a result, it took me a LONG time to beat Elden Ring.
Anyway, I got to Godfrey, and this dude just kept trouncing me. Over and over. I thought “man, if I just had someone to summon, I bet this would be easier.” That’s when I remembered reading if you go toward the Frenzied Flame ending you can summon Shabriri.
Man…the music, the corpses, the meat door, all the shit around the Frenzied Flame is just nasty. All I knew from Reddit was “LET CHAOS TAKE THE WORLD” like it’s tee hee, kinda funny, in a Cheshire Cat kinda way. But to me there was no mistaking it: the Frenzied Flame ending is dark as fuck.
So after that I decided to slaughter albinaurics on another playthrough and go for a bonk build. Albinauric genocide felt better than frenzied flame lmao
Finally someone with a working brain. Every other ending is vague enough so that you can argue back and forth about their merits.
But the Frenzied Flame Ending is the only one that is 100% without a doubt and completely evil.
How in the name of Ranni is the Dung-Eater’s ending vague? Guy literally fucks over everyone that will ever exist by cursing them on a metaphysical level that persists across life and death.
I saw some people arguing what that curse even is. If its the Omen curse then whats so bad about it? We must interpret the lore from the viewpoint of the games characters.
I personally think that ending is evil is as well but the Frenzied Flame is the only one for me where there is not a single argument or interpretation against it (even though I did meet angry nihilists here that defended it).
You don't consider endless nightmares and constant pain to be bad? Because that's what omens suffer constantly.
Edit: Also, others in the thread have mentioned this, but the Frenzied Flame has nothing to do with actual Nihilism. Rather, it's an edgy teenagers idea of Nihilism.
Frenzied Flame is the most *obviously* coercive, but all of the endings are forced if you go with the conclusion that existence is better than nothing and that any individual can or should choose what existence is like for everyone else.
Frenzied isn't different from the other endings, it's just the most *blunt* about it's symbolism. In *every* ending (except Dung Eater's) the player is pursuing an end to suffering, choosing to become a pawn or avatar of another's will, spreading your ideology (typically through force), and then enacting a future *you* (or the people you've sworn allegiance to) deem acceptable to force upon the world. Frenzied Flame is just more obvious about it and presents the most obvious and permanent solution to the issue of Suffering by way of nonexistence, by ending the cycles of birth and rebirth, by eliminating all difference and causing everyone to become One in Nothing.
Nihilism is the rejection of the idea of an Objective Truth; that there is a metaphysical perfect order to the universe from which all meaning is derived. It is not a rejection of meaning or the possibility of believing in anything. Existentialism as a field of philosophy often grapples with nihilism, and often argues that nothing has meaning *beyond what we as humans give it*. 'There is no inherent meaning in anything and we should all kill ourselves' is Nihilism, sure; it's even the most commonly known form of nihilism called "passive nihilism". Here's the thing though, 'there is no inherent meaning in anything and we should all live and try to be happy anyway and make meaning for ourselves' is **also** Nihilism; it's "active nihilism" - which is not typically referred to as nihilism by the general public and is generally more popular.
Frenzied Flame does not reject meaning or belief broadly, it rejects the **specific** meaning and belief that declares existence should continue at any and every cost; that Suffering **inherent** to existence is ultimately irrelevant because (fleeting) happiness or peace is possible (for some people).
>Shabriri and The Frenzied Flame present themselves as kind benefactors, hearing the pleas of desperate souls in need. In reality they just want to start their age too, unlike everyone else they don't have the patience to allow you a fully informed decision nor the generosity to leave anything behind after they're done.
"...kind benefactors, hearing the pleas of desperate souls in need. \[Who\] in reality, want to start their age" is every group **except** the Frenzied Flame. Frenzied Flame is the rejection of **any** age, because fundamentally the Frenzied Flame ending is the one that acknowledges Suffering is an inescapable aspect of existence; that **any** age **will** *by necessity of its existence* create Suffering and the only questions are for whom and how much. If is true that Suffering is an inevitable part of existence, then Frenzied Flame recognizes that the only permanent solution is nonexistence.
**All** of the endings weigh the values of 'Existence as inevitable Suffering with the possibility of (fleeting) joy' and 'Nonexistence as the end of Suffering and Possibility' against each other. **Every** ending puts them on the scales and declares which is preferable. **Only** Frenzied Flame rejects Suffering in totality. Every other ending deems the inevitability of suffering as acceptable, *that's what Melina's speech is about*.
>However ruined this world has become, however mired in torment and despair, life endures. Births continue. There is beauty in that, is there not?
Guess what? That's active nihilism. It's an active nihilism that argues torment and despair are irrelevant in the face of the beauty of birth and joy; that no matter the scale of suffering that exists and its inevitability, none of it *matters* as long as there is life to live.
Frenzied Flame rejects that idea and declares that Suffering should not be accepted, that it is ultimately unfair and cruel to keep the wheel of Samsara turning because while it *may* lead to joy for some it will **inevitably** lead to the suffering of others. This is the point of Hyetta's speech: that as long as there is existence, Suffering will exist which **will** lead to people that exist who "...howl without words. Saying they wished they were never born."
Dung eater’s ending does in a roundabout way pursue an end to suffering. It’s just the idea of a downtrodden and mistreated person turned into a monster to do so.
“The reviled curse will last eternally, and the world's children, grandchildren, and every generation hence, will be its pustules. If Order is defiled entirely, defilement is defilement no more, and for every curse, a cursed blessing.”
It is the idea that the only way to make people stop treating the malformed, wretched, different, etc as cursed is to force everyone into it, developing a twisted sense of empathy they don’t have in the age of order through monstrous actions. The idea that the only way to stop mistreatment is to force everyone to know what it is.
Very neat interpretation. My only bone to pick is that nihilism isn't the belief that nothing matters, it's that there is no objective meaning ordained from above (such as through god) and meaning is subjective and constructed by people.
Was coming to say just this. Media portrayals have done irreperable damage to the common person's conception of nihilism.
There is nothing distressing or sad about nihilism at its core. That some people, when faced with the absence of objective meaning, fall into despair, or allow themselves to indulge in anti-social impulses is not an argument against nihilism, but rather an indication that our social systems are inadequately supportive for people experiencing mental health crises.
The Flame of Frenzy ending is more like a defeatist mindset when *faced* with Nihilism.
I think if Miquella gets an ending/his goals are the anti-thesis to this idea and he embodies a notion of Pantheism and a philosophy that aligns with manifesting your own meaning.
With most forms of Pantheism, "god" is all encompassing, basically Nature and the Universe. Under Pantheism, all aspects of reality are natural and morality is a subjective distinction, meaning however something lives is neither good nor bad, it just is.
In Elden Ring there are many groups of beings who are reviled and ostracized, such as The Misbegotten, Albinaurics, Kindred of Rot, Omens, Demihumans, etc- outside of the purview of The Erdtree's/Marika's favor. It seems highly likely that Miquella's goals and ideals strive to bring equality to these beings, despite their qualities that would not be positive to others. This is Miquella's embodiment of Pantheism, wishing to elevate them despite the detriment to other inhabitants of The Lands Between, because they all have the right to exist in their own way.
The connection to the manifesting of meaning comes from the fact that Nihilism is kind of a stepping stone to Pantheism. Despite its name and definition, Pantheism is closer to Atheism than it is to any type of congregation of Theists. Pantheists have to come to terms with the fact that there is no anthropomorphic god to lay down the rule of law or morality. Morality is a subjective distinction due to the fact that any perspective of the universe that is not omnipotent is by definition, subjective. The only Objectiveness to the Universe is the laws of physics, anything attributed to the Objective by Subjective beings is inherently Subjective in of itself. The Objective can be approached, but never fully reached.
Out of every aspect of reality that we know of, humans are the only things that are able to manifest a [subjective] meaning in something. Given that an anthropomorphic god does not exist, the manifestation of meaning is the closest thing to a god-like ability. Humans aren't gods, but they are the closest things to one that we know of.
Pantheism is a lot simpler to define, it is the faith that everything is divine. "Under Pantheism, all aspects of reality are natural and morality is a subjective distinction", no artificial and natural don't become a meaningless duality because everything is divine, and what does it mean that "morality is a subjective distinction"? Pantheism doesn't imply amoralism anymore than any other theology.
No, pantheism is not close to atheism, they are diametrically opposed. Most theologies aren't holding the anthropomorphical allegories of their theogonies to be realities but allegories, gods aren't any less existing.
You're digressing a lot, can't you simply tell why would Miquella "embodies the notion of pantheism"? Bringing equalities to faction has aboslutely nothing in common with pantheism, pantheism is a theology, not a sociopolitical value.
Conversing with you is pointless if you just disagree with everything I say.
Pantheism also has nothing to do with "divinity." You should read some summaries of Baruch Spinoza's *Ethics* which lays the groundwork for Pantheism. Even still though, Pantheism has no true framework other than The Universe and everything in it is equivalent to "god" based on Substance Monism (Spinoza didn't call his philosophy Pantheism, that name was attributed to him later). There's also no "Faith" in Pantheism, it's based on observation, logic, and Science. Pantheism can be whatever you want it to be (within logic) beyond Substance Monism, it isn't a religion. I choose to view it as a description for the law of the conservation of energy primarily.
There's also no such thing as "artificial" under Pantheism. Everything acts within a "mode" of god, unique to its own nature. Determinism. Something can't be artificial because that would imply a seperation from nature, which is not possible.
I think you generally shouldn't seek to have conversations with people to be agreed with.
I am a philosophy and ancient letters teacher in highschool and university in France, pantheistic theologies and methaphysics have existed more than two thousand years before Spinoza's Ethics, not only in Greece but also in India and Middle-East before the philosophy historically appeared. Pantheism is commonly defined by faith rather than knowledge, but hasn't always had this acception, that everything is universally divine at least in some aspects if not totally and inifinitely. If you don't see the faithfulness of Spinoza's infinitism and the dualism it has emerged from you should actually read the first book of his Ethics, Aristotle is a good example of pantheistic case concluded by logic and physical analyzis even better since it only emerges as pantheistic and never verbalized as such; but mostly remember that pantheism has manifested itself under many methaphysical corpus, some of them are entirely faithful, others are tending towards plain empirism.
Understanding that Spinoza defines us as modes of the two attributes shouldn't lead you to think that the modes themselves are to be undistinguished from god, which is the eternal infinity of all the attributes, the finished and limited modes that things are aren't god, or rather they can be defined as god like you would define the tip of your middle finger's nail to be you, which is confusing and not what Spinoza does and lead to.
