The chat feels kinda hostile at times as if TA's theorizing is an offense to them, feels kind of snobby. TA is utilizing very good archeological theory which is interesting regardless of how deep one thinks FromSoft has prepared for it. Putting the caveat of "maybe maybe not" on everything he says serves little purpose considering how little of the puzzle we have. Everything is a theory, some lay more weight on the japanese text while others lay more weight on real life inspirations while others just want to stitch it into a cohesive narrative. Seeing the chat call him foolish and even potentionally malicious for speculating at the inspirations of the creators when they themselves can only theorize creates a kinda toxic atmosphere, like "how dare this guy say something with mild confidence". In the end this is just a theory vs theory subject that will get added to and likely get retconned when the DLC comes. So the chat especially should chill out a bit. Though I do think you're also a bit unfair at times, like with the Erdtree relief in the tiny church in Leyndell. TA said that it wasn't anywhere else in the game, which is true in that form, but you counter that by altering a different depiction to make it the right proportions and flipped in order to kind of "dunk" on that, thats not very honest since when you alter it, it becomes a different thing. I don't think TA was making the argument that it was a completely unique asset in 3ds max (though it still wasn't identical so clearly other alterations have been done to it), I'm sure many common assets are altered for different use throughout the game, but one is not wrong in theorizing that such alterations or inclusions of unique assets have inentions. I found it very jarring when that was kind of used as a big point against TA's whole method when he was correct . If you take a depiction of a tall tree then squish it down into a short fat tree then it is not longer a depiction of a tall tree. Thats my thoughts so far. The vibes are strange.
It doesn't seem truthful to say that TA is using 'very good archaeological theory' when he claims that the tall icon of a tree is a conifer and represents a tree other than the erdtree even though the knights of Leyndell have that "conifer" icon on their armor, and when the item description of that armor specifically names those knights defenders of the erdtree. That's...not good archaeology.
@@DavidStavis The Leyndell Knights do not have that icon on them if you're referring to the icon on their chest. Thats a wide tree icon which looks more like a deciduous, not a conifer.
On TAs presentation. I personally enjoy him presenting very speculative ideas, i find it entertaining and fun, and its why i think people watch him in the first place. Re: TA often times doesn't delineate between whats fact and whats more extrapolation. --While he doesn't Explicitly say it, its generally pretty clear, at least for me, when his ideas are speculative and when are factual. I also think his target audience are people that sort of already know the main thrust of the "factual lore", hes usually not going over whats generally known, so its sort of a given that hes going to be more speculative. When i watch TA im already under the guise that im here to watch some one who will sometimes make specualtive leaps. So im not blindly accepting everything they say, im curating the ideas in real time. Most of the time i finish the video thinking, "thats a pretty cool idea, not sure if i agree, but he might be right on some points, ill keep my eye out for more things that can either confirm or deny this theory. It was fun." And i move on. Maybe its just me, but i personally find it annoying and repetitive when I'm watching or reading a lore theory, and every three seconds goes "this is just speculation btw", "this is just my opinion ofcourse". I know its speculation! i want to hear you speculate, and im here for it! I dont need a reminder that the evidence is a bit shaky every other sentence. I can look at the evidence presented and see that for myself. I wouldnt be againt TA being more upfront about how specualtive his ideas are, but i wouldnt want him to change his whole presentation in order to do so. Overall i just don't see any 'harm' in how hes doing things right now. Are there some people that will blindly eat up everything TA says without questioning anything? Sure probably. But those people are not of my concern at all, let them have fun that way if they want. The people who want to be more rigorous on the other hand will *already* be more cautious without anyone having to tell them to.
Good catch with the erdtree depiction in the "special church" in lleyndel, that was one of the videos i had the most disagreements with in TAs catalouge. I think TA could swindle his position by saying its a "special depiction", even if it was really just an edited version of another depiction, but overall i agree with you here.
I think you misconstrued his position a bit. The "not everyone can see the erdtree" theory, doesn't necessarily imply only the tarnished guided by grace can see the erdtree.
Overall i disagree with TAs timeline. The main part i disagree with is the placemnet of the shattering of the elden ring. It seems very hard to justify to me. I think the erdtree rotted or burned at the end of the age of plenty but not the shattering of the elden ring itself. I do agree with TA that the different sigils loosely apply to different stages of erdtree worship. And thus the incantations can be loosely used as a "timeline" of events.
Your argument against the vine idea feels a bit dismissive. You imply the vine idea somehow contradicts or diminishes other aspects of radagons role, but i dont see why that could be the case. I also think radagons crosshatch can have multiple meanings. The trellis, the web of wyrd, the cross etc. Radagon has many roles, he fettered the fate of the night to the erdtree. He combines faith and intelligence. He seals the erdtree. He seeks completion. He repairs the elden ring. You cant simplify him to one thing.
That's fair. My assumption is that vines come from something other than a tree, meaning that the vines would be external from the Erdtree and that Radagon's power should be something internal to the Erdtree. (Thorns can actually grow from trees fwiw.)
I don't know why we're equating burning the Erdtree with reforming the Elden Ring. We burn the tree because the path is blocked and we do so solely to bypass the wall of thorns. That's it. The idea that we NEED to burn the tree in order to factory reset the Elden Ring doesn't come up anywhere.
I don't understand these comments, this video is the furthest away possible from drama. All that happens is LP cordially disagreeing with TAs approach to the lore and pointing out a few mistakes in good faith in a very mild manner. LP isn't "debunking" or "exposing" TA or anything stupid like that. I strongly suggest you all get a grip or consider logging off to touch grass
People are so terminally online and stuck in their own echo chambers that any kind of disagreement to their favorite internet celeb is a personal attack to them. Truly the touch grass moment of all time
@@MugenDino5555 Yes lol, people being insanely parasocial about this like their father was personally insulted Nobody said you can't like a guy's videos or something, insane thing to get so clearly in your ego about
I think people are seeing the title and then making assumptions, it's pretty obvious that people haven't actually watched the entire thing (or at least the ones commenting haven't).
Typical, people have a different opinion than you so you make it personal. This is the second time I watched LP react TA and he is so focused on this “ummm actually” kick, and this notion of “Imma help you grow”, that it is blatantly obviously to a lot of people that he struggles to grasp what TA is conveying because of this…subtle condescending nature
@@epiccthuluRight? At 56:32 LP gets really close to saying TA is being malicious and lying for fame, how is that 'cordially disagreeing'? The video felt more lile nitpicking if anything else.
First of all thanks for making this videos as I always appreciate it when lore creators with different opinions criticize each other's videos. However it seems at some points during this videos that you are trying really hard to catch him making a mistake that you either just forget or misremember his prior videos. At around 40 mins you argue that he forgot that the great tree came before the erdtree in his own timeline because of the tree depiction in the "sellian" leyndell depicting the erdtree but he is clearly talking about this being a greattree depiction as in his timeline eternal cities->great tree->erdtree and the "saint and tree empire" came out of the eternal cities like how Rome turned christian after being about the Greek gods prior.
I appreciate the feedback, and I may be misunderstanding TA's broader point, but in the Eternal Cities video, TA states: "[The Leyndell church] tells the story of a group of inhabitants within Lower Leyndell who started a small cult of tree worship unbeknownst to them beginning a new faith that would transform the empire." So, sure, TA could be saying Leyndell exists as a Nox/Eternal City settlement and there's no Greattree yet either, but TA then goes on to say the Carian children and Black Knife Assassins are part of the old "Eternal City order" and "lashed out against the new regime." The Carian children are born after the actual Erdtree has flourished due to Radagon's marriage with Rennala combining the "House of the Erdtree" and the "House of the Full Moon." So if the Carian children and BKAs are affiliated with a "prior order" of the Eternal Cities, this fails to reconcile how the Greattree and its roots should predate the Erdtree according to TA's grafted-Erdtree hypothesis. Was there just a giant tree in Leyndell before the Erdtree that no one worshipped? TA's timeline is left vague. They say there was no Greattree initially, but fail to say when it came into being and when the Erdtree was then grafted onto its roots. Because of the way TA makes sweeping statements about the game and parallels them to literally irrelevant historical events, but potentially figuratively relevant ones, we rarely get a direct sequence of events listed out for us which goes back into the issue I raised throughout this video that it gives TA plausible deniability in what they're saying because they rarely make their claims directly. We're left with one fragment of an idea in one spot and then have to tie it to another fragment of an idea in another that doesn't directly connect to what came before it. So if I'm misrepresenting TA's views here, I'm not doing it out of malice, I'm doing it because TA is vague and I want them to address this reoccurring issue
@@LastProtagonist wow thanks for the response definetly didn't expect that. I agree with you that TA suffers from flowery language syndrome and is not as direct as most lore channels, maybe a byproduct of him focusing mainly on architecture instead of the text. And he does tend to speak with a lot of authority and takes as fact things that are not completely proven but instead just supported by his architectual findings. That coupled with him tending to stack theory on top of theory makes it hard to not disagree with some things he says. As for the great tree: there is a lot of evidence of tree worship prior to the erdtree as both farum azula as well as the ancient dynasty have tree motives in their most important religious/cultural depictions. The bearded man that dominates the ancient dynasty architecture carries a tablet depicting a tree and the depiction of the elden ring itself in farum azula shows roots. That coupled with one of the most repeated statues of marikas age showing a golden tree in it's "infancy" being nurtured makes it clear that a tree or even multiple ones sprouting from the same rootstock prior to the erdtree is all but confirmed. The society closest to the elden ring(farum azula) focusing on the rootstock whereas other surrounding cultures focusing on the various trees sprouting out of it would explain why the ancient dynasty as well as eventually some people from within the eternal cities, especially leyndell where the trees actually grow would surely see this tree as divine. As for the carian children: while they are clearly not from the eternal cities there is however a clear connection as nokstella has a guiding moon just like ranni and rennala, the church of vows has a swordsmistress as a statue and ranni is or at least was allied with the black knives during the night of the black knives. Marikas golden order is the continuation of the tree worship that took over leyndell and the carians are connected to the eternal cities. That seems to be the only point he is making, at least to me. As for the historical comparisons: I agree that TA probably uses them too much but I believe they are sometimes valid especially with the stuff he focuses on. Most of his videos go back even further than marikas age and as far as I know george r r Martin Was responsible for the ancient worldbuilding before from soft then focused more on the recent events and how everything fell apart. Martin loves historical allegories and it is clear that there is a lot of christian as well as pagan influence in elden ring. So I'd say when he only has a historical example he is reaching too far but a lot of time it seems reasonable to draw a parallel if he has other supporting evidence. Anyway thanks for doing these videos I always enjoy them and I hope my writing isn't too much of a word salad.