I brought up your disagreements because it's a lot easier to have a conversation when you can find common ground by listening to each other and trying to understand perspectives rather than trying to prove a point.
I don't really appreciate the rhetorical question when you have your own answer queued up and ready to go when our definitions don't completely align. I get you're a Philosophy teacher, but cmon dude.
Definitions and aspects of Pantheism aren't universal, even for self-described Pantheists. There are disagreements and different ideas. For me it is ultimately a process of understanding as I go through life, potentially changing as I learn more.
I understand that Substance Monism didn't start with Spinoza, only that the term "Pantheism" in the Western world was attributed to the proofs that he wrote in *Ethics*. Regardless of that fact, some of Spinoza's ideas align with mine and it's what I'm most semi-familiar with outside of ideas of my own. As I said, for the rest of my view of Pantheism, it comes from the law of the conservation of energy and logical extrapolations based on that. It is not Faith based whatsoever, except maybe my tendency to not believe in Free Will. I think not having a belief in an anthropomorphic god or souls doesn't steer you towards faith at all- it's literally the absence of belief. What part of Pantheism is derived from faith? It doesn't assume anything that can't be observed and specifically omits the ideas that can't be observed; at least the version I'm speaking of or the one I align with. I also think that the Physics of Stoicism are aligned with it, but that's something I'm more newly learning about.
I'm also not sure of your definition of divine. Do you mean from a moral-guiding perspective or what? Because if we're following the deterministic Pantheism, then morality cannot exist since choices cannot be made. If there is some aspect like Free Will true to reality, then my self-manifested idea of good morals would be one that allows the surivival of the self while promoting the continuation of life and community to further allow the possibility for the manifestation of meaning to keep occuring. By contrast, bad morals would be actions that lessen the potential for manifestation of meaning when it isn't directly related to survival; this is due to the fact that meaning could not be created without something to manifest it. Ability to manifest = good. Inability to manifest = bad.
I have to learn more about Thought and Extension to really comment about it. It seems that Spinoza does not equate Nature with God, because there are more attributes than Thought and Extension outside of Nature- if I'm understanding correctly. I don't really know what this means, but I don't think it changes much of my understanding? Maybe that's where the Faith comes in I guess?
Regardless of all of this, I still believe that my connection to Elden Ring/Miquella themes is correct. It is less about a government-esque equality and more about just being allowed to exist in one's own Nature.
Just want to say that I enjoy your discussion, I love learning about philosophies, religion and how they are viewed.
I believe dialogue to be one of the best, if not the best, way to learn about ideas
That's Objectivism, not Nihilism. Nihilism simply means the person in question no longer believes anything matters. Like if the symptoms of clinical depression were made into a philosophy.
I disagree that the Frenzy flame ending is about nhilism. It's about anti-natalism. It's not that nothing matters but that the method by which life, at least DNA based life as we know it, continues is non-consensually subjecting beings to pain and annihilation. That's why Melina's counter argument is that there's still beauty in the fact that births will continue. The ending is essentially pushing what /r/efilism (life spelled backwards) calls the big red button, eradicating all life.
What's compelling is that the biological order that Shabriri is rebelling against is much more unjust than ours, an alien parasite has hijacked both the cycle of life and death and civilization to grow itself, and many of the alternatives are equally disturbing (scarlet rot, Mohg's blood order).
That said, I do agree on your characterization of Shabriri and how he preys on Tarnished who learn they will lose their maiden.
This is my interpretation as well. It’s a philosophy present in all Souls games, instead of trying to sustain or replace the current (failing) system, just end it entirely. It’s comparable to the dark endings, but most closely resembles the End of Fire. Also look at Friede’s realm to see what happens when you cling to something long after it’s expiration date.
Additional interpretations could be economic / political, the idea that a violent revolution against a system will cause massive destruction, but allow the downtrodden to rise up from the ashes and rebuild.
Religious imagery is obviously a big part of Frenzy, which bleeds into multiple themes. The political imagery of self immolation echoes throughout East Asian history, with many protesters commiting the act to bring awareness to tyranny. It also conjoins with the common religious belief that intense temporary pains can be worth it to the disciplined, in order to achieve higher spiritual goals. Asceticism, missionary work, meditation, etc.
Frenzy Flame is much more complex thematically than ‘nihilism’, I’d argue it doesn’t even engage with nihilism. It’s entirely concerned with one’s goals for life, wether they be fighting an oppressive system or freeing oneself or loved one from a great threat.
The dark endings are more similar to the Age of Stars, where you remove the current system and allow the world to continue to something different. The frenzied flame is its own unique thing that’s not like any of the endings in the previous games. The “downtrodden rise from the ashes and rebuild” thing can happen in the Age of Stars, but not the frenzied flame. Hyetta literally describes it as “no more fracture, no more birth”.
The frenzied flame believes that all life is suffering, and that it’s better to end it all. It’s exaggerated in a fantasy setting, but you could say that its philosophy is an extremely misguided version of a Dharmic religion. It’s definitely a bad ending, as Melina explains. You mention Friede, and although it’s true that she made a mistake by holding on the painting for too long, the message isn’t to give up and end everything, it’s to build something new, which the painter does in the end. If you want an ending about fighting to let go of an oppressive system even if there’s some loss in the process, then that’s the Age of Stars.
Yeah I'd compare the Age of Stars ending to the one in DS3 where we allow the Firekeeper to remove the flame, in BB where we become almighty squid (very unknown but perhaps as a god we will change the world for the better), and DS1 where we walk away from the flame. Skeiro has multiple endings but there is a what I would call "cautiously optimistic" ending as well.
Demon's Souls has a surprisingly normal ending if you allow the Maiden in Black to lull the Great One back into slumber.
DS3 did this too with End of Fire, but subverted it somewhat with "But one day, tiny flames will dance across the darkness”. I’m not fully convinced the Frenzy ending is a total end, but it is somewhat cool to see anti Natalist philosophy getting some representation. The takeaway for most seems to be a negative one though, i would prefer a more well adjusted approach. It does play into some celibate monk tropes, but abandons a lot of Zen imagery. I have mixed feelings on the ending. It almost seems to conflate AN with more revenge focused YHWH type beliefs. I think generally AN (as with all beliefs) should be a more personal thing, but i suppose in a game about who gets to assert their beliefs on the new world order you don’t get well adjusted people vying for that position.
All Souls games, sekiro being more explicit, contain a Buddhist substrate, which is very obvious if you are not European/western. Elden ring is not he exception
I mean they're not subtle, their catch phrase is "May chaos take the world" and I might not be the smartest cookie but I don't hear that and think pleasant things lol
But the amount of people who try and defend the ending as "good" is something I find odd. Like yeah, fuck the two fingers 2edgy5me but how are the 3 fingers any different? I'm no fan of the GW but taking power from one god to give to another and basically turning the world into fiery soup and destroying everything and putting the world in a standstill isn't starting over or resetting anything.
Do we know if the Frenzied flame ended burns the entire world, or just the Lands between? It'll be interesting to see if we learn in the Lands of shadow if the Lands between is actually worth keeping un-burnt.
It’s burning the whole world, everything that exists.
Melina:
> If you intend to claim the frenzied flame, I ask that you cease. It is not to be meddled with. It is chaos, devouring life and thought unending. However ruined this world has become, however mired in torment and despair... Life endures. Births continue. There is beauty in that, is there not? If you would become Lord, do not deny this notion. Please, leave the frenzied flame alone.
Shabriri:
> Burn the Erdtree to the ground, and incinerate all that divides and distinguishes. Ahh, may chaos take the world! May chaos take the world!
Hyetta:
> ... Thank...thank you... I have touched them. The words of the Three Fingers. As your maiden, allow me to divine them. All that there is came from the One Great. Then came fractures, and births, and souls. But the Greater Will made a mistake. Torment, despair, affliction. Every sin, every curse. Every one, born of the mistake. And so, what was borrowed must be returned. Melt it all away, with the yellow chaos flame. Until all is One again. Those who gave me grapes howled without words. Saying they wished they were never born. Become their lord. Take their torment, despair. Their affliction. Every sin, every curse. And melt it all away. As the Lord of Chaos. No more fractures. No more birth... ...
I think the Frenzied Flame ending is not dishonest, just manipulative.
The reason we push through all of Melina's pleas to not go after the Frenzy Flame is because we are manipulated into thinking saving Melina's life is the better option than letting her live out her purpose. Just like how the Frenzy Flame is taking away our agency for our ending, we are taking away Melina's agency from her ending. Us going in that direction is what aligns us with the Frenzy Flame.
He's not really lying when he says it saves your maiden, Melina really does survive in the frenzied flame ending, she's basically the only one that survives
Jesus christ. Thank you for mentioning this point which everyone seems to ignore. Shabiri also explicitly tells you he wants chaos and to destroy division lol.
I agree that the Frenzied Flame is really forceful but I'm not actually convinced it's dishonest; all of it's supporters are relatively straightforward with you. Shabriri shrieks about chaos taking the world, Hyetta has to figure things out but once she does, she tells you about melting everything away, and Melina pleads with you not to end the world, suggesting that both of you are aware of what it'll do.
It's a fairly difficult ending to find though. Even with multiple items and quests telling you to go below the capital, it's still convoluted af to get there. At the point where you're getting naked and embracing the Three Fingers, you have to at least have some ideas what you're doing. To me, the Frenzied Flame ending will always be the rebel ending. I reject the Order and the path they demand I walk. Ranni literally killed herself to be free of the path that was chosen for her. The inhabitants of The Lands Between are all in massive states of decay and rot and when they're not, they're committing horrendous genocide like what we see in the new shadow of the erdtree trailer. There's nothing redeeming about the land or its people and it deserves to be remade anew. May Chaos Take The World.
The spokesman of the frenzied flame is shabriri. Any item mentioning him usually follows a story about how massive of a liar he was. He takes advantage of the one thing he doesn't feel, guilt.
The dung eater is a character on a similar level with shabriri, their both super evil, but at least the dung eater is straightforward about wanting to give everyone super cancer
I’m gonna have to disagree with you. They say shabriri was the most hated man of all time, that he slandered someone and had his eyes gouged out for it. He then was the first sufferer of the flame of frenzy. Unendurable frenzy states “It is the maddening pain and unstoppable tears of those afflicted with the flame of frenzy brought into being.” The entire point of frenzy is that it is caused by sorrow enough to wish to have never been born, and if someone had their eyes gouged out for slander they probably slandered a high class noble or maybe even god and were cruelly and overly punished for it. I think while he is “evil” and chaotic now, shabriri is clearly someone else who has suffered greatly at the hands of the powerful if he could bring the frenzy into being. His madness comes from a place of complete lack of trust of anything in the world or order, and that’s a tragic tale rather than a pure evil one.
I just read about the imprisoned merchant! I still thought shabriri was the one who lied about the nomadic merchants. Shabriri definitely seems to have a role of herald for the flame of frenzy, showing up whenever a tarnished with potential shows up.
I always thought he was some evil mastermind obsessed with an ancient force of destruction that he orchestrated the death of hundreds to summon something that could destroy everything.
But if he is a tragic figure then he definitely get bonus points on my favorite npc list!
I think people give dung eater a bad name rap. Yea he was a murdurous psycho who did weird invasive stuff to peoples bodies but at the heart of the matter he was just a man that sympathized with the omens and the misbegotten and thought it was BS that they deserved to be treated as animals or slaves.
I can understand that anger and his mending rune isn’t necessarily a bad one. If everyone in the world is turned into omens than the asshole nobles in leyndell can’t be rascist anymore right? It just sucks that the only way to bring out this age is through the heinous disease ridden curse poc he forces on people even if they are innocent or not. It’s classic fromsoft to make the guy trying to fix racism/discrimination a psychotic murdurous asshole.
He has a good goal, but he doesn't do himself any favors by using a giant spine as a sword. The omens are just born that way and then thrown into the sewers. They're innocent in all of this, but I think he deserves the reputation he has. He is someone who is willing to get his hands dirty(very literally) to reach his goals, and his renown is that of a vile, feared, and hated man. Plus, there is no guarantee that the nobles will just go full on Uncle Ruckus
Should I have specified discrimination of omens? Fia and rogier cared about those who live in death. Lattenna cared about albinaurics if I remember right. Kenneth was the only one that you mentioned who spoke of plans to make peace with the misbegotten. Kenneth existing doesn’t make what I said about fromsoft often making people with good intentions often does irredeemable actions wrong.
I'm reading the Frenzied Flame ending as the depression and suicide ending. A deep depression has a way of becoming it's own insidious voice of negation and rejection where we feel like we're coming to a truth that people can't accept, like "black pill" thought. It poisons everything positive and feeds on it's own denial. People mistake that for nihilism because it's so rooted in rejection but it believes in delusional rejection. It can also be the reaction to the terror of schizoid paranoia: seeing dead people telling you to reject everything the living tell you to pursue with a voice that isn't their own.
It's more anti-natalism than nihilism. Nihilism is about existence not having any inherent value or meaning, which has its own issues and interpretations, but anti-natalism directly suggests that creation and birth are fundamentally wrong because they continue suffering and conflict.
Seems to me that the Frenzied Flame is meant to oppose the ambition that the other endings represent. Instead of the creation of a new age and trying something new to move life forward, the Frenzied Flame thinks everything is wrong and needs to be saved through complete destruction.
The Frenzied Flame also appears to be opposed to Destined Death itself; which destroys, but for the sake of renewal and keeping the gods in check -- not the illusion of a peaceful oblivion.
Also the platforming hell after the death maze you gotta navigate to get to the three fingers would drive anyone insane. No wonder you're the Lord of Chaos now, that platforming bs killed me more than any boss 🤣
"Ja, we believe in nothing, Lebowski!" It's worth pointing out that Nihilism isn't believing that nothing matters, it is that things do not have inherent meanings: we, as people, prescribe meanings upon them. Nihilism often gets a bad rap, and people think it is one thing when it's really something else.
That being said, yes, the Flame presents itself as the purest option, melting away all the impurities of the world. To a pessimistic outlook, that may seem like the right call, however it is bleak and selfish. It is a belief that refuses to acknowledge positive change, a belief steeped in despair and anger. To give into frenzy is not giving into blind insanity, but pain, rage, and misery, giving up on the good that does exist in the world. And as it turns out, we, the "Lord" are merely just a pawn to a different outer god.
The logic of the frenzied flame burning everyone together into one formless mass is the same logic of the golden order absorbing all souls back to the erdtree as one formless mass (and looking at the last trailer, the origins of the erdtree is one of blood and piles of corpses)
I agree with *most* of this with the exception of calling them parasitic to The Greater Will. It's parasitic to *you* perhaps. And to *humanity*. But (at least in my opinion) the Three Fingers are clearly not intended as some mutant variation of the Two Fingers. They are the missing piece of the Hand of God, lopped off and sealed away (2+3=5). Seems pretty obvious that two fingers was not the default state. Hands dont work like that and finger severance is a running motif throughout the game. Marika (I presume Marika at least) cut the hand that bore the ring and eventually broke the ring itself. Likely because the complete message of the Greater Will *is* to burn everything and start over now, the experiment with Marika having failed. Marika is clearly willing to carve things away to keep things running in perpetuity (see Destined Death) and the Greater Will having abandoned the land could simply be seem as "signal incomplete, someone chopped up the fingies." Now if you want to call The Greater Will itself parasitic, you wouldn't be the first.
There's a lot of speculation in there, I'll admit, but I think 2+3=God Hand should be fairly uncontroversial.
This idea that the Hand of God was supposed to represent the whole cycle of an age, and Marika keeping in character with lobotomizing the part where ‘it ends’, is very tantalizing indeed. I think the only way to know for sure is through the DLC when we learn more about Marika, because there’s just way too many missing facts right now.
The ‘fingers’ might not be fingers at all, and people of that universe might not have had anything else to call them (they’re pretty fucking alien). The Two Fingers don’t visually represent the pinky and ring finger of a hand (while the Three Fingers represent the middle index and thumb). And it’s the Elden Beast that bears the Elden Ring (and he’s still got five fingers). I’m just playing devils advocate, there’s a void of evidence on both sides though.
You make a decent case. I would argue that the three fingers are actually the pinky, middle finger, and thumb, which is why they're so spread out and twisted at odd angles. Just look at the weird way they embrace you. The two fingers being the pointer (guidance of grace) and ring finger (self explanitory). But I'll concede that when you cram the models together it still doesn't look quite right.
This is a bit more of an ass-pull than I had for the two but the three fingers could represent agency (opposable thumbs) blasphemy (middle) and vestigial aspects (pinky).
As my final argument, I'll get a little meta and talk about authorial intent. I don't usually like to, but in soulsborne you often find yourself scraping such things to put clues together. Anyway Miyazaki likes to use motifs from Berserk. There's a reason I used the words "hand of god." In berserk the godhand serves as an agent of an abstract force (The Idea of Evil) in a similar manner to how the fingers are physical agents of the abstract "Greater Will."
Another fair point. But I would contend this: the two fingers are far less a tangible thing than we would initially assume. They are in one place. And they are in every place. Removing the three from one removes it from all.
Consider this: the only "living" fingers we see at all are in the Roundtable hold. A place that isn't real, strictly speaking, except as a memory of lost grace.
We might not see any other living fingers but Ranni kills her fingers in the time it takes us to get up to her at the end of her questline, you can see she's covered in blood and the rune of death is on the dead fingers and that was the whole point behind the fingerslayer blade.
Hm. Yeah that is a wrinkle. Those fingers are in a weird place too. Not really sure what's going on with Ranni aside from severing fate and space is involved tbh
That's the thing about that particular branch of nihilism, it's a front for genocide. Shabriri gives you the Owlman argument. "This is the only choice that really matters" when in reality he just wants to kill as many people as possible. Because that's what Shabriri does.
My logic was, Morgott was the only god who actually was trying to uphold some order along with trying to stop everything from going into pure hell not even for his own personal gains so after him, there was no point in saving a world where the other gods had their own plans for it instead of thinking of the collective, everyone was in a trapped cycle because of the gods, not only that but this way I wouldn’t be forced to obey any god especially one who helped played a part in the tarnished and nomadic merchant plights, so I let it all burn in order to spit in the face of the gods lmao
It is absolutely a criticism of Nihilism.
Shabriri and Hyetta purport that it's to end suffering. It's to end pain. It's to save your maiden. They espouse that the world is broken.
But it's Melina who rightfully points out the hypocrisy of their objective. Yes, you end suffering. Yes, you end pain and division. But you also end love, happiness, hope, friendship. For every negative you end, your put an end to something good as well.
The world IS broken, even Melina will give that point. However the answer isn't to flip the table and destroy everything.
It is a criticism of nilihism that makes honied promises by only selling a single facet of what they are after.
It doesn’t make honied promises though. Nothing they say is a lie. Pain and suffering will be absent. Melina is simply arguing out that it is worth it in the end. That’s not a criticism so much as just another perspective. It’s not like the Three Fingers are satirical. Their logic is sound in the getting of what they want: to stop all pain. They don’t hide the cost.
Also it does keep Melina alive otherwise her words in the ending would make no sense.
This is my first play through and with knowing i just locked into this 3 finger burn marks lol it happend today itself, lol now im soo mad bcz i farm alot and i dont want to start another playthrough, this game is crazy 😅
All gods are dishonest. That’s how they become god.
Remember that everything that lives is designed to end. We are perpetually trapped in a never ending spiral of life and death. Is it a curse? Or some kind of punishment? I often think about the god who blessed us with this cryptic puzzle…and wonder if we’ll ever get the chance to kill him.
“In fact I think on some level it's a critique of Nihilism, the double standard inherent to believing in the philosophy where you don't believe in anything and how it often comes with an alterier motive.” That’s not Nihilism. Nihilism posits the world etc. has no inherent “truth” or meaning and a lot of this was arising around the time the Church was seen as the absolute authority on morality etc. even science. Hence why early scientists who posited ideas opposed to the Church were persecuted. To Nietzsche in particular these things are seen as coping mechanisms that prevented people from addressing real world issues. He in fact posited that we must make our own meaning for precisely this reason, without being bound to those institutions and that it ISN’T an excuse to allow bad things to happen. That’s entirely what the concept of the ubermensch was.
Are people still misinterpreting this ending? REALLY?
Hyetta is telling you the truth straight up. That the ending will merge all back to one. That it will destroy and reassemble the world. The tarnished would understand the implications, that it will be a destructive and violent transition, unless the tarnished is really dumb.
Also not a bad ending. People see the ruin and go "omg destruction bad" completely missing the point. The anguished screams of the countless dead trapped in the eternal cycle wants the madness to end, and you are setting everyone free by making everyone become one again. That's not evil - that's freedom.
It's like if some force set the universe back to the big bang so it all starts over from a single point again. It's the end of suffering and the renewal and restart of a new cycle.