@@TheVeldoran I'm not trying to deny that a greattree could have predated the Erdtree. The issue is the timeline of events TA presents in relation to it. Saying that the people of Leyndell started a "new religion" of tree worship is unsubstantiated particularly when there's archaeological evidence to suggest the "Sellian" portion of Leyndell is younger than the Fortified Manor. The lion engraving on the front of the Fortified Manor is found underneath the throne in Stormveil, yet Stormveil has the tree in question depicted along with "Crucible" statues on the keep. By your own admission, Farum Azula and its great roots seem like they would predate or coincide with the Nox, so TA's suggestion that they created the tree-worshipping religion based on a random relief seems like putting the cart before the horse to me. If they want to elaborate, they can. I didn't want to address that video directly because it's too nebulous trying to figure out TA's actual opinion on the timeline without further clarification. Because this video is more direct about their opinion, I could address it more directly in a way I couldn't with the other, but I still felt it important to draw attention to the issues of that video. If you think I'm missing something, lmk, and thanks for the comments.
Several thoughts: The tarish and grace, if I recall appropriately, Marika removed the grace from Lord Godfrey and exiled him into the badlands. However, I naturally expect all that worhship and live beneath the erdtree to be grace-given. Such, I think grace striken is similar to how the Ancient Athenians would banish people, a type of apostasy or defiance to the order/peace. Anyways, to address or concisely explain the erdtree appearance point: people might be digging to deep into something, ie: the ambiguity post from chat. If I had to share, I would think that the erdtree was severely damaged; since all the characters hold it to such a revered state, making rhetoricals wouldn't make sense. I would assume there is some cognitive dissonance to reality, similar to how radagon wanted to perserve everything to status quo. The people may have allign to that perspective as well. As well, the fundamentalist seal is the purist deconstruction of the erdtree philosophy or beliefs (erdtree being the focal point of resurrection and rebirth, similar to the laws [forgot the names; basically, convergence/regression and divergence/causality], shedding all physical to focus strictly on abstracts) I may be inserting erdtree fundamentalist ethos into the statement, because there could be flaws with the thought. The erdtree seal; personally from me (deriving from you and TA) I would think the seal would be crafted when Radagon was in union with Rennala. Because like TA, the seal lost most of its natural nature and became more symbolic. However, I agree with you that some points make no sense when applying the dragon seal or frenzy flame seal as juxtaposition. I see the seal as how Myril roughly says, "The union of the stars and the erdtree." The physical (erdtree) and the abstract (stars), could be a byproduct of Radagon's pursuit of being complete. Historically, I see this moment as the Greeks interactions with the Jews and how they gave their philosophical thoughts to them, the Jews would ultimately create the Mosaic Laws (a union between rational/physical and abstract). Lastly, the first burning of erdtree. Simply, I believe there was one, because after a fire or major eruption, soot and other nutrient dense materials would spoil the land. Such, providing rich and hearty harvests. I think, marika and her followers burned the crucible and sowed the land for their tree; draining the red in gold to a pale gold, which ended the Age of Abundance. A literal sapping I might say. However, potentially, the war of the dragons or giants could've harmed the erdtree and halted the abundance as the tree was wounded to a severe degree. This would create a stagnation and eventually ignite the beginnings of the shattering, Marika's interpretation of the crucible to respark another Age of Abundance. I think some of this is my rambles and lots of speculation; anywho, have a nice day.
Just want to pop in and say that everyone in the lands between is grace given. Zullie discovered that in the eyes of almost EVERYTHING in the game is a little golden smear of pixels. A tiny echo of gold.
To be fair, this is probably TA's most logically flawed video and he backed down on his claims regarding the Shattering's timeline like... One day after releasing it. He made a mistake, and I wish he released a new video clearing that up, but most of his content is far more consistent.
Well, they could have unlisted the video if they really wanted to pivot away from these claims because with it up as it is I definitely didn't get that impression
I feel like a good way to talk about this is with TA directly. Not sure how easy he is to get a hold of, but I do know he talks to other lore creators.
Here's the thing. TA has a public channel, and while I considered addressing them privately, I also think it's just as important to have an opportunity to address their viewers about the issues I've raised. Along with TA, I tag all the other content creators whose videos I've reacted to in order to give them notifications about their content that I address. My video address to TA really isn't that different from a comment left on one of their videos, and both are open for all the world to see. I like TA's videos and I want their channel to improve. As such, I'm trying to apply as much pressure as I can in a positive direction for their channel by pointing out the bad and I'd gladly ask that others do the same of me, which is why I don't really censor comments on my videos which criticize my ideas.
@@LastProtagonist I didn't mean privately. I meant in a call to talk about this stuff publicly. Since you sometimes had issues to see what TA actually means, having him clarify would have been helpful.
@@LastProtagonistpeople are weird about that stuff, even if you put a disclaimer like that in the video, you would still have people saying “why are you attacking ____?” You can’t win.
It’s weird to see a lore community get so defensive about a critique like this. If you posted a video like this in the Dragon Age lore community you’d get a lot of comments agreeing or disagreeing with you, but 95% of them would be respectful and it wouldn’t be seen as “drama” by either the commenters or lore RUclipsrs. I’ve made comments in the Dragon Age community about preferring one lore youtuber over another and nobody was upset, but I’ve made comments in the Souls community about preferring Sinclair Lore over Vaati due to accuracy and a preference of approach, and I got insulted and belittled. Really the Souls community needs more academic-style critique and disagreements, at least until the community at large can learn that critique and disagreement are okay and not some great act of inflammatory drama lmao.
It's one thing to critique his take or interpretation of the lore, it's another to be grammar police and criticizing his video flow and presentation. It's petty and childish.
Sorry but I think framing this as just disagreement is a bit dishonest. LP clearly seems to have an issue with TA as a creator, and repeatedly refers to him as problematic, disingenuous, incompetent, and even entertains the idea of him being ”malicious” whatever that even means in this context. This commentary comes off as incredibly condescending imo.
I really appreciate videos like this where people with different thoughts about the broader interpretation of in game and out of game theories can critique each other. Right now the channels who have the most interesting interpretations are you, TA, and hawkshaw. Would love some kind of chaotic discord call between you all lol.
TA is great at identifying real world inspirations to the lore and giving us greater insight into the design choices made throughout the game world and what they could mean. However he leans way too much into these real world inspirations to interpret the lore and tends to ignore what’s actually established by stuff written in game. Inspiration is just that - inspiration. There’s no telling how much the devs deviated from the real world inspiration for any particular thing.
Yeah, a lot of his points are good but when he gets too caught up in IRL stuff or even realism I think it hurts the videos. The video specifically on the Divine Towers comes to mind as his timeline essentially says there are 3 meteor strikes and none of them were the Elden Beast (he also fails to clarify why the Giants would build the Divine Towers when they cant fit in them at all). His best videos are probably things like the "Great tree is real!" or the two fingers video, but even in those he sometimes gets a bit too carried away in places. I don't think he is the Elden Ring communities own Preston Jacobs (especially because he apparently backed down very quickly after people pointed out the issues with his timeline)
@@gaynarchist Three meteor strikes?? That must have been quite a leap. There was the Elden Beast crashing to earth, and Astel. What meteors is he talking about?
I don’t like the idea that someone can’t change their opinion or point of view but being fluid you can more easily commit to changes. Especially when shadow comes a lot of ideas will be tossed or reaffirmed let people have fun
Hard agree that TA should do a much better job at stating much of the content is speculation rather than theory. That being said I feel as though there are a few times you misrepresent TAs words and conflate them to suit your counter narrative. Like when in the instance of how the tree might not be visible to “some” people (stated by him), you keep saying “most”. Despite agree with you for the majority, I do think this was inflated more than need be.
Could you give some examples on how a youtuber might clarify between statements (blanket disclaimer at start etc). The initial assumption of mine has always been something is your opinion unless you state why its from somehwhere else. In TA videos that would include things not between quote and end quote. Though I see how referring to a previous idea makes it look unsubstantiated (since the sources are in the other video) and could train the audience to just overlook missing sources by habit.
@@teaandloops2864 preface by saying TAs videos are some of my favorites on ER lore to watch. Love the dude. I just think something like a disclaimer, like you said, would go a long way in grounding them and their approach to lore. They speak very matter of factly about whatever subject they’re covering. I don’t really assume things are opinions unless otherwise stated. When someone says “X is Y” I assume they mean that to be a statement of fact unless otherwise stated in videos like this. But I certainly understand where you’re coming from! That’s just not how I look at it.