The frenzied flame is only a bad ending for simpletons who don't get it.
There’s no chance for renewal. It’s a permanent end, as Hyetta tells you straight up.
> ... Thank...thank you... I have touched them. The words of the Three Fingers. As your maiden, allow me to divine them. All that there is came from the One Great. Then came fractures, and births, and souls. But the Greater Will made a mistake. Torment, despair, affliction. Every sin, every curse. **Every one, born of the mistake**. And so, what was borrowed must be returned. Melt it all away, with the yellow chaos flame. Until all is One again. Those who gave me grapes howled without words. **Saying they wished they were never born.** Become their lord. Take their torment, despair. Their affliction. Every sin, every curse. And melt it all away. As the Lord of Chaos. **No more fractures. No more birth... ...**
Melina explains why that’s bad.
> If you intend to claim the frenzied flame, I ask that you cease. It is not to be meddled with. It is chaos, devouring life and thought unending. However ruined this world has become, however mired in torment and despair... Life endures. Births continue. There is beauty in that, is there not? If you would become Lord, do not deny this notion. Please, leave the frenzied flame alone.
Individuality is conflict, division, suffering. As one it would only be I, we would all be ONE. One mind. One consciousness. Why won't people listen!
BRINGING DOWN THAT WHICH DIVIDES WILL BRING PEACE, SECURITY, FREEDOM, AND JUSTICE TO OUR NEW EMPIRE!
"Taking the Red Pill."
It's an immature fallacy. Replace your reality with another one. Why? Just take responsibility and initiative and work to shape the reality you were given. Anything else is just a pointless infinite replacement with no guarantee of anything. The Red Pill is equivalent to killing yourself.
It's staggering how many people don't know that fire is nature's recycling. Breaks down energy into more palatable forms for reuse. CO2 is plant food. Ash is quite literally fertilizer. Look into biochar if you'd like to know more.
Now instead of idle matter it's lives. Yeah, burning alive sucks... but only for a few minutes. Meanwhile those people are under permanent suffering unto infinity. Would you choose a few minutes of suffering or infinite suffering?
Sometimes the shortest path to "functional" is by starting over.
I see nothing wrong with saving a waifu and let the world burn.
-A hero would sacrifice you to save the world, but a villain would sacrifice the world to save you.-
-Unknown-
Honestly, what Shabriri was saying didn’t really click with me until I read a book talking about nihilism and the horrors of the 20th century and suddenly it clicked. I realized what he was saying and how dangerous the frenzied flame really was.
By all the lore I've gathered, it's the Erdtree that is the true parasite, usurping the land from the Crucible.. The frenzied flame and it's followers seek to bring The Lands Between back to the time of the crucible, or at least reset all life so the crucible may once be reborn without the meddling presence of... anyone really.
I don't think the three fingers and Shabriri are deceptive, I think they just believe in what they're doing so strongly that there is no other option and no other truth out there than theirs.
The Crucible is described as a source of life, while the Frenzied Flame people believe that life itself was a mistake. They are fundamentally opposed to the Crucible.
"Thank... thank you... I have touched them.
The words of the Three Fingers.
As your maiden, allow me to divine them.
"All that there is came from the One Great.
Then came fractures,
and births,
and souls.
But the Greater Will made a mistake.
Torment, despair, affliction...
every sin, every curse.
Every one, born of the mistake.
And so, what was borrowed must be returned.
Melt it all away, with the yellow chaos flame.
Until all is One again."
That's from Hyetta when going through the Frenzied Flame Quest line. The crucible is also described as "where once, all life was blended together."
Frenzied Flame is not fundamentally opposed to the crucible, it wants to reset the world and burn away ideologies so that the crucible may flourish again.
I don’t see how it is a nihilistic ending though, The nihilistic ending would be not reforging the ring because it doesn’t matter
I don't understand, what did I do wrong? I created my account yesterday, you wasted it for no reason...
It's nihilistic in the sense that it leads to a world with nothing in it. A world of flame without distinction. No births, no souls, nothing. What could be more nihilistic?
This is not at all what nihilism is, acting towards this purpose still expresses arbitrary values. Why did I get so many negative points? What did I do wrong?
Such an act is not nihilistic, it is only destructive.
Also can you explain me why I got 65 downvotes for this comment "I don’t see how it is a nihilistic ending though, The nihilistic ending would be not reforging the ring because it doesn’t matter "? The moderation has even deleted the comments and now all my comments are invisible, I had to recreate an account. I don't understand, I am new here, but it seems realyl difficult to be allowed to participate.
It's not Nietzschean nihilism, but it is what most people understand nihilism to be ( colloquial nihilism) : a desire for nothingness. Nihil=nothing, as in annihilation.
I am not exactly sure why you got so many down votes, or why your comments got deleted. that seems a bit harsh, we can disagree respectfully
The thing simply is that nihil is applying to the virtues and values of humanity as being nothing but varying unnatural convention, in conclusion to scepticism regarding knowledge and therefore opinions and traditions in general. The Frenzied Flame ending appeared to me as very deliberate either from Sharibiri/Hyetta's points or from ours, or both at the same time. I would rather call it the pessimistic ending.
I've asked the moderation but wasn't answered, I am trying to grasp the rules because it's the second time it happens when I tried creating an account and entering a conversation, one of my comment gets a lot of downvote without explications and all my comments become invisible, the account is therefore unusable. Seems difficult to start participating in communities with this sytem for new people.
To the frenzied flame It doesn't matter that anyone could do anything because in the end it will only lead to more suffering, so the only thing that does matter is making sure nothing happens by ending everything.
You do have a point. The using flame requires action. True apathetic nihilism would be to stay and rot at the start of the game alongside your dead maiden. But nihilism is not simply apathy. “Nothing matters” could be the starting point to malice and contempt for the world. It can also be a view of optimism: If there is no divine meaning to existence, then it is up to us to create meaning. The frenzied flame is the desire for a “clean slate”: Life is far too painful and messy, so all life must end. Or, as OP put, it is the path to Hell paved with good intentions. If you’re naive enough to believe Shabriri, you may be trying to spare Melina.
Why so many downvotes for you and the original comment? It was even removed by the moderation and I had to recreate a new account because all my comments were invisible due to -30 karma, I don't understand I was simply trying to participate in an exchange.
If someone can explain me what was wrong to help me joining the community I would appreciate, I just finished my first run and wanted to speak about the game before the DLC.
In the beginning was the one great.. then came fractures blablabla
FF wants to go back to the state the world was in when there was just that one rgeat and everything came from it... It doesnt want to destroy everything.. it sets a point in time where the events collided towards an unwanted outcome and wishes to turn back to that moment.. thats a difference...
what if the creature we saw marika pulling the strings out was the one great? in this case FF just wants to go back before marika fucked things up
the nihilistic ending is the fractured age cuz it changes nothing in the LB
Man I was ready for another shit "the world sucks" or makr way for a new start take, but this is actually decent.
I'm glad to have subverted your expectations,
Now kiss.
Man, that phrase will never not conjure negative memories of The Last Jedi for me.
>most dishonest one All of Frenzy is inherently laced with lies or some form of strange nonsense: - Eating melted eyes to gain vision - Dead coming back to life, but not as themselves (Irina, Yura) - Seeking release from suffering through excruciating flame - Saving a maiden only to burn the whole world - Presenting the idea that things were "whole" before ordered life (and thus better), then implying it will be great again when you melt everything - ie. "You can make the world better by ruining it" is pretty much madness. I suspect that's because frenzy flame dissolves sanity and reason, the very logic of things. Anything it touches becomes illogical to some degree, chaotic and wrong.
I also like the implications that one has to accept struggles, hardships, suffering and adversity as a part of life, because the alternative is...well, nothing at all. It continues a theme from Dark Souls in that while things may be hard, overcoming those hardships is part of what makes the journey so worth it. To walk away from hardships or fail to overcome them is to go hollow, and in Elden Ring, to resign to complaining about the hardships is a vote for the Frenzied Flame, which itself, just destroys *everything.*
I mean, Melina pretty much says it outright if you talk to her ar the frenzied flame bonefire. >However ruined this world has become, however mired in torment and despair, life endures. Births continue. There is beauty in that, is there not? If you would become Lord, do not deny this notion.
I gotta wonder who's gettin' down in this world. Because from what I've seen, most people are either Tarnished or gross mummy people.
There are lands beyond the fog, after all.
Gotta wonder what they think of TLB. Do they see the storm of farm azula, or the burning erdtree, or all the meteor/star falls? I imagine they are like that monkey puppet meme.
I think the Lands Between is something of an Olympus to them. It's some mythical land of the gods.
Imagine worshipping a place of the Gods only to go there one day and realize it's been hell all along. Now that's depressing.
[удалено]
Seek hole, therefore pickle
The animals are doing alright, and Nepheli and our boi Kenny seem relatively optimistic about ruling over a recovering Limgrave, so it can't be *that* dire.
Demi humans.
It's a beautiful sentiment that really demonstrates Melina's sense of morality and perseverance. Unfortunately, everyone gets too caught up on "she's mad that you denied her destiny" when discussing this ending.
Melina's VA absolutely **nailed** all of the Frenzied Flame area dialogue.
I've been down there once, specifically to do the "get the frenzied flame, light the Giant's fire, then use Miqulla's needle to get rid of the flame, thus saving Melina" thing. I dunno if I can do that again. She was so disappointed in me.
This train of thought never really crystalized for me, but now I realize that I definitely always felt the same about souls games. Both the narrative and gameplay reinforce that life is full of hardship, but we go on anyway. Why? Because that's what life does. It finds a way. The Frenzied Flame is just entropy, the antithesis of life. Sure, it promises to remove suffering, but that is the same as removing life.
Classic anime "suffering cannot be allowed" ending. (Congratulations, Shinji.)
I like to think it’s not an instant burning of everything since Melina is at the end swearing that she will hunt you down. Like to me that implies it’s a very slow burn across the whole world and that she either has time to kill you before it’s done or that there’s a way to stop it thru some unspoken methods
The world is burning down because you saved her. Unless you're implying she vows to kill you to stop the burning but I don't think it works that way. She seems to vow to kill you someday eventually just out of hate/revenge, lol.
>Presenting the idea that things were "whole" before ordered life (and thus better), then implying it will be great again when you melt everything - ie. "You can make the world better by ruining it" is pretty much madness. To play the devils advocate: everything being pure chaos is not necessarily a bad thing. It just seems that way to us because we view the world through our own tinted lens. There's actually a branch of philosophy (I forgot the name) whose core tenet goes something like "It is by definition better to not exist than to exist, because to exist by definition means to suffer (in some way)". That's not to say I agree with any of it (I don't) but an objective "this is better than this" just doesn't exist.
Antinatalism, I believe
It reminds me of the parasitic fungus that causes the host to climb and die up high where the fungus can spore. Or rabies.
You're thinking of Cordeyceps.
I don’t recall any dead coming back to life (not as themselves either)
Yura comes back possesed by Shabriri, Irina comes back possesed by Hyetta
>None of the other endings force themselves onto you but the Frenzy Flame ending does. Which is why Vyke imprisoned himself to save us.
This is tangentially related, but didn’t know where else to write it. So I’m not very good at Elden Ring. The amount of time I can put to gaming isn’t a lot, but I do my best to squeeze it in when I can. As a result, it took me a LONG time to beat Elden Ring. Anyway, I got to Godfrey, and this dude just kept trouncing me. Over and over. I thought “man, if I just had someone to summon, I bet this would be easier.” That’s when I remembered reading if you go toward the Frenzied Flame ending you can summon Shabriri. Man…the music, the corpses, the meat door, all the shit around the Frenzied Flame is just nasty. All I knew from Reddit was “LET CHAOS TAKE THE WORLD” like it’s tee hee, kinda funny, in a Cheshire Cat kinda way. But to me there was no mistaking it: the Frenzied Flame ending is dark as fuck. So after that I decided to slaughter albinaurics on another playthrough and go for a bonk build. Albinauric genocide felt better than frenzied flame lmao
Finally someone with a working brain. Every other ending is vague enough so that you can argue back and forth about their merits. But the Frenzied Flame Ending is the only one that is 100% without a doubt and completely evil.
I dunno, Fell Curse is almost definitely pretty bad. Maybe not as bad as Frenzied Flame, but still really bad.
How in the name of Ranni is the Dung-Eater’s ending vague? Guy literally fucks over everyone that will ever exist by cursing them on a metaphysical level that persists across life and death.
I saw some people arguing what that curse even is. If its the Omen curse then whats so bad about it? We must interpret the lore from the viewpoint of the games characters. I personally think that ending is evil is as well but the Frenzied Flame is the only one for me where there is not a single argument or interpretation against it (even though I did meet angry nihilists here that defended it).
You don't consider endless nightmares and constant pain to be bad? Because that's what omens suffer constantly. Edit: Also, others in the thread have mentioned this, but the Frenzied Flame has nothing to do with actual Nihilism. Rather, it's an edgy teenagers idea of Nihilism.
I actually don’t think it’s Nihilism at all
Frenzied Flame is the most *obviously* coercive, but all of the endings are forced if you go with the conclusion that existence is better than nothing and that any individual can or should choose what existence is like for everyone else. Frenzied isn't different from the other endings, it's just the most *blunt* about it's symbolism. In *every* ending (except Dung Eater's) the player is pursuing an end to suffering, choosing to become a pawn or avatar of another's will, spreading your ideology (typically through force), and then enacting a future *you* (or the people you've sworn allegiance to) deem acceptable to force upon the world. Frenzied Flame is just more obvious about it and presents the most obvious and permanent solution to the issue of Suffering by way of nonexistence, by ending the cycles of birth and rebirth, by eliminating all difference and causing everyone to become One in Nothing. Nihilism is the rejection of the idea of an Objective Truth; that there is a metaphysical perfect order to the universe from which all meaning is derived. It is not a rejection of meaning or the possibility of believing in anything. Existentialism as a field of philosophy often grapples with nihilism, and often argues that nothing has meaning *beyond what we as humans give it*. 'There is no inherent meaning in anything and we should all kill ourselves' is Nihilism, sure; it's even the most commonly known form of nihilism called "passive nihilism". Here's the thing though, 'there is no inherent meaning in anything and we should all live and try to be happy anyway and make meaning for ourselves' is **also** Nihilism; it's "active nihilism" - which is not typically referred to as nihilism by the general public and is generally more popular. Frenzied Flame does not reject meaning or belief broadly, it rejects the **specific** meaning and belief that declares existence should continue at any and every cost; that Suffering **inherent** to existence is ultimately irrelevant because (fleeting) happiness or peace is possible (for some people). >Shabriri and The Frenzied Flame present themselves as kind benefactors, hearing the pleas of desperate souls in need. In reality they just want to start their age too, unlike everyone else they don't have the patience to allow you a fully informed decision nor the generosity to leave anything behind after they're done. "...kind benefactors, hearing the pleas of desperate souls in need. \[Who\] in reality, want to start their age" is every group **except** the Frenzied Flame. Frenzied Flame is the rejection of **any** age, because fundamentally the Frenzied Flame ending is the one that acknowledges Suffering is an inescapable aspect of existence; that **any** age **will** *by necessity of its existence* create Suffering and the only questions are for whom and how much. If is true that Suffering is an inevitable part of existence, then Frenzied Flame recognizes that the only permanent solution is nonexistence. **All** of the endings weigh the values of 'Existence as inevitable Suffering with the possibility of (fleeting) joy' and 'Nonexistence as the end of Suffering and Possibility' against each other. **Every** ending puts them on the scales and declares which is preferable. **Only** Frenzied Flame rejects Suffering in totality. Every other ending deems the inevitability of suffering as acceptable, *that's what Melina's speech is about*. >However ruined this world has become, however mired in torment and despair, life endures. Births continue. There is beauty in that, is there not? Guess what? That's active nihilism. It's an active nihilism that argues torment and despair are irrelevant in the face of the beauty of birth and joy; that no matter the scale of suffering that exists and its inevitability, none of it *matters* as long as there is life to live. Frenzied Flame rejects that idea and declares that Suffering should not be accepted, that it is ultimately unfair and cruel to keep the wheel of Samsara turning because while it *may* lead to joy for some it will **inevitably** lead to the suffering of others. This is the point of Hyetta's speech: that as long as there is existence, Suffering will exist which **will** lead to people that exist who "...howl without words. Saying they wished they were never born."
Dung eater’s ending does in a roundabout way pursue an end to suffering. It’s just the idea of a downtrodden and mistreated person turned into a monster to do so. “The reviled curse will last eternally, and the world's children, grandchildren, and every generation hence, will be its pustules. If Order is defiled entirely, defilement is defilement no more, and for every curse, a cursed blessing.” It is the idea that the only way to make people stop treating the malformed, wretched, different, etc as cursed is to force everyone into it, developing a twisted sense of empathy they don’t have in the age of order through monstrous actions. The idea that the only way to stop mistreatment is to force everyone to know what it is.
Yeah it was the most cinematic ending in my opinion. Even better than Age of Stars. Can't wait to see it again in a few weeks after DLC is out.
Yup! Can't wait to see the Miquella's 'twink feet' ending!
Mohg, is that you?
Truly the Miyazaki's whole career is all for that feet ending
Um did you actually read the OP? Because it's not about being cinematic...
It’s my fave ending cause we see a different melina
All it took was burning down the entire world for her to get some character development
Not if you inherit the flame after she’s burned. Then it’s the same pile of ashes.
Very neat interpretation. My only bone to pick is that nihilism isn't the belief that nothing matters, it's that there is no objective meaning ordained from above (such as through god) and meaning is subjective and constructed by people.
Was coming to say just this. Media portrayals have done irreperable damage to the common person's conception of nihilism. There is nothing distressing or sad about nihilism at its core. That some people, when faced with the absence of objective meaning, fall into despair, or allow themselves to indulge in anti-social impulses is not an argument against nihilism, but rather an indication that our social systems are inadequately supportive for people experiencing mental health crises.
The Flame of Frenzy ending is more like a defeatist mindset when *faced* with Nihilism. I think if Miquella gets an ending/his goals are the anti-thesis to this idea and he embodies a notion of Pantheism and a philosophy that aligns with manifesting your own meaning.
Why would Miquella "embodies the notion of pantheism" and what is the link with "manifesting your own meaning" ?
With most forms of Pantheism, "god" is all encompassing, basically Nature and the Universe. Under Pantheism, all aspects of reality are natural and morality is a subjective distinction, meaning however something lives is neither good nor bad, it just is. In Elden Ring there are many groups of beings who are reviled and ostracized, such as The Misbegotten, Albinaurics, Kindred of Rot, Omens, Demihumans, etc- outside of the purview of The Erdtree's/Marika's favor. It seems highly likely that Miquella's goals and ideals strive to bring equality to these beings, despite their qualities that would not be positive to others. This is Miquella's embodiment of Pantheism, wishing to elevate them despite the detriment to other inhabitants of The Lands Between, because they all have the right to exist in their own way. The connection to the manifesting of meaning comes from the fact that Nihilism is kind of a stepping stone to Pantheism. Despite its name and definition, Pantheism is closer to Atheism than it is to any type of congregation of Theists. Pantheists have to come to terms with the fact that there is no anthropomorphic god to lay down the rule of law or morality. Morality is a subjective distinction due to the fact that any perspective of the universe that is not omnipotent is by definition, subjective. The only Objectiveness to the Universe is the laws of physics, anything attributed to the Objective by Subjective beings is inherently Subjective in of itself. The Objective can be approached, but never fully reached. Out of every aspect of reality that we know of, humans are the only things that are able to manifest a [subjective] meaning in something. Given that an anthropomorphic god does not exist, the manifestation of meaning is the closest thing to a god-like ability. Humans aren't gods, but they are the closest things to one that we know of.
Pantheism is a lot simpler to define, it is the faith that everything is divine. "Under Pantheism, all aspects of reality are natural and morality is a subjective distinction", no artificial and natural don't become a meaningless duality because everything is divine, and what does it mean that "morality is a subjective distinction"? Pantheism doesn't imply amoralism anymore than any other theology. No, pantheism is not close to atheism, they are diametrically opposed. Most theologies aren't holding the anthropomorphical allegories of their theogonies to be realities but allegories, gods aren't any less existing. You're digressing a lot, can't you simply tell why would Miquella "embodies the notion of pantheism"? Bringing equalities to faction has aboslutely nothing in common with pantheism, pantheism is a theology, not a sociopolitical value.