I’m just going to say this: I understand why a lot of lore theorists don’t react to other people’s stuff. This was….almost unbearable to watch. The over all condescending nature and “this doesn’t count because I think this” undertones were…yea. Not for me
The link between vision/sight, grace as looking like slices of the tree but also like the iris of an eye is absolutely brilliant, it also does explain some of the odd dialogue some NPC's have and question us seeing the Tree or not, why would they ask us that lol?
Finally someone's actually talking about this! I've been following TA since his 2nd or 3rd video and with time I too have found the same flaws in reasoning and logical fallacies that you've pointed out in this stream. I couldn't agree more with you on that. The various paralleles between real life and ER lore made by TA are very interesting and informative, but they don't add anything really concrete to the understanding of the lore. In the end they're just neat facts about real history, or at best possible inspiration that may have been used by the developers. TA videos really seem like they're made with the intention of telling his own story (a compelling and interesting one for sure but..), to the detriment of actually caring about beign factually correct even on the most basic and more established things in the lore. He really seems like he's going out of his way to dodge hard facts just to cherrypick the few things he needs to move forward with his narrative, at that's a real shame. P.S. That beign said, keep the good work up Protagonist! You're one of the best Lore channels on YT!
VERY late reply, sorry for that, but I do have something to say in reply… Fromsoft games have always had “factual” elements about them, but the games are never factual. Theyre mythologies, unlike (e.g.) - God of War Ragnarok where its mythology is told to us as facts, or spiderman 2 where the game’s story is borderline an action movie. Miyazaki’s whole storytelling approach is to ensure each player, for the most part, has a unique experience with the games lore. This is further reinforced in Elden Ring, compared to prior games. With Elden Ring particularly, it is more a mythology than something he’s ever done before. The biases, the difference in culture, the layers of internal and external history… it is all meant to be interpretive (Miyazaki, Gamesradar, 2022), aside from a few explicit facts like Radagon is married to Marika, it is all meant to come down to the player’s own experience with the real world - and how they think they’d interpret the lore because of that. Even the mere statement “Radagon IS Marika” isnt fact. Sure, it is bluntly told/shown to us… but to what extent is Radagon Marika?? Did Rad exist prior then they merged? or were they always one together since birth? or did Marika duplicate (maybe the silver tear theory)? Stuff like this is bluntly told to us as facts, but depending on your interpretations, it may not even be a fact You said it yourself, TA has made cool connections between architectural history. It’s not as he makes things up as he goes TAs videos, while I dont agree with a lot, are very refreshing in the sea of basic “here’s what happened during the Shattering” type videos. TAs unique approach theorycrafting, which is what Miyazaki presumably wants for Elden Ring loreists (Gamesradar, 2022), is what paved the way for MANY of our favourite Elden Ring loretubers now
A lot of your arguments here about the timeline are super valid. But you're working on the assumption that when you and TA say "The Shattering" you mean the same thing. I think its possible that TA is talking about something different than the Shattering War or the breaking of the Elden Ring caused by the Night of Black Knives. ie; an earlier semi-forgotten Shattering. Or he's saying that the many sources we have saying that the NotBK caused the Shattering are all wrong which is...a WILD take. Granted, TA doesn't openly say that and it is mostly me trying to reconcile TA's admittedly *VERY* weird timeline shenanigans around when the Shattering occurred. Which is another one of your very legit complaints, which is that TA uses implications and arguing multiple points simultaneously too much. I am glad that you made this video, because while I do love TA's work, it is pretty clear that it is flawed once you start critically analyzing what he says, something his fanbase often does not do.
Imma be real, I think the divided response to these critiques has very little to do with fanboyism or lore disagreements, and much more to do with the loaded language you use. It seems like a large part of the critique is impeaching his character and motivations, sometimes almost veering into ad-hom territory. You use words like disingenuous, dishonest, problematic and even entertain the idea that he is just lying and spreading misinformation for money. I came here for an alternative perspective on TA’s work but parts of this come off more like a hitpiece than a constructive critique, and it leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth.
I agree with this 100%. Bro chose to critique someone else’s lore theory and nearly called it malicious or at least insinuated he believes in the possibility of “malicious theorizing.” Even the idea LP puts forth of TA “harming” the lore community I find totally disingenuous. It’s one dudes opinion based on his field of experience and his likes. Way too loaded of language over a video game.
I enjoy your content very much and as a fan of TA videos i really like your videos dedicated to their lore view, because sometimes you point on mistakes i missed and provide new lore info i havent seen before But I was unpleasantly surprised with your criticism towards their speculation presentation. First of all, form of that critique was just rude. Aside of that, again, it's really surprising, because soulsborne youtube lore community enviroment in my opinion is made mostly of creators who present their content with not "it's just a theory" but "look i unpuzzled lore, now you know True Story Of Game X", and TA is quite gentle with their takes and avoides clickbait. And you, if i remember correctly, had no problems with style of presentation of, for example, elden ring mushroom theory? Furthermore, i think most people who watches TA has no problem distinguishing lore from speculations. It may be wrong impression, but i think the difference is pretty clear. Also i think narrator tries into immersivity and "its just a hypothesis" after every take in my opinion doesnt fit in this vibe. Honestly, i don't think it fits in any speculation video; it's enough to mention that in the beggining once. Yes, TA doesn't have such a disclaimer, but you mentioned yourself that TA's videos are series, and i want to say that in the fisrt ones TA (if i remember correctly) claimed that series are about analysis of game visuals About visuals. You were unhappy with the fact TA relies so heavily on visuals. It's also surprising, because core of the TA content is analysis of game visuals and searching real life parallels; for me (and i want to think for many others) that's obvious that sometimes game assets are not meant to tell the story and sometimes real life parallels tell you only about inspiration and not about actual game story. You're, like, unhappy with whole idea of the channel?? Why? You mentioned some of the parallels in positive light, but it sounded like you think parallels are meant to be spicy detail added to text analysis, when in the meantime it's not a detail, it's core of the content. Yes, they are not as good in speculations and game text as you are, but they put enormous effort in the other field - visuals and real life parallels. They're incredible good at searching references and that's contributes to community a lot. You want them to be good in both? I'm sure you put a ton of time and effort in your content and you should know what is it like. I can speculate in their case adding this skillset of yours to the big work they are doind already with visuals and references will double the time they spend on videos
It would be interesting to see a version of this topic in a more coherent format. It's become more and more frustrating trying to talk about Elden Ring lore and its mysteries whenever someone came out with something along the line of "Oh but youtuber X said it's like that so it must be like that because he know best." It's like hearing old folks saying "They said it on the television so it must be true." Fortunately there are some like Crunchy and Smoughtown that acknowledge the existence and the possibilities offered by theories other than their own.
Hard agree. Back in my day, we looked to Vaati for the “definitive” answers😅… and still do, for older games like dark souls most of our current theories for those games derive from Vaati. We had actual answers that the community would universally accept, even before dlc Elden Ring is different. So many different cultures, time periods, influences, layers of mythology… to the point where every Loretuber has a unique and singular experience with Elden Rings lore that cannot be compared to other loretubers due to their difference in Culture, upbringing, or respective degrees in Studies. It’s for this reason, to this day, there isn’t a single RUclipsr that I’d consider who has that “DEFINITIVE” Elden Ring lore… closest there is to somebody who fits those shoes for Elden Ring, imo, is Crunchy. Solely because he’s willing to accept other peoples interpretive findings due to different classes and category of culture and studies etc… Because of these things, I feel that the best way to NOT be toxic is to respect other peoples opinions on the lore, because they may specialise in particular areas you do not. Back in the day, it was only really Vaati. With some cameos from Hawkshaw and Quelaag, but for the most part every player didn’t have a “favourite Loretuber” because everyone had Vaati. Elden Ring gave birth to, and revitalised, many Fromsoft Loretubers… to the point where the Students outgrew the Master (“master” being Vaati, and “students” being the newer Elden Ring lore channels). These loretubers personally identify with aspects of Elden Ring that may not be compatible with everyone else. This division also lead to a divide in the Fromsoft lore community, now everyone has a “favourite Loretuber” srry for the wall of text, I like speaking into nothing because I’m just weird like that :) TL;DR - Elden Rings lore is big and complicated. Respect other people’s interpretations of it. you do not know everything
I knew when I first saw TA's videos that his approach towards lore (literary as opposed to taxonomical) would upset a lot of people. Even Vaati's taking pot shots recently. He's precisely interesting enough to threaten people who read item descriptions for a living
I don't think anyone is upset with how TA presents information. In fact, I think it's the one thing people can all agree he does really well. Myself included. At the end of the day, none of this is all that serious to me. But it's one thing to interpret an item description, piece of art, or architecture within the context of the game differently. It's another to miss basic, explicit story elements that add context to those interpretations.
Before anything else: This kind of critique stop and go picking at individual lines is literally worthless and can be dismissed immediately. There is no value here, except the self indictment of this creators integrity. He should have realised that the 10th time he critisized himself for pausing and picking at individual lines. All that Destiny nonsense making claims about intent and doing this without a sensible reason... Whats absolutely baffling is his statement about citing other videos making it hard to follow along as its arguably the one key ability that is demonstrated and lacking in every single other lore creator. I have yet to find even one lore content creator that is able to produce such a remarkable focus on breaking down rationale. I guess the lack of formal or self education and a somewhat addled lack attention span makes it difficult to follow since you get stuck on half sentences constantly. The rest is character flaws. Couching positive expressions, constantly applying debatebro terminology and generally assuming that there is something to disprove. What an astounding display of feckless trifling and ill considered burning of ones integrity. A fun aside: There is a shocking amount of accuracy in TAs predictions that are very specific. Also, 5x times the subs in a year + overwhelmingly negative feedback even from your fans. Think I'll download this for posterity.