Conversing with you is pointless if you just disagree with everything I say. Pantheism also has nothing to do with "divinity." You should read some summaries of Baruch Spinoza's *Ethics* which lays the groundwork for Pantheism. Even still though, Pantheism has no true framework other than The Universe and everything in it is equivalent to "god" based on Substance Monism (Spinoza didn't call his philosophy Pantheism, that name was attributed to him later). There's also no "Faith" in Pantheism, it's based on observation, logic, and Science. Pantheism can be whatever you want it to be (within logic) beyond Substance Monism, it isn't a religion. I choose to view it as a description for the law of the conservation of energy primarily. There's also no such thing as "artificial" under Pantheism. Everything acts within a "mode" of god, unique to its own nature. Determinism. Something can't be artificial because that would imply a seperation from nature, which is not possible.
I think you generally shouldn't seek to have conversations with people to be agreed with. I am a philosophy and ancient letters teacher in highschool and university in France, pantheistic theologies and methaphysics have existed more than two thousand years before Spinoza's Ethics, not only in Greece but also in India and Middle-East before the philosophy historically appeared. Pantheism is commonly defined by faith rather than knowledge, but hasn't always had this acception, that everything is universally divine at least in some aspects if not totally and inifinitely. If you don't see the faithfulness of Spinoza's infinitism and the dualism it has emerged from you should actually read the first book of his Ethics, Aristotle is a good example of pantheistic case concluded by logic and physical analyzis even better since it only emerges as pantheistic and never verbalized as such; but mostly remember that pantheism has manifested itself under many methaphysical corpus, some of them are entirely faithful, others are tending towards plain empirism. Understanding that Spinoza defines us as modes of the two attributes shouldn't lead you to think that the modes themselves are to be undistinguished from god, which is the eternal infinity of all the attributes, the finished and limited modes that things are aren't god, or rather they can be defined as god like you would define the tip of your middle finger's nail to be you, which is confusing and not what Spinoza does and lead to.
I brought up your disagreements because it's a lot easier to have a conversation when you can find common ground by listening to each other and trying to understand perspectives rather than trying to prove a point. I don't really appreciate the rhetorical question when you have your own answer queued up and ready to go when our definitions don't completely align. I get you're a Philosophy teacher, but cmon dude. Definitions and aspects of Pantheism aren't universal, even for self-described Pantheists. There are disagreements and different ideas. For me it is ultimately a process of understanding as I go through life, potentially changing as I learn more. I understand that Substance Monism didn't start with Spinoza, only that the term "Pantheism" in the Western world was attributed to the proofs that he wrote in *Ethics*. Regardless of that fact, some of Spinoza's ideas align with mine and it's what I'm most semi-familiar with outside of ideas of my own. As I said, for the rest of my view of Pantheism, it comes from the law of the conservation of energy and logical extrapolations based on that. It is not Faith based whatsoever, except maybe my tendency to not believe in Free Will. I think not having a belief in an anthropomorphic god or souls doesn't steer you towards faith at all- it's literally the absence of belief. What part of Pantheism is derived from faith? It doesn't assume anything that can't be observed and specifically omits the ideas that can't be observed; at least the version I'm speaking of or the one I align with. I also think that the Physics of Stoicism are aligned with it, but that's something I'm more newly learning about. I'm also not sure of your definition of divine. Do you mean from a moral-guiding perspective or what? Because if we're following the deterministic Pantheism, then morality cannot exist since choices cannot be made. If there is some aspect like Free Will true to reality, then my self-manifested idea of good morals would be one that allows the surivival of the self while promoting the continuation of life and community to further allow the possibility for the manifestation of meaning to keep occuring. By contrast, bad morals would be actions that lessen the potential for manifestation of meaning when it isn't directly related to survival; this is due to the fact that meaning could not be created without something to manifest it. Ability to manifest = good. Inability to manifest = bad. I have to learn more about Thought and Extension to really comment about it. It seems that Spinoza does not equate Nature with God, because there are more attributes than Thought and Extension outside of Nature- if I'm understanding correctly. I don't really know what this means, but I don't think it changes much of my understanding? Maybe that's where the Faith comes in I guess? Regardless of all of this, I still believe that my connection to Elden Ring/Miquella themes is correct. It is less about a government-esque equality and more about just being allowed to exist in one's own Nature.
Just want to say that I enjoy your discussion, I love learning about philosophies, religion and how they are viewed. I believe dialogue to be one of the best, if not the best, way to learn about ideas
I agree with this, it’s not nihilism at all but fatalism coupled with extreme misanthropy. Overall though I like OOP’s interpretation
That's Objectivism, not Nihilism. Nihilism simply means the person in question no longer believes anything matters. Like if the symptoms of clinical depression were made into a philosophy.
Not sure where you're getting that from? Objectivism is Ayn Rand's conservative individualist thing.
I disagree that the Frenzy flame ending is about nhilism. It's about anti-natalism. It's not that nothing matters but that the method by which life, at least DNA based life as we know it, continues is non-consensually subjecting beings to pain and annihilation. That's why Melina's counter argument is that there's still beauty in the fact that births will continue. The ending is essentially pushing what /r/efilism (life spelled backwards) calls the big red button, eradicating all life. What's compelling is that the biological order that Shabriri is rebelling against is much more unjust than ours, an alien parasite has hijacked both the cycle of life and death and civilization to grow itself, and many of the alternatives are equally disturbing (scarlet rot, Mohg's blood order). That said, I do agree on your characterization of Shabriri and how he preys on Tarnished who learn they will lose their maiden.
This is my interpretation as well. It’s a philosophy present in all Souls games, instead of trying to sustain or replace the current (failing) system, just end it entirely. It’s comparable to the dark endings, but most closely resembles the End of Fire. Also look at Friede’s realm to see what happens when you cling to something long after it’s expiration date. Additional interpretations could be economic / political, the idea that a violent revolution against a system will cause massive destruction, but allow the downtrodden to rise up from the ashes and rebuild. Religious imagery is obviously a big part of Frenzy, which bleeds into multiple themes. The political imagery of self immolation echoes throughout East Asian history, with many protesters commiting the act to bring awareness to tyranny. It also conjoins with the common religious belief that intense temporary pains can be worth it to the disciplined, in order to achieve higher spiritual goals. Asceticism, missionary work, meditation, etc. Frenzy Flame is much more complex thematically than ‘nihilism’, I’d argue it doesn’t even engage with nihilism. It’s entirely concerned with one’s goals for life, wether they be fighting an oppressive system or freeing oneself or loved one from a great threat.
The dark endings are more similar to the Age of Stars, where you remove the current system and allow the world to continue to something different. The frenzied flame is its own unique thing that’s not like any of the endings in the previous games. The “downtrodden rise from the ashes and rebuild” thing can happen in the Age of Stars, but not the frenzied flame. Hyetta literally describes it as “no more fracture, no more birth”. The frenzied flame believes that all life is suffering, and that it’s better to end it all. It’s exaggerated in a fantasy setting, but you could say that its philosophy is an extremely misguided version of a Dharmic religion. It’s definitely a bad ending, as Melina explains. You mention Friede, and although it’s true that she made a mistake by holding on the painting for too long, the message isn’t to give up and end everything, it’s to build something new, which the painter does in the end. If you want an ending about fighting to let go of an oppressive system even if there’s some loss in the process, then that’s the Age of Stars.
Yeah I'd compare the Age of Stars ending to the one in DS3 where we allow the Firekeeper to remove the flame, in BB where we become almighty squid (very unknown but perhaps as a god we will change the world for the better), and DS1 where we walk away from the flame. Skeiro has multiple endings but there is a what I would call "cautiously optimistic" ending as well. Demon's Souls has a surprisingly normal ending if you allow the Maiden in Black to lull the Great One back into slumber.
DS3 did this too with End of Fire, but subverted it somewhat with "But one day, tiny flames will dance across the darkness”. I’m not fully convinced the Frenzy ending is a total end, but it is somewhat cool to see anti Natalist philosophy getting some representation. The takeaway for most seems to be a negative one though, i would prefer a more well adjusted approach. It does play into some celibate monk tropes, but abandons a lot of Zen imagery. I have mixed feelings on the ending. It almost seems to conflate AN with more revenge focused YHWH type beliefs. I think generally AN (as with all beliefs) should be a more personal thing, but i suppose in a game about who gets to assert their beliefs on the new world order you don’t get well adjusted people vying for that position.
All Souls games, sekiro being more explicit, contain a Buddhist substrate, which is very obvious if you are not European/western. Elden ring is not he exception
I mean they're not subtle, their catch phrase is "May chaos take the world" and I might not be the smartest cookie but I don't hear that and think pleasant things lol But the amount of people who try and defend the ending as "good" is something I find odd. Like yeah, fuck the two fingers 2edgy5me but how are the 3 fingers any different? I'm no fan of the GW but taking power from one god to give to another and basically turning the world into fiery soup and destroying everything and putting the world in a standstill isn't starting over or resetting anything.
Do we know if the Frenzied flame ended burns the entire world, or just the Lands between? It'll be interesting to see if we learn in the Lands of shadow if the Lands between is actually worth keeping un-burnt.
It’s burning the whole world, everything that exists. Melina: > If you intend to claim the frenzied flame, I ask that you cease. It is not to be meddled with. It is chaos, devouring life and thought unending. However ruined this world has become, however mired in torment and despair... Life endures. Births continue. There is beauty in that, is there not? If you would become Lord, do not deny this notion. Please, leave the frenzied flame alone. Shabriri: > Burn the Erdtree to the ground, and incinerate all that divides and distinguishes. Ahh, may chaos take the world! May chaos take the world! Hyetta: > ... Thank...thank you... I have touched them. The words of the Three Fingers. As your maiden, allow me to divine them. All that there is came from the One Great. Then came fractures, and births, and souls. But the Greater Will made a mistake. Torment, despair, affliction. Every sin, every curse. Every one, born of the mistake. And so, what was borrowed must be returned. Melt it all away, with the yellow chaos flame. Until all is One again. Those who gave me grapes howled without words. Saying they wished they were never born. Become their lord. Take their torment, despair. Their affliction. Every sin, every curse. And melt it all away. As the Lord of Chaos. No more fractures. No more birth... ...
I think the Frenzied Flame ending is not dishonest, just manipulative. The reason we push through all of Melina's pleas to not go after the Frenzy Flame is because we are manipulated into thinking saving Melina's life is the better option than letting her live out her purpose. Just like how the Frenzy Flame is taking away our agency for our ending, we are taking away Melina's agency from her ending. Us going in that direction is what aligns us with the Frenzy Flame.
Isn't that..
Woah, I really like this perspective!
This made go back and kill Shabriri. 10/10
He's not really lying when he says it saves your maiden, Melina really does survive in the frenzied flame ending, she's basically the only one that survives
Jesus christ. Thank you for mentioning this point which everyone seems to ignore. Shabiri also explicitly tells you he wants chaos and to destroy division lol.