Sealed as in removed from the Elden Ring. The thing which starts the Golden Order. The Golden Order cannot first come into being upon the Shattering of the Elden Ring because Miquella would have needed to have an actual relationship with Radagon to develop incantations with, and Marika is said to have "long vanished" after the Shattering.
He says that the duality of Marika is something that was founded on faith rather than logic, proceed to play a dialog where somebody said that he did deduce it from the text but cannot believe it...
I certainly enjoy TA's content. But at times it's hard to understand how he arrived at his conclusions. Off hand, there was a bit about Serosh and his origin that didn't make the most sense. And was pretty egregious when you consider how the companions (Blaidd, Serosh, etc) came to be. As the lore there is relatively explicit. Again, I really enjoy HOW TA presents his theories and the overall premise/format of his videos. But there are more than a few theories that left me scratching my head.
Why do I get the feeling most the comments don't normally watch TLPs stuff? There's a lot of weird comments here acting like TLP is some parasitic youtuber who is attacking TA, when in reality most of TLPs reaction streams are done with permission from the original creator and are generally neutral or agreeing with their stuff.
@@LastProtagonistAh sorry then, you mentioned in streams how you message the creator so they can hop in chat so I assumed that involved asking for permission too.
@@reddeadspartan Oh, right, that. I am in more direct contact with some creators in The Roundtable Hold (they're featured in my channel,) but not all of the content I've been reacting to has been from them specifically. Before I started, I got express permission from the RTH's group of content creators as well as their thoughts in general before I did it
So I'm like, an hour into this vid now and I'm not really grasping the point of it? You're not wrong about TA stating speculations as fact, dodging hard evidence in favour of preserving headcanon narratives, or most of what you're saying but I find that these issues could be levied at almost every creator in the field and they'd stick. Some are just inevitable given the field even. You keep doing you TLP but these vids just aren't for me.
I love these streams that critique TA as I do feel frustrated at times when said, "refer to this to know more" lines. It's like.... you have to repeat the information to cement an argument, explanation, or "story." I also appreciate how you try to challenge the methodology and where TA's info comes from. I do love TA's presentation in his videos, but I feel like they are more hollow due to not having enough information. Thank you for your explanations. You do fumble a little bit in explanation, but your intentions are clear.
Whoa! Using Bart *I cannot shed my fundamentalism even as an atheist* Erhman as a trusted source on religion... That's rich. Edit: Yeah, a few seconds later and the poor fella is spitting falsehoods because he believed Bart :( Synoptics have a very high Christology, Jesus calls himself "a lord over the Sabbath" for example, which is said to be Lord's alone in the Old Testament. Not to mention extremely clear high Christology in Paul...That is a bold face lie, simply put...
"Trying to base their video on Archaeology instead of a marriage of archaeology, literal text and visual clues." Literally exactly after that the video does exactly that. Visual clue, item description the whole shebang. Dude doesnt even notice. Too busy pausing and making the next petty ad hominem. This is actually great fun. Dont think everytime guy critizes the writing and immediately after explains how he has difficulties formulating his own thoughts
The game outright says not everyone sees the erdtree as a glowing tree and those who cannot see grace do not see a glowing golden tree. Id look at other comments about jumping to disagree so quickly. The same could be said about many things you claim in your videos. You can find the implied story if you want the game to literally tell you in text "this is literally what happened"
I'm not going to get mad if people point out issues in my videos. But if "The game outright says not everyone sees the erdtree as a glowing tree and those who cannot see grace do not see a glowing golden tree," please do go ahead and provide the direct source of such claims.
TA is just in love with his own thought process a bit too much. Incidently the tendency to present speculation so matter of factly as to make it seem factual is why I stopped watching Vaati back in the DS2 era. It is easy to start sentences with "It's possible that..." or "suggests that..." or "one interpretation is..."
To sum up some of TA's videos, they misrepresent or distort facts about the game, or fill in gaps of knowledge with conclusions that there simply isn't enough evidence available and never will be, given how intentionally obscure some of the lore in Elden Ring is, to fit the narrative they're trying to get across to their audience. This is an excellent, sincere and courageous piece of criticism. I hope TA doesn't take it personally and instead learn from it. Misinformation, regardless of intention - be it in fiction or in history or in science - should always be countered with a measured response.
This is weird content. You're making whole videos about how TA is not always right but....that's ok. The narrative is intentionally obscure so at times we as a community are all slightly off base when it comes to what actually happened but to re-post someone else's content specifically to poke holes in it is parasitic in my opinion.
People only start with 'nobody can really know' stuff when they're being defensive and touchy. If Melina says she doesn't like you becoming the Lord of frenzy. That's a textual statement. It's not just whatever your head canon wants it to be. At no point did he insult TA, he questioned his methodology, something archaeology itself invites and does all the time. Should we not update what we know about modern day burial sites because it would upset earlier scholars who got details wrong?
I disagree that LP's critique of TA's content here is parasitic, as he isn't simply reposting the video, but offering a lot of transformative commentary here and there. He isn't a large channel like Xqc who just watches videos without saying anything.
@@humblegamer7876 as I mentioned re-posting someone else’s content JUST to poke holes is kinda lame. You won’t see TA re-post LA’s videos JUST to point out what’s wrong. He’s more interested in the answers than who got what wrong. At the end of this video no one was more informed about anything lore wise except what TA got wrong. And his followers making statements like “where does he got his lore from? He must live in the lands between” and LA laughing is just hater behavior but hey different strokes for different folks.
Haven't watched the video yet, so maybe he does get "weird" about it, but i dont see anything wrong in making a critique on someone elses theory, as long as your respectful about it ofc.
@@petro1864you're being parasocial about this and speaking as if your TA's inner conscious and voicing motive+ assuming intent and stuff. That's a lot weirder and further reaching than anything any of us are doing bro
Sadly, my first dislike of any of your videos. Disagreeing and challenging TAs view points is one thing, but criticizing his sentencing and his video flow presentation comes off very poor. Also passive-aggressivly noting your japanese language expertise also comes off as superior and douchy. Slightly immature overall for your whole video in general. A cringy watch and you should probably consider this in your future critiques. A competition this is not.
Same, and I’m really against disliking videos especially creators that lore hunt the souls series like LP, Vaati, Sinclair, TA, etc. However this will be my first…I don’t want to unsubscribe because that feels extreme, but I do not care for these type of takes. Idk, it feels passive aggressive and nit-picky and needlessly judgmental. Everyone has their own head cannon, thoughts, and methodology of expressing themselves and how they arrived at the conclusion they did. This feels personal and it comes off as a bit jealous, I’m sure he will disagree with our opinion. But…. Speaking about run on sentences, trying to debunk another creator’s opinion, and having more experience…like what is this. A big problem with the From community is that due to the vagueness of the lore, it leaves 90% of the events up to interpretation. But this inevitably leads to content creators dissecting the opinion/s of another content creators. TA dissected the game, LP dissected TA’s dissection of the game.
If you can't take criticism in how you present or your sentence structure then you have a fragile ego, and that is a foible of yours, not a slight of the critic. There was nothing hostile about this video.
@@trisbane4086 never said hostile. Learn the difference. And who is Last to be critiquing and evaluating someone else's work and grammar? He's not a English college professor that I'm aware. Maybe you and him should check your fragile egos bud.
@@13mrservon Someone doesn't have to be an English professor to critique anything, the difference is in the credibility and merit of the critic - if they don't know what they're talking about their opinion is of less value. But seeing as how these are both content creators specifically about Elden Ring, his expertise qualifies him to make a critique in my book. It doesn't matter how self-effacing and anodyne he had made this video, there would still be people (like you) complaining he made it at all. Therefore, frankly, learn to take criticism. "Never said hostile." I really don't care what words you used. You said passive-aggressive and cringe. It's tantamount to the same thing.
It's hardly a drama. At no point did he insult TA, or make it personal-- he questioned his methodology, something archaeology itself invites and does all the time. Should we not update what we know about modern day burial sites because it would upset earlier scholars who got details wrong?
LP is bae and TA is whack.Nah, seriously I've picked up on the problems u brought up in ur commentary and it kinda left me with a bad taste in my mouth. Overall i think most of the real-life stuff he bringa up is super cool and interesting, it just that connections he draws between things ingame and reallity don't align with the internal history of the game's world as much as he'd like to admit.
Folks like you don’t like TA’s videos because they’re actually compelling and entertaining while yours are awkward um akshuallys in front of a screen share
@@erichowens85 Huh, you’d think people with the “it doesn’t matter if something is true or accurate, only if it’s entertaining” mentality would have better things to watch than RUclips lore videos.
I’m watching someone start a fist fight over someone else’s recent D&D success Sorry. cynical assumption on my part. Kinda like assuming someone is deliberately deceptive and malicious over your inferences from their Elden ring lore interpretations!?! DUDE lol WHAT!?
The chat feels kinda hostile at times as if TA's theorizing is an offense to them, feels kind of snobby. TA is utilizing very good archeological theory which is interesting regardless of how deep one thinks FromSoft has prepared for it. Putting the caveat of "maybe maybe not" on everything he says serves little purpose considering how little of the puzzle we have. Everything is a theory, some lay more weight on the japanese text while others lay more weight on real life inspirations while others just want to stitch it into a cohesive narrative. Seeing the chat call him foolish and even potentionally malicious for speculating at the inspirations of the creators when they themselves can only theorize creates a kinda toxic atmosphere, like "how dare this guy say something with mild confidence". In the end this is just a theory vs theory subject that will get added to and likely get retconned when the DLC comes. So the chat especially should chill out a bit.
Though I do think you're also a bit unfair at times, like with the Erdtree relief in the tiny church in Leyndell. TA said that it wasn't anywhere else in the game, which is true in that form, but you counter that by altering a different depiction to make it the right proportions and flipped in order to kind of "dunk" on that, thats not very honest since when you alter it, it becomes a different thing. I don't think TA was making the argument that it was a completely unique asset in 3ds max (though it still wasn't identical so clearly other alterations have been done to it), I'm sure many common assets are altered for different use throughout the game, but one is not wrong in theorizing that such alterations or inclusions of unique assets have inentions. I found it very jarring when that was kind of used as a big point against TA's whole method when he was correct . If you take a depiction of a tall tree then squish it down into a short fat tree then it is not longer a depiction of a tall tree.
Thats my thoughts so far. The vibes are strange.
It doesn't seem truthful to say that TA is using 'very good archaeological theory' when he claims that the tall icon of a tree is a conifer and represents a tree other than the erdtree even though the knights of Leyndell have that "conifer" icon on their armor, and when the item description of that armor specifically names those knights defenders of the erdtree.
That's...not good archaeology.
@@DavidStavis The Leyndell Knights do not have that icon on them if you're referring to the icon on their chest. Thats a wide tree icon which looks more like a deciduous, not a conifer.
On TAs presentation.
I personally enjoy him presenting very speculative ideas, i find it entertaining and fun, and its why i think people watch him in the first place.
Re: TA often times doesn't delineate between whats fact and whats more extrapolation. --While he doesn't Explicitly say it, its generally pretty clear, at least for me, when his ideas are speculative and when are factual. I also think his target audience are people that sort of already know the main thrust of the "factual lore", hes usually not going over whats generally known, so its sort of a given that hes going to be more speculative.
When i watch TA im already under the guise that im here to watch some one who will sometimes make specualtive leaps. So im not blindly accepting everything they say, im curating the ideas in real time. Most of the time i finish the video thinking, "thats a pretty cool idea, not sure if i agree, but he might be right on some points, ill keep my eye out for more things that can either confirm or deny this theory. It was fun." And i move on.
Maybe its just me, but i personally find it annoying and repetitive when I'm watching or reading a lore theory, and every three seconds goes "this is just speculation btw", "this is just my opinion ofcourse". I know its speculation! i want to hear you speculate, and im here for it! I dont need a reminder that the evidence is a bit shaky every other sentence. I can look at the evidence presented and see that for myself.
I wouldnt be againt TA being more upfront about how specualtive his ideas are, but i wouldnt want him to change his whole presentation in order to do so.
Overall i just don't see any 'harm' in how hes doing things right now. Are there some people that will blindly eat up everything TA says without questioning anything? Sure probably. But those people are not of my concern at all, let them have fun that way if they want. The people who want to be more rigorous on the other hand will *already* be more cautious without anyone having to tell them to.
Good catch with the erdtree depiction in the "special church" in lleyndel, that was one of the videos i had the most disagreements with in TAs catalouge. I think TA could swindle his position by saying its a "special depiction", even if it was really just an edited version of another depiction, but overall i agree with you here.
I think you misconstrued his position a bit. The "not everyone can see the erdtree" theory, doesn't necessarily imply only the tarnished guided by grace can see the erdtree.
Overall i disagree with TAs timeline. The main part i disagree with is the placemnet of the shattering of the elden ring. It seems very hard to justify to me. I think the erdtree rotted or burned at the end of the age of plenty but not the shattering of the elden ring itself.
I do agree with TA that the different sigils loosely apply to different stages of erdtree worship. And thus the incantations can be loosely used as a "timeline" of events.
Your argument against the vine idea feels a bit dismissive. You imply the vine idea somehow contradicts or diminishes other aspects of radagons role, but i dont see why that could be the case. I also think radagons crosshatch can have multiple meanings. The trellis, the web of wyrd, the cross etc.
Radagon has many roles, he fettered the fate of the night to the erdtree. He combines faith and intelligence. He seals the erdtree. He seeks completion. He repairs the elden ring. You cant simplify him to one thing.
That's fair. My assumption is that vines come from something other than a tree, meaning that the vines would be external from the Erdtree and that Radagon's power should be something internal to the Erdtree. (Thorns can actually grow from trees fwiw.)
I don't know why we're equating burning the Erdtree with reforming the Elden Ring.
We burn the tree because the path is blocked and we do so solely to bypass the wall of thorns. That's it.
The idea that we NEED to burn the tree in order to factory reset the Elden Ring doesn't come up anywhere.
I don't understand these comments, this video is the furthest away possible from drama. All that happens is LP cordially disagreeing with TAs approach to the lore and pointing out a few mistakes in good faith in a very mild manner. LP isn't "debunking" or "exposing" TA or anything stupid like that. I strongly suggest you all get a grip or consider logging off to touch grass
People are so terminally online and stuck in their own echo chambers that any kind of disagreement to their favorite internet celeb is a personal attack to them.
Truly the touch grass moment of all time
@@MugenDino5555
Yes lol, people being insanely parasocial about this like their father was personally insulted
Nobody said you can't like a guy's videos or something, insane thing to get so clearly in your ego about
I think people are seeing the title and then making assumptions, it's pretty obvious that people haven't actually watched the entire thing (or at least the ones commenting haven't).
Typical, people have a different opinion than you so you make it personal. This is the second time I watched LP react TA and he is so focused on this “ummm actually” kick, and this notion of “Imma help you grow”, that it is blatantly obviously to a lot of people that he struggles to grasp what TA is conveying because of this…subtle condescending nature
@@epiccthuluRight? At 56:32 LP gets really close to saying TA is being malicious and lying for fame, how is that 'cordially disagreeing'? The video felt more lile nitpicking if anything else.
First of all thanks for making this videos as I always appreciate it when lore creators with different opinions criticize each other's videos. However it seems at some points during this videos that you are trying really hard to catch him making a mistake that you either just forget or misremember his prior videos.
At around 40 mins you argue that he forgot that the great tree came before the erdtree in his own timeline because of the tree depiction in the "sellian" leyndell depicting the erdtree but he is clearly talking about this being a greattree depiction as in his timeline eternal cities->great tree->erdtree and the "saint and tree empire" came out of the eternal cities like how Rome turned christian after being about the Greek gods prior.
I appreciate the feedback, and I may be misunderstanding TA's broader point, but in the Eternal Cities video, TA states: "[The Leyndell church] tells the story of a group of inhabitants within Lower Leyndell who started a small cult of tree worship unbeknownst to them beginning a new faith that would transform the empire." So, sure, TA could be saying Leyndell exists as a Nox/Eternal City settlement and there's no Greattree yet either, but TA then goes on to say the Carian children and Black Knife Assassins are part of the old "Eternal City order" and "lashed out against the new regime."
The Carian children are born after the actual Erdtree has flourished due to Radagon's marriage with Rennala combining the "House of the Erdtree" and the "House of the Full Moon." So if the Carian children and BKAs are affiliated with a "prior order" of the Eternal Cities, this fails to reconcile how the Greattree and its roots should predate the Erdtree according to TA's grafted-Erdtree hypothesis. Was there just a giant tree in Leyndell before the Erdtree that no one worshipped? TA's timeline is left vague. They say there was no Greattree initially, but fail to say when it came into being and when the Erdtree was then grafted onto its roots.
Because of the way TA makes sweeping statements about the game and parallels them to literally irrelevant historical events, but potentially figuratively relevant ones, we rarely get a direct sequence of events listed out for us which goes back into the issue I raised throughout this video that it gives TA plausible deniability in what they're saying because they rarely make their claims directly. We're left with one fragment of an idea in one spot and then have to tie it to another fragment of an idea in another that doesn't directly connect to what came before it. So if I'm misrepresenting TA's views here, I'm not doing it out of malice, I'm doing it because TA is vague and I want them to address this reoccurring issue
@@LastProtagonist wow thanks for the response definetly didn't expect that. I agree with you that TA suffers from flowery language syndrome and is not as direct as most lore channels, maybe a byproduct of him focusing mainly on architecture instead of the text. And he does tend to speak with a lot of authority and takes as fact things that are not completely proven but instead just supported by his architectual findings. That coupled with him tending to stack theory on top of theory makes it hard to not disagree with some things he says.
As for the great tree: there is a lot of evidence of tree worship prior to the erdtree as both farum azula as well as the ancient dynasty have tree motives in their most important religious/cultural depictions. The bearded man that dominates the ancient dynasty architecture carries a tablet depicting a tree and the depiction of the elden ring itself in farum azula shows roots. That coupled with one of the most repeated statues of marikas age showing a golden tree in it's "infancy" being nurtured makes it clear that a tree or even multiple ones sprouting from the same rootstock prior to the erdtree is all but confirmed. The society closest to the elden ring(farum azula) focusing on the rootstock whereas other surrounding cultures focusing on the various trees sprouting out of it would explain why the ancient dynasty as well as eventually some people from within the eternal cities, especially leyndell where the trees actually grow would surely see this tree as divine.
As for the carian children: while they are clearly not from the eternal cities there is however a clear connection as nokstella has a guiding moon just like ranni and rennala, the church of vows has a swordsmistress as a statue and ranni is or at least was allied with the black knives during the night of the black knives. Marikas golden order is the continuation of the tree worship that took over leyndell and the carians are connected to the eternal cities. That seems to be the only point he is making, at least to me.
As for the historical comparisons: I agree that TA probably uses them too much but I believe they are sometimes valid especially with the stuff he focuses on. Most of his videos go back even further than marikas age and as far as I know george r r Martin Was responsible for the ancient worldbuilding before from soft then focused more on the recent events and how everything fell apart. Martin loves historical allegories and it is clear that there is a lot of christian as well as pagan influence in elden ring. So I'd say when he only has a historical example he is reaching too far but a lot of time it seems reasonable to draw a parallel if he has other supporting evidence.