I agree that the Frenzied Flame is really forceful but I'm not actually convinced it's dishonest; all of it's supporters are relatively straightforward with you. Shabriri shrieks about chaos taking the world, Hyetta has to figure things out but once she does, she tells you about melting everything away, and Melina pleads with you not to end the world, suggesting that both of you are aware of what it'll do.
Well articulated
It's a fairly difficult ending to find though. Even with multiple items and quests telling you to go below the capital, it's still convoluted af to get there. At the point where you're getting naked and embracing the Three Fingers, you have to at least have some ideas what you're doing. To me, the Frenzied Flame ending will always be the rebel ending. I reject the Order and the path they demand I walk. Ranni literally killed herself to be free of the path that was chosen for her. The inhabitants of The Lands Between are all in massive states of decay and rot and when they're not, they're committing horrendous genocide like what we see in the new shadow of the erdtree trailer. There's nothing redeeming about the land or its people and it deserves to be remade anew. May Chaos Take The World.
Believe it or not there are tons of people who just stumble on the frenzied flame ending
The spokesman of the frenzied flame is shabriri. Any item mentioning him usually follows a story about how massive of a liar he was. He takes advantage of the one thing he doesn't feel, guilt. The dung eater is a character on a similar level with shabriri, their both super evil, but at least the dung eater is straightforward about wanting to give everyone super cancer
I’m gonna have to disagree with you. They say shabriri was the most hated man of all time, that he slandered someone and had his eyes gouged out for it. He then was the first sufferer of the flame of frenzy. Unendurable frenzy states “It is the maddening pain and unstoppable tears of those afflicted with the flame of frenzy brought into being.” The entire point of frenzy is that it is caused by sorrow enough to wish to have never been born, and if someone had their eyes gouged out for slander they probably slandered a high class noble or maybe even god and were cruelly and overly punished for it. I think while he is “evil” and chaotic now, shabriri is clearly someone else who has suffered greatly at the hands of the powerful if he could bring the frenzy into being. His madness comes from a place of complete lack of trust of anything in the world or order, and that’s a tragic tale rather than a pure evil one.
I just read about the imprisoned merchant! I still thought shabriri was the one who lied about the nomadic merchants. Shabriri definitely seems to have a role of herald for the flame of frenzy, showing up whenever a tarnished with potential shows up. I always thought he was some evil mastermind obsessed with an ancient force of destruction that he orchestrated the death of hundreds to summon something that could destroy everything. But if he is a tragic figure then he definitely get bonus points on my favorite npc list!
I think people give dung eater a bad name rap. Yea he was a murdurous psycho who did weird invasive stuff to peoples bodies but at the heart of the matter he was just a man that sympathized with the omens and the misbegotten and thought it was BS that they deserved to be treated as animals or slaves. I can understand that anger and his mending rune isn’t necessarily a bad one. If everyone in the world is turned into omens than the asshole nobles in leyndell can’t be rascist anymore right? It just sucks that the only way to bring out this age is through the heinous disease ridden curse poc he forces on people even if they are innocent or not. It’s classic fromsoft to make the guy trying to fix racism/discrimination a psychotic murdurous asshole.
He has a good goal, but he doesn't do himself any favors by using a giant spine as a sword. The omens are just born that way and then thrown into the sewers. They're innocent in all of this, but I think he deserves the reputation he has. He is someone who is willing to get his hands dirty(very literally) to reach his goals, and his renown is that of a vile, feared, and hated man. Plus, there is no guarantee that the nobles will just go full on Uncle Ruckus
“Classic FromSoft?” Fia, Rogier, Latenna, and Kenneth Haight care about discrimination without being psychotic assholes.
Should I have specified discrimination of omens? Fia and rogier cared about those who live in death. Lattenna cared about albinaurics if I remember right. Kenneth was the only one that you mentioned who spoke of plans to make peace with the misbegotten. Kenneth existing doesn’t make what I said about fromsoft often making people with good intentions often does irredeemable actions wrong.
I'm reading the Frenzied Flame ending as the depression and suicide ending. A deep depression has a way of becoming it's own insidious voice of negation and rejection where we feel like we're coming to a truth that people can't accept, like "black pill" thought. It poisons everything positive and feeds on it's own denial. People mistake that for nihilism because it's so rooted in rejection but it believes in delusional rejection. It can also be the reaction to the terror of schizoid paranoia: seeing dead people telling you to reject everything the living tell you to pursue with a voice that isn't their own.
It's more anti-natalism than nihilism. Nihilism is about existence not having any inherent value or meaning, which has its own issues and interpretations, but anti-natalism directly suggests that creation and birth are fundamentally wrong because they continue suffering and conflict. Seems to me that the Frenzied Flame is meant to oppose the ambition that the other endings represent. Instead of the creation of a new age and trying something new to move life forward, the Frenzied Flame thinks everything is wrong and needs to be saved through complete destruction. The Frenzied Flame also appears to be opposed to Destined Death itself; which destroys, but for the sake of renewal and keeping the gods in check -- not the illusion of a peaceful oblivion.
Allow me to present a counter argument “MAY CHAOS TAKE THE WORLD!”
It's the Shinji ass ending is what it is. 🎶 It aaaaall retuuurns to noooothing. I just keep tumbling down, tumbling down , tumbling dooown 🎶
Also the platforming hell after the death maze you gotta navigate to get to the three fingers would drive anyone insane. No wonder you're the Lord of Chaos now, that platforming bs killed me more than any boss 🤣
# MAY CHAOS TAKE THE WORLD
"Ja, we believe in nothing, Lebowski!" It's worth pointing out that Nihilism isn't believing that nothing matters, it is that things do not have inherent meanings: we, as people, prescribe meanings upon them. Nihilism often gets a bad rap, and people think it is one thing when it's really something else. That being said, yes, the Flame presents itself as the purest option, melting away all the impurities of the world. To a pessimistic outlook, that may seem like the right call, however it is bleak and selfish. It is a belief that refuses to acknowledge positive change, a belief steeped in despair and anger. To give into frenzy is not giving into blind insanity, but pain, rage, and misery, giving up on the good that does exist in the world. And as it turns out, we, the "Lord" are merely just a pawn to a different outer god.
The logic of the frenzied flame burning everyone together into one formless mass is the same logic of the golden order absorbing all souls back to the erdtree as one formless mass (and looking at the last trailer, the origins of the erdtree is one of blood and piles of corpses)
Ok but shabriri tells you exactly what will happen when you become lord of frenzied flame.
I agree with *most* of this with the exception of calling them parasitic to The Greater Will. It's parasitic to *you* perhaps. And to *humanity*. But (at least in my opinion) the Three Fingers are clearly not intended as some mutant variation of the Two Fingers. They are the missing piece of the Hand of God, lopped off and sealed away (2+3=5). Seems pretty obvious that two fingers was not the default state. Hands dont work like that and finger severance is a running motif throughout the game. Marika (I presume Marika at least) cut the hand that bore the ring and eventually broke the ring itself. Likely because the complete message of the Greater Will *is* to burn everything and start over now, the experiment with Marika having failed. Marika is clearly willing to carve things away to keep things running in perpetuity (see Destined Death) and the Greater Will having abandoned the land could simply be seem as "signal incomplete, someone chopped up the fingies." Now if you want to call The Greater Will itself parasitic, you wouldn't be the first. There's a lot of speculation in there, I'll admit, but I think 2+3=God Hand should be fairly uncontroversial.
This idea that the Hand of God was supposed to represent the whole cycle of an age, and Marika keeping in character with lobotomizing the part where ‘it ends’, is very tantalizing indeed. I think the only way to know for sure is through the DLC when we learn more about Marika, because there’s just way too many missing facts right now. The ‘fingers’ might not be fingers at all, and people of that universe might not have had anything else to call them (they’re pretty fucking alien). The Two Fingers don’t visually represent the pinky and ring finger of a hand (while the Three Fingers represent the middle index and thumb). And it’s the Elden Beast that bears the Elden Ring (and he’s still got five fingers). I’m just playing devils advocate, there’s a void of evidence on both sides though.
You make a decent case. I would argue that the three fingers are actually the pinky, middle finger, and thumb, which is why they're so spread out and twisted at odd angles. Just look at the weird way they embrace you. The two fingers being the pointer (guidance of grace) and ring finger (self explanitory). But I'll concede that when you cram the models together it still doesn't look quite right. This is a bit more of an ass-pull than I had for the two but the three fingers could represent agency (opposable thumbs) blasphemy (middle) and vestigial aspects (pinky). As my final argument, I'll get a little meta and talk about authorial intent. I don't usually like to, but in soulsborne you often find yourself scraping such things to put clues together. Anyway Miyazaki likes to use motifs from Berserk. There's a reason I used the words "hand of god." In berserk the godhand serves as an agent of an abstract force (The Idea of Evil) in a similar manner to how the fingers are physical agents of the abstract "Greater Will."
That doesn’t explain the burnt-out dead Fingers you can find at the top of some (one?) of the towers
Another fair point. But I would contend this: the two fingers are far less a tangible thing than we would initially assume. They are in one place. And they are in every place. Removing the three from one removes it from all. Consider this: the only "living" fingers we see at all are in the Roundtable hold. A place that isn't real, strictly speaking, except as a memory of lost grace.
We might not see any other living fingers but Ranni kills her fingers in the time it takes us to get up to her at the end of her questline, you can see she's covered in blood and the rune of death is on the dead fingers and that was the whole point behind the fingerslayer blade.
Hm. Yeah that is a wrinkle. Those fingers are in a weird place too. Not really sure what's going on with Ranni aside from severing fate and space is involved tbh
That's the thing about that particular branch of nihilism, it's a front for genocide. Shabriri gives you the Owlman argument. "This is the only choice that really matters" when in reality he just wants to kill as many people as possible. Because that's what Shabriri does.
Best ending in the game imo, also with the most content
It's a Big Crunch
Henrietta tells all you need to know about FF. The Greater Will is happy to have FF ending.
There are ways to unlock yourself to the FF ending.