Anyway thanks for doing these videos I always enjoy them and I hope my writing isn't too much of a word salad.
@@TheVeldoran I'm not trying to deny that a greattree could have predated the Erdtree. The issue is the timeline of events TA presents in relation to it. Saying that the people of Leyndell started a "new religion" of tree worship is unsubstantiated particularly when there's archaeological evidence to suggest the "Sellian" portion of Leyndell is younger than the Fortified Manor. The lion engraving on the front of the Fortified Manor is found underneath the throne in Stormveil, yet Stormveil has the tree in question depicted along with "Crucible" statues on the keep.
By your own admission, Farum Azula and its great roots seem like they would predate or coincide with the Nox, so TA's suggestion that they created the tree-worshipping religion based on a random relief seems like putting the cart before the horse to me. If they want to elaborate, they can. I didn't want to address that video directly because it's too nebulous trying to figure out TA's actual opinion on the timeline without further clarification. Because this video is more direct about their opinion, I could address it more directly in a way I couldn't with the other, but I still felt it important to draw attention to the issues of that video.
If you think I'm missing something, lmk, and thanks for the comments.
Several thoughts:
The tarish and grace, if I recall appropriately, Marika removed the grace from Lord Godfrey and exiled him into the badlands. However, I naturally expect all that worhship and live beneath the erdtree to be grace-given. Such, I think grace striken is similar to how the Ancient Athenians would banish people, a type of apostasy or defiance to the order/peace.
Anyways, to address or concisely explain the erdtree appearance point: people might be digging to deep into something, ie: the ambiguity post from chat.
If I had to share, I would think that the erdtree was severely damaged; since all the characters hold it to such a revered state, making rhetoricals wouldn't make sense. I would assume there is some cognitive dissonance to reality, similar to how radagon wanted to perserve everything to status quo. The people may have allign to that perspective as well.
As well, the fundamentalist seal is the purist deconstruction of the erdtree philosophy or beliefs (erdtree being the focal point of resurrection and rebirth, similar to the laws [forgot the names; basically, convergence/regression and divergence/causality], shedding all physical to focus strictly on abstracts)
I may be inserting erdtree fundamentalist ethos into the statement, because there could be flaws with the thought.
The erdtree seal; personally from me (deriving from you and TA) I would think the seal would be crafted when Radagon was in union with Rennala. Because like TA, the seal lost most of its natural nature and became more symbolic. However, I agree with you that some points make no sense when applying the dragon seal or frenzy flame seal as juxtaposition.
I see the seal as how Myril roughly says, "The union of the stars and the erdtree." The physical (erdtree) and the abstract (stars), could be a byproduct of Radagon's pursuit of being complete.
Historically, I see this moment as the Greeks interactions with the Jews and how they gave their philosophical thoughts to them, the Jews would ultimately create the Mosaic Laws (a union between rational/physical and abstract).
Lastly, the first burning of erdtree. Simply, I believe there was one, because after a fire or major eruption, soot and other nutrient dense materials would spoil the land. Such, providing rich and hearty harvests. I think, marika and her followers burned the crucible and sowed the land for their tree; draining the red in gold to a pale gold, which ended the Age of Abundance. A literal sapping I might say.
However, potentially, the war of the dragons or giants could've harmed the erdtree and halted the abundance as the tree was wounded to a severe degree. This would create a stagnation and eventually ignite the beginnings of the shattering, Marika's interpretation of the crucible to respark another Age of Abundance.
I think some of this is my rambles and lots of speculation; anywho, have a nice day.
Just want to pop in and say that everyone in the lands between is grace given. Zullie discovered that in the eyes of almost EVERYTHING in the game is a little golden smear of pixels. A tiny echo of gold.
To be fair, this is probably TA's most logically flawed video and he backed down on his claims regarding the Shattering's timeline like... One day after releasing it. He made a mistake, and I wish he released a new video clearing that up, but most of his content is far more consistent.
Well, they could have unlisted the video if they really wanted to pivot away from these claims because with it up as it is I definitely didn't get that impression
It'd be nice if TA could do a Q&A and then trying to update his lore videos in a year later once he tries to redraft his scripts.@@LastProtagonist
I feel like a good way to talk about this is with TA directly. Not sure how easy he is to get a hold of, but I do know he talks to other lore creators.
A _much_ better way
Lol that's only if he has answers, if he can't justify his position then it would be incredibly awkward
Here's the thing. TA has a public channel, and while I considered addressing them privately, I also think it's just as important to have an opportunity to address their viewers about the issues I've raised. Along with TA, I tag all the other content creators whose videos I've reacted to in order to give them notifications about their content that I address. My video address to TA really isn't that different from a comment left on one of their videos, and both are open for all the world to see.
I like TA's videos and I want their channel to improve. As such, I'm trying to apply as much pressure as I can in a positive direction for their channel by pointing out the bad and I'd gladly ask that others do the same of me, which is why I don't really censor comments on my videos which criticize my ideas.
@@LastProtagonist I didn't mean privately. I meant in a call to talk about this stuff publicly. Since you sometimes had issues to see what TA actually means, having him clarify would have been helpful.
@@LastProtagonistpeople are weird about that stuff, even if you put a disclaimer like that in the video, you would still have people saying “why are you attacking ____?” You can’t win.
It’s weird to see a lore community get so defensive about a critique like this. If you posted a video like this in the Dragon Age lore community you’d get a lot of comments agreeing or disagreeing with you, but 95% of them would be respectful and it wouldn’t be seen as “drama” by either the commenters or lore RUclipsrs. I’ve made comments in the Dragon Age community about preferring one lore youtuber over another and nobody was upset, but I’ve made comments in the Souls community about preferring Sinclair Lore over Vaati due to accuracy and a preference of approach, and I got insulted and belittled. Really the Souls community needs more academic-style critique and disagreements, at least until the community at large can learn that critique and disagreement are okay and not some great act of inflammatory drama lmao.
It's one thing to critique his take or interpretation of the lore, it's another to be grammar police and criticizing his video flow and presentation.
It's petty and childish.
Sorry but I think framing this as just disagreement is a bit dishonest. LP clearly seems to have an issue with TA as a creator, and repeatedly refers to him as problematic, disingenuous, incompetent, and even entertains the idea of him being ”malicious” whatever that even means in this context. This commentary comes off as incredibly condescending imo.
I really appreciate videos like this where people with different thoughts about the broader interpretation of in game and out of game theories can critique each other. Right now the channels who have the most interesting interpretations are you, TA, and hawkshaw. Would love some kind of chaotic discord call between you all lol.
TA is great at identifying real world inspirations to the lore and giving us greater insight into the design choices made throughout the game world and what they could mean. However he leans way too much into these real world inspirations to interpret the lore and tends to ignore what’s actually established by stuff written in game. Inspiration is just that - inspiration. There’s no telling how much the devs deviated from the real world inspiration for any particular thing.
Yeah, a lot of his points are good but when he gets too caught up in IRL stuff or even realism I think it hurts the videos. The video specifically on the Divine Towers comes to mind as his timeline essentially says there are 3 meteor strikes and none of them were the Elden Beast (he also fails to clarify why the Giants would build the Divine Towers when they cant fit in them at all).
His best videos are probably things like the "Great tree is real!" or the two fingers video, but even in those he sometimes gets a bit too carried away in places. I don't think he is the Elden Ring communities own Preston Jacobs (especially because he apparently backed down very quickly after people pointed out the issues with his timeline)
@@gaynarchist Three meteor strikes?? That must have been quite a leap. There was the Elden Beast crashing to earth, and Astel. What meteors is he talking about?
I don’t like the idea that someone can’t change their opinion or point of view but being fluid you can more easily commit to changes. Especially when shadow comes a lot of ideas will be tossed or reaffirmed let people have fun
Hard agree that TA should do a much better job at stating much of the content is speculation rather than theory. That being said I feel as though there are a few times you misrepresent TAs words and conflate them to suit your counter narrative. Like when in the instance of how the tree might not be visible to “some” people (stated by him), you keep saying “most”. Despite agree with you for the majority, I do think this was inflated more than need be.
Could you give some examples on how a youtuber might clarify between statements (blanket disclaimer at start etc). The initial assumption of mine has always been something is your opinion unless you state why its from somehwhere else. In TA videos that would include things not between quote and end quote. Though I see how referring to a previous idea makes it look unsubstantiated (since the sources are in the other video) and could train the audience to just overlook missing sources by habit.
@@teaandloops2864 preface by saying TAs videos are some of my favorites on ER lore to watch. Love the dude. I just think something like a disclaimer, like you said, would go a long way in grounding them and their approach to lore. They speak very matter of factly about whatever subject they’re covering. I don’t really assume things are opinions unless otherwise stated. When someone says “X is Y” I assume they mean that to be a statement of fact unless otherwise stated in videos like this. But I certainly understand where you’re coming from! That’s just not how I look at it.
Vaati is in the same boat and why I stopped watching his channel years ago.
I’m just going to say this: I understand why a lot of lore theorists don’t react to other people’s stuff. This was….almost unbearable to watch. The over all condescending nature and “this doesn’t count because I think this” undertones were…yea. Not for me
The link between vision/sight, grace as looking like slices of the tree but also like the iris of an eye is absolutely brilliant, it also does explain some of the odd dialogue some NPC's have and question us seeing the Tree or not, why would they ask us that lol?
Finally someone's actually talking about this!
I've been following TA since his 2nd or 3rd video and with time I too have found the same flaws in reasoning and logical fallacies that you've pointed out in this stream.
I couldn't agree more with you on that.
The various paralleles between real life and ER lore made by TA are very interesting and informative, but they don't add anything really concrete to the understanding of the lore.
In the end they're just neat facts about real history, or at best possible inspiration that may have been used by the developers.
TA videos really seem like they're made with the intention of telling his own story (a compelling and interesting one for sure but..), to the detriment of actually caring about beign factually correct even on the most basic and more established things in the lore.
He really seems like he's going out of his way to dodge hard facts just to cherrypick the few things he needs to move forward with his narrative, at that's a real shame.
P.S. That beign said, keep the good work up Protagonist! You're one of the best Lore channels on YT!
VERY late reply, sorry for that, but I do have something to say in reply…
Fromsoft games have always had “factual” elements about them, but the games are never factual. Theyre mythologies, unlike (e.g.) - God of War Ragnarok where its mythology is told to us as facts, or spiderman 2 where the game’s story is borderline an action movie. Miyazaki’s whole storytelling approach is to ensure each player, for the most part, has a unique experience with the games lore.
This is further reinforced in Elden Ring, compared to prior games. With Elden Ring particularly, it is more a mythology than something he’s ever done before. The biases, the difference in culture, the layers of internal and external history… it is all meant to be interpretive (Miyazaki, Gamesradar, 2022), aside from a few explicit facts like Radagon is married to Marika, it is all meant to come down to the player’s own experience with the real world - and how they think they’d interpret the lore because of that.
Even the mere statement “Radagon IS Marika” isnt fact. Sure, it is bluntly told/shown to us… but to what extent is Radagon Marika?? Did Rad exist prior then they merged? or were they always one together since birth? or did Marika duplicate (maybe the silver tear theory)?
Stuff like this is bluntly told to us as facts, but depending on your interpretations, it may not even be a fact
You said it yourself, TA has made cool connections between architectural history. It’s not as he makes things up as he goes
TAs videos, while I dont agree with a lot, are very refreshing in the sea of basic “here’s what happened during the Shattering” type videos. TAs unique approach theorycrafting, which is what Miyazaki presumably wants for Elden Ring loreists (Gamesradar, 2022), is what paved the way for MANY of our favourite Elden Ring loretubers now
A lot of your arguments here about the timeline are super valid. But you're working on the assumption that when you and TA say "The Shattering" you mean the same thing. I think its possible that TA is talking about something different than the Shattering War or the breaking of the Elden Ring caused by the Night of Black Knives. ie; an earlier semi-forgotten Shattering. Or he's saying that the many sources we have saying that the NotBK caused the Shattering are all wrong which is...a WILD take.
Granted, TA doesn't openly say that and it is mostly me trying to reconcile TA's admittedly *VERY* weird timeline shenanigans around when the Shattering occurred. Which is another one of your very legit complaints, which is that TA uses implications and arguing multiple points simultaneously too much.
I am glad that you made this video, because while I do love TA's work, it is pretty clear that it is flawed once you start critically analyzing what he says, something his fanbase often does not do.
Imma be real, I think the divided response to these critiques has very little to do with fanboyism or lore disagreements, and much more to do with the loaded language you use. It seems like a large part of the critique is impeaching his character and motivations, sometimes almost veering into ad-hom territory. You use words like disingenuous, dishonest, problematic and even entertain the idea that he is just lying and spreading misinformation for money. I came here for an alternative perspective on TA’s work but parts of this come off more like a hitpiece than a constructive critique, and it leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth.
I agree with this 100%. Bro chose to critique someone else’s lore theory and nearly called it malicious or at least insinuated he believes in the possibility of “malicious theorizing.”
Even the idea LP puts forth of TA “harming” the lore community I find totally disingenuous. It’s one dudes opinion based on his field of experience and his likes. Way too loaded of language over a video game.
I enjoy your content very much and as a fan of TA videos i really like your videos dedicated to their lore view, because sometimes you point on mistakes i missed and provide new lore info i havent seen before
But I was unpleasantly surprised with your criticism towards their speculation presentation. First of all, form of that critique was just rude. Aside of that, again, it's really surprising, because soulsborne youtube lore community enviroment in my opinion is made mostly of creators who present their content with not "it's just a theory" but "look i unpuzzled lore, now you know True Story Of Game X", and TA is quite gentle with their takes and avoides clickbait. And you, if i remember correctly, had no problems with style of presentation of, for example, elden ring mushroom theory?
Furthermore, i think most people who watches TA has no problem distinguishing lore from speculations. It may be wrong impression, but i think the difference is pretty clear. Also i think narrator tries into immersivity and "its just a hypothesis" after every take in my opinion doesnt fit in this vibe. Honestly, i don't think it fits in any speculation video; it's enough to mention that in the beggining once. Yes, TA doesn't have such a disclaimer, but you mentioned yourself that TA's videos are series, and i want to say that in the fisrt ones TA (if i remember correctly) claimed that series are about analysis of game visuals
About visuals. You were unhappy with the fact TA relies so heavily on visuals. It's also surprising, because core of the TA content is analysis of game visuals and searching real life parallels; for me (and i want to think for many others) that's obvious that sometimes game assets are not meant to tell the story and sometimes real life parallels tell you only about inspiration and not about actual game story. You're, like, unhappy with whole idea of the channel?? Why? You mentioned some of the parallels in positive light, but it sounded like you think parallels are meant to be spicy detail added to text analysis, when in the meantime it's not a detail, it's core of the content. Yes, they are not as good in speculations and game text as you are, but they put enormous effort in the other field - visuals and real life parallels. They're incredible good at searching references and that's contributes to community a lot. You want them to be good in both? I'm sure you put a ton of time and effort in your content and you should know what is it like. I can speculate in their case adding this skillset of yours to the big work they are doind already with visuals and references will double the time they spend on videos
It would be interesting to see a version of this topic in a more coherent format. It's become more and more frustrating trying to talk about Elden Ring lore and its mysteries whenever someone came out with something along the line of "Oh but youtuber X said it's like that so it must be like that because he know best." It's like hearing old folks saying "They said it on the television so it must be true."
Fortunately there are some like Crunchy and Smoughtown that acknowledge the existence and the possibilities offered by theories other than their own.
Hard agree.
Back in my day, we looked to Vaati for the “definitive” answers😅… and still do, for older games like dark souls most of our current theories for those games derive from Vaati. We had actual answers that the community would universally accept, even before dlc
Elden Ring is different. So many different cultures, time periods, influences, layers of mythology… to the point where every Loretuber has a unique and singular experience with Elden Rings lore that cannot be compared to other loretubers due to their difference in Culture, upbringing, or respective degrees in Studies.
It’s for this reason, to this day, there isn’t a single RUclipsr that I’d consider who has that “DEFINITIVE” Elden Ring lore… closest there is to somebody who fits those shoes for Elden Ring, imo, is Crunchy. Solely because he’s willing to accept other peoples interpretive findings due to different classes and category of culture and studies etc…
Because of these things, I feel that the best way to NOT be toxic is to respect other peoples opinions on the lore, because they may specialise in particular areas you do not.
Back in the day, it was only really Vaati. With some cameos from Hawkshaw and Quelaag, but for the most part every player didn’t have a “favourite Loretuber” because everyone had Vaati.
Elden Ring gave birth to, and revitalised, many Fromsoft Loretubers… to the point where the Students outgrew the Master (“master” being Vaati, and “students” being the newer Elden Ring lore channels). These loretubers personally identify with aspects of Elden Ring that may not be compatible with everyone else. This division also lead to a divide in the Fromsoft lore community, now everyone has a “favourite Loretuber”
srry for the wall of text, I like speaking into nothing because I’m just weird like that :)
TL;DR - Elden Rings lore is big and complicated. Respect other people’s interpretations of it. you do not know everything
I knew when I first saw TA's videos that his approach towards lore (literary as opposed to taxonomical) would upset a lot of people. Even Vaati's taking pot shots recently. He's precisely interesting enough to threaten people who read item descriptions for a living
I don't think anyone is upset with how TA presents information. In fact, I think it's the one thing people can all agree he does really well. Myself included.
At the end of the day, none of this is all that serious to me. But it's one thing to interpret an item description, piece of art, or architecture within the context of the game differently. It's another to miss basic, explicit story elements that add context to those interpretations.
Before anything else: This kind of critique stop and go picking at individual lines is literally worthless and can be dismissed immediately.
There is no value here, except the self indictment of this creators integrity.
He should have realised that the 10th time he critisized himself for pausing and picking at individual lines.
All that Destiny nonsense making claims about intent and doing this without a sensible reason...
Whats absolutely baffling is his statement about citing other videos making it hard to follow along as its arguably the one key ability that is demonstrated and lacking in every single other lore creator.
I have yet to find even one lore content creator that is able to produce such a remarkable focus on breaking down rationale.
I guess the lack of formal or self education and a somewhat addled lack attention span makes it difficult to follow since you get stuck on half sentences constantly.
The rest is character flaws. Couching positive expressions, constantly applying debatebro terminology and generally assuming that there is something to disprove.
What an astounding display of feckless trifling and ill considered burning of ones integrity.
A fun aside: There is a shocking amount of accuracy in TAs predictions that are very specific.
Also, 5x times the subs in a year + overwhelmingly negative feedback even from your fans. Think I'll download this for posterity.
Destined death having to be sealed to be stolen quite a made up reason. You can easily argue it was sealed BECAUSE it was stolen.
Sealed as in removed from the Elden Ring. The thing which starts the Golden Order.
The Golden Order cannot first come into being upon the Shattering of the Elden Ring because Miquella would have needed to have an actual relationship with Radagon to develop incantations with, and Marika is said to have "long vanished" after the Shattering.