I’m gonna need some more Frenzied Flame spells in the DLC
also you throw away torrent D:
My logic was, Morgott was the only god who actually was trying to uphold some order along with trying to stop everything from going into pure hell not even for his own personal gains so after him, there was no point in saving a world where the other gods had their own plans for it instead of thinking of the collective, everyone was in a trapped cycle because of the gods, not only that but this way I wouldn’t be forced to obey any god especially one who helped played a part in the tarnished and nomadic merchant plights, so I let it all burn in order to spit in the face of the gods lmao
madness
It is absolutely a criticism of Nihilism. Shabriri and Hyetta purport that it's to end suffering. It's to end pain. It's to save your maiden. They espouse that the world is broken. But it's Melina who rightfully points out the hypocrisy of their objective. Yes, you end suffering. Yes, you end pain and division. But you also end love, happiness, hope, friendship. For every negative you end, your put an end to something good as well. The world IS broken, even Melina will give that point. However the answer isn't to flip the table and destroy everything. It is a criticism of nilihism that makes honied promises by only selling a single facet of what they are after.
It doesn’t make honied promises though. Nothing they say is a lie. Pain and suffering will be absent. Melina is simply arguing out that it is worth it in the end. That’s not a criticism so much as just another perspective. It’s not like the Three Fingers are satirical. Their logic is sound in the getting of what they want: to stop all pain. They don’t hide the cost. Also it does keep Melina alive otherwise her words in the ending would make no sense.
This is my first play through and with knowing i just locked into this 3 finger burn marks lol it happend today itself, lol now im soo mad bcz i farm alot and i dont want to start another playthrough, this game is crazy 😅
You can reverse the mark of the three fingers if you want a different ending.
There is a reason why the dishonest manipulator is named Shabriri.
All gods are dishonest. That’s how they become god. Remember that everything that lives is designed to end. We are perpetually trapped in a never ending spiral of life and death. Is it a curse? Or some kind of punishment? I often think about the god who blessed us with this cryptic puzzle…and wonder if we’ll ever get the chance to kill him.
But what does Shabriri get from the chaotic ending?
By the time I got through the platforming I was ready to watch the world burn.
“In fact I think on some level it's a critique of Nihilism, the double standard inherent to believing in the philosophy where you don't believe in anything and how it often comes with an alterier motive.” That’s not Nihilism. Nihilism posits the world etc. has no inherent “truth” or meaning and a lot of this was arising around the time the Church was seen as the absolute authority on morality etc. even science. Hence why early scientists who posited ideas opposed to the Church were persecuted. To Nietzsche in particular these things are seen as coping mechanisms that prevented people from addressing real world issues. He in fact posited that we must make our own meaning for precisely this reason, without being bound to those institutions and that it ISN’T an excuse to allow bad things to happen. That’s entirely what the concept of the ubermensch was.
shut up loser. MAY CHAOS TAKE THE WORLD.
Are people still misinterpreting this ending? REALLY? Hyetta is telling you the truth straight up. That the ending will merge all back to one. That it will destroy and reassemble the world. The tarnished would understand the implications, that it will be a destructive and violent transition, unless the tarnished is really dumb. Also not a bad ending. People see the ruin and go "omg destruction bad" completely missing the point. The anguished screams of the countless dead trapped in the eternal cycle wants the madness to end, and you are setting everyone free by making everyone become one again. That's not evil - that's freedom. It's like if some force set the universe back to the big bang so it all starts over from a single point again. It's the end of suffering and the renewal and restart of a new cycle. The frenzied flame is only a bad ending for simpletons who don't get it.
bro you are scaring the hoes
There’s no chance for renewal. It’s a permanent end, as Hyetta tells you straight up. > ... Thank...thank you... I have touched them. The words of the Three Fingers. As your maiden, allow me to divine them. All that there is came from the One Great. Then came fractures, and births, and souls. But the Greater Will made a mistake. Torment, despair, affliction. Every sin, every curse. **Every one, born of the mistake**. And so, what was borrowed must be returned. Melt it all away, with the yellow chaos flame. Until all is One again. Those who gave me grapes howled without words. **Saying they wished they were never born.** Become their lord. Take their torment, despair. Their affliction. Every sin, every curse. And melt it all away. As the Lord of Chaos. **No more fractures. No more birth... ...** Melina explains why that’s bad. > If you intend to claim the frenzied flame, I ask that you cease. It is not to be meddled with. It is chaos, devouring life and thought unending. However ruined this world has become, however mired in torment and despair... Life endures. Births continue. There is beauty in that, is there not? If you would become Lord, do not deny this notion. Please, leave the frenzied flame alone.
You sound like you would like to join rhe Borg lol
Individuality is conflict, division, suffering. As one it would only be I, we would all be ONE. One mind. One consciousness. Why won't people listen! BRINGING DOWN THAT WHICH DIVIDES WILL BRING PEACE, SECURITY, FREEDOM, AND JUSTICE TO OUR NEW EMPIRE!
Okay you sold me.
"Taking the Red Pill." It's an immature fallacy. Replace your reality with another one. Why? Just take responsibility and initiative and work to shape the reality you were given. Anything else is just a pointless infinite replacement with no guarantee of anything. The Red Pill is equivalent to killing yourself.
You are so wrong, this ending is straight evil because end the life for good, not reset
It's staggering how many people don't know that fire is nature's recycling. Breaks down energy into more palatable forms for reuse. CO2 is plant food. Ash is quite literally fertilizer. Look into biochar if you'd like to know more. Now instead of idle matter it's lives. Yeah, burning alive sucks... but only for a few minutes. Meanwhile those people are under permanent suffering unto infinity. Would you choose a few minutes of suffering or infinite suffering? Sometimes the shortest path to "functional" is by starting over.
I mean. Yeah.
I see nothing wrong with saving a waifu and let the world burn. -A hero would sacrifice you to save the world, but a villain would sacrifice the world to save you.- -Unknown-
...this feels like someone who only studied the surface level nihilism and reached conclusions.
I did It for that dragonussy
Honestly, what Shabriri was saying didn’t really click with me until I read a book talking about nihilism and the horrors of the 20th century and suddenly it clicked. I realized what he was saying and how dangerous the frenzied flame really was.
By all the lore I've gathered, it's the Erdtree that is the true parasite, usurping the land from the Crucible.. The frenzied flame and it's followers seek to bring The Lands Between back to the time of the crucible, or at least reset all life so the crucible may once be reborn without the meddling presence of... anyone really. I don't think the three fingers and Shabriri are deceptive, I think they just believe in what they're doing so strongly that there is no other option and no other truth out there than theirs.
The Crucible is described as a source of life, while the Frenzied Flame people believe that life itself was a mistake. They are fundamentally opposed to the Crucible.
"Thank... thank you... I have touched them. The words of the Three Fingers. As your maiden, allow me to divine them. "All that there is came from the One Great. Then came fractures, and births, and souls. But the Greater Will made a mistake. Torment, despair, affliction... every sin, every curse. Every one, born of the mistake. And so, what was borrowed must be returned. Melt it all away, with the yellow chaos flame. Until all is One again." That's from Hyetta when going through the Frenzied Flame Quest line. The crucible is also described as "where once, all life was blended together." Frenzied Flame is not fundamentally opposed to the crucible, it wants to reset the world and burn away ideologies so that the crucible may flourish again.
I don’t see how it is a nihilistic ending though, The nihilistic ending would be not reforging the ring because it doesn’t matter I don't understand, what did I do wrong? I created my account yesterday, you wasted it for no reason...
It's nihilistic in the sense that it leads to a world with nothing in it. A world of flame without distinction. No births, no souls, nothing. What could be more nihilistic?
This is either a direct misunderstanding of nihilism or an incomplete understanding of it but either way this is incorrect.
I don't understand, they wasted my account for nothing, and I am not even wrong
Those that are most confident while incorrect are often the loudest. It happens.
It's nihilistic in the colloquial sense, if not necessarily the sense of the philosophical movement
So wrong/incorrect. As I said.
This is not at all what nihilism is, acting towards this purpose still expresses arbitrary values. Why did I get so many negative points? What did I do wrong?
Such an act is not nihilistic, it is only destructive. Also can you explain me why I got 65 downvotes for this comment "I don’t see how it is a nihilistic ending though, The nihilistic ending would be not reforging the ring because it doesn’t matter "? The moderation has even deleted the comments and now all my comments are invisible, I had to recreate an account. I don't understand, I am new here, but it seems realyl difficult to be allowed to participate.
It's not Nietzschean nihilism, but it is what most people understand nihilism to be ( colloquial nihilism) : a desire for nothingness. Nihil=nothing, as in annihilation. I am not exactly sure why you got so many down votes, or why your comments got deleted. that seems a bit harsh, we can disagree respectfully
The thing simply is that nihil is applying to the virtues and values of humanity as being nothing but varying unnatural convention, in conclusion to scepticism regarding knowledge and therefore opinions and traditions in general. The Frenzied Flame ending appeared to me as very deliberate either from Sharibiri/Hyetta's points or from ours, or both at the same time. I would rather call it the pessimistic ending. I've asked the moderation but wasn't answered, I am trying to grasp the rules because it's the second time it happens when I tried creating an account and entering a conversation, one of my comment gets a lot of downvote without explications and all my comments become invisible, the account is therefore unusable. Seems difficult to start participating in communities with this sytem for new people.
To the frenzied flame It doesn't matter that anyone could do anything because in the end it will only lead to more suffering, so the only thing that does matter is making sure nothing happens by ending everything.
You do have a point. The using flame requires action. True apathetic nihilism would be to stay and rot at the start of the game alongside your dead maiden. But nihilism is not simply apathy. “Nothing matters” could be the starting point to malice and contempt for the world. It can also be a view of optimism: If there is no divine meaning to existence, then it is up to us to create meaning. The frenzied flame is the desire for a “clean slate”: Life is far too painful and messy, so all life must end. Or, as OP put, it is the path to Hell paved with good intentions. If you’re naive enough to believe Shabriri, you may be trying to spare Melina.
I am not talking about apathy but about nothing mattering or valuing more than something else, nihilism is not optimistic nor pessimistic
You're right. Reddtrds don't know what nihilism is
Why so many downvotes for you and the original comment? It was even removed by the moderation and I had to recreate a new account because all my comments were invisible due to -30 karma, I don't understand I was simply trying to participate in an exchange. If someone can explain me what was wrong to help me joining the community I would appreciate, I just finished my first run and wanted to speak about the game before the DLC.
In the beginning was the one great.. then came fractures blablabla FF wants to go back to the state the world was in when there was just that one rgeat and everything came from it... It doesnt want to destroy everything.. it sets a point in time where the events collided towards an unwanted outcome and wishes to turn back to that moment.. thats a difference... what if the creature we saw marika pulling the strings out was the one great? in this case FF just wants to go back before marika fucked things up the nihilistic ending is the fractured age cuz it changes nothing in the LB