He says that the duality of Marika is something that was founded on faith rather than logic, proceed to play a dialog where somebody said that he did deduce it from the text but cannot believe it...
I certainly enjoy TA's content. But at times it's hard to understand how he arrived at his conclusions. Off hand, there was a bit about Serosh and his origin that didn't make the most sense. And was pretty egregious when you consider how the companions (Blaidd, Serosh, etc) came to be. As the lore there is relatively explicit.
Again, I really enjoy HOW TA presents his theories and the overall premise/format of his videos. But there are more than a few theories that left me scratching my head.
Great stuff! Well thought out.
Why do I get the feeling most the comments don't normally watch TLPs stuff? There's a lot of weird comments here acting like TLP is some parasitic youtuber who is attacking TA, when in reality most of TLPs reaction streams are done with permission from the original creator and are generally neutral or agreeing with their stuff.
They're not done with express permission, but they fall under "fair use"
@@LastProtagonistAh sorry then, you mentioned in streams how you message the creator so they can hop in chat so I assumed that involved asking for permission too.
@@reddeadspartan Oh, right, that. I am in more direct contact with some creators in The Roundtable Hold (they're featured in my channel,) but not all of the content I've been reacting to has been from them specifically. Before I started, I got express permission from the RTH's group of content creators as well as their thoughts in general before I did it
So I'm like, an hour into this vid now and I'm not really grasping the point of it? You're not wrong about TA stating speculations as fact, dodging hard evidence in favour of preserving headcanon narratives, or most of what you're saying but I find that these issues could be levied at almost every creator in the field and they'd stick. Some are just inevitable given the field even. You keep doing you TLP but these vids just aren't for me.
I love these streams that critique TA as I do feel frustrated at times when said, "refer to this to know more" lines. It's like.... you have to repeat the information to cement an argument, explanation, or "story." I also appreciate how you try to challenge the methodology and where TA's info comes from. I do love TA's presentation in his videos, but I feel like they are more hollow due to not having enough information. Thank you for your explanations. You do fumble a little bit in explanation, but your intentions are clear.
Whoa! Using Bart *I cannot shed my fundamentalism even as an atheist* Erhman as a trusted source on religion... That's rich.
Whoa! Using Bart *I cannot shed my fundamentalism even as an atheist* Erhman as a trusted source on religion... That's rich.
Edit: Yeah, a few seconds later and the poor fella is spitting falsehoods because he believed Bart :( Synoptics have a very high Christology, Jesus calls himself "a lord over the Sabbath" for example, which is said to be Lord's alone in the Old Testament. Not to mention extremely clear high Christology in Paul...That is a bold face lie, simply put...
"Trying to base their video on Archaeology instead of a marriage of archaeology, literal text and visual clues."
Literally exactly after that the video does exactly that. Visual clue, item description the whole shebang. Dude doesnt even notice. Too busy pausing and making the next petty ad hominem.
This is actually great fun. Dont think everytime guy critizes the writing and immediately after explains how he has difficulties formulating his own thoughts
The game outright says not everyone sees the erdtree as a glowing tree and those who cannot see grace do not see a glowing golden tree. Id look at other comments about jumping to disagree so quickly. The same could be said about many things you claim in your videos. You can find the implied story if you want the game to literally tell you in text "this is literally what happened"
I'm not going to get mad if people point out issues in my videos. But if "The game outright says not everyone sees the erdtree as a glowing tree and those who cannot see grace do not see a glowing golden tree," please do go ahead and provide the direct source of such claims.
lol why are you lying? Thats never said ingame. It is said that not everyone see grace not that not everone see Erd Tree.
TA is just in love with his own thought process a bit too much.
Incidently the tendency to present speculation so matter of factly as to make it seem factual is why I stopped watching Vaati back in the DS2 era. It is easy to start sentences with "It's possible that..." or "suggests that..." or "one interpretation is..."
To sum up some of TA's videos, they misrepresent or distort facts about the game, or fill in gaps of knowledge with conclusions that there simply isn't enough evidence available and never will be, given how intentionally obscure some of the lore in Elden Ring is, to fit the narrative they're trying to get across to their audience.
This is an excellent, sincere and courageous piece of criticism. I hope TA doesn't take it personally and instead learn from it.
Misinformation, regardless of intention - be it in fiction or in history or in science - should always be countered with a measured response.
This is weird content. You're making whole videos about how TA is not always right but....that's ok. The narrative is intentionally obscure so at times we as a community are all slightly off base when it comes to what actually happened but to re-post someone else's content specifically to poke holes in it is parasitic in my opinion.
People only start with 'nobody can really know' stuff when they're being defensive and touchy.
If Melina says she doesn't like you becoming the Lord of frenzy. That's a textual statement. It's not just whatever your head canon wants it to be.
At no point did he insult TA, he questioned his methodology, something archaeology itself invites and does all the time.
Should we not update what we know about modern day burial sites because it would upset earlier scholars who got details wrong?
I disagree that LP's critique of TA's content here is parasitic, as he isn't simply reposting the video, but offering a lot of transformative commentary here and there. He isn't a large channel like Xqc who just watches videos without saying anything.
@@humblegamer7876 as I mentioned re-posting someone else’s content JUST to poke holes is kinda lame. You won’t see TA re-post LA’s videos JUST to point out what’s wrong. He’s more interested in the answers than who got what wrong. At the end of this video no one was more informed about anything lore wise except what TA got wrong. And his followers making statements like “where does he got his lore from? He must live in the lands between” and LA laughing is just hater behavior but hey different strokes for different folks.
Haven't watched the video yet, so maybe he does get "weird" about it, but i dont see anything wrong in making a critique on someone elses theory, as long as your respectful about it ofc.
@@petro1864you're being parasocial about this and speaking as if your TA's inner conscious and voicing motive+ assuming intent and stuff. That's a lot weirder and further reaching than anything any of us are doing bro
Sadly, my first dislike of any of your videos. Disagreeing and challenging TAs view points is one thing, but criticizing his sentencing and his video flow presentation comes off very poor. Also passive-aggressivly noting your japanese language expertise also comes off as superior and douchy. Slightly immature overall for your whole video in general.
A cringy watch and you should probably consider this in your future critiques. A competition this is not.
Same, and I’m really against disliking videos especially creators that lore hunt the souls series like LP, Vaati, Sinclair, TA, etc. However this will be my first…I don’t want to unsubscribe because that feels extreme, but I do not care for these type of takes. Idk, it feels passive aggressive and nit-picky and needlessly judgmental. Everyone has their own head cannon, thoughts, and methodology of expressing themselves and how they arrived at the conclusion they did. This feels personal and it comes off as a bit jealous, I’m sure he will disagree with our opinion.
But….
Speaking about run on sentences, trying to debunk another creator’s opinion, and having more experience…like what is this. A big problem with the From community is that due to the vagueness of the lore, it leaves 90% of the events up to interpretation. But this inevitably leads to content creators dissecting the opinion/s of another content creators. TA dissected the game, LP dissected TA’s dissection of the game.
If you can't take criticism in how you present or your sentence structure then you have a fragile ego, and that is a foible of yours, not a slight of the critic. There was nothing hostile about this video.
@@trisbane4086 never said hostile. Learn the difference. And who is Last to be critiquing and evaluating someone else's work and grammar? He's not a English college professor that I'm aware.
Maybe you and him should check your fragile egos bud.
@@13mrservon Someone doesn't have to be an English professor to critique anything, the difference is in the credibility and merit of the critic - if they don't know what they're talking about their opinion is of less value.
But seeing as how these are both content creators specifically about Elden Ring, his expertise qualifies him to make a critique in my book.
It doesn't matter how self-effacing and anodyne he had made this video, there would still be people (like you) complaining he made it at all. Therefore, frankly, learn to take criticism.
"Never said hostile."
I really don't care what words you used. You said passive-aggressive and cringe. It's tantamount to the same thing.
You know TA is a man, right?
EDIT: lol Y'all lore people taking my comment way too literally. The IRONY
Souls Lore hunter drama lol
Wikipedia nerds
It's hardly a drama. At no point did he insult TA, or make it personal--
he questioned his methodology, something archaeology itself invites and does all the time.
Should we not update what we know about modern day burial sites because it would upset earlier scholars who got details wrong?
And where is the drama?
What drama? Weirdo
the"issues that add up in this video" seem to just be a comprehension error on your part
His videos are better produced so he's right.
And Vaati is rightest of all.
@@LastProtagonist wrongest of all*
LP is bae and TA is whack.Nah, seriously I've picked up on the problems u brought up in ur commentary and it kinda left me with a bad taste in my mouth. Overall i think most of the real-life stuff he bringa up is super cool and interesting, it just that connections he draws between things ingame and reallity don't align with the internal history of the game's world as much as he'd like to admit.
Folks like you don’t like TA’s videos because they’re actually compelling and entertaining while yours are awkward um akshuallys in front of a screen share
Oh no. You got me!
lol
That's like assuming you only like TAs videos because you think listening to thirty seconds of classical music makes you smart lol
This is entertainment and TA is a much better artist and storyteller than most of these nervous lore guys
@@erichowens85 Huh, you’d think people with the “it doesn’t matter if something is true or accurate, only if it’s entertaining” mentality would have better things to watch than RUclips lore videos.
@@erichowens85 Do you have split personalities? Why are you insulting LP in this thread and then supporting him and this video in another one?
I’m watching someone start a fist fight over someone else’s recent D&D success
Sorry. cynical assumption on my part.
Kinda like assuming someone is deliberately deceptive and malicious over your inferences from their Elden ring lore interpretations!?!
DUDE lol
WHAT!?
Not at all what was said you're drama farming