It's not really important so I don't wish to derail the thread further by disproving the "Daisy = Absolute" or "Daisy = Tadpole" beliefs. This was all disproven during Early Access and especially with full release, so it's pointless in my opinion to discuss that.

Point of the story is; the in-game lore during Early Access certainly used to perfectly connect the narrative of the Emperor being the one to intentionally tadpole the party and then project himself as the enticing Daisy while inside the artefact to protect his Chosen as they take on the Absolute, since Early Access characters along with their motivations and personalities were far more rougher around the edges than they are today, so such crude methods were a perfect fit.

Unfortunately the rewrites streamlined the narrative to make it comprehensible and likable to the general public and by doing so punched way too many holes into the consistency of the lore and its characters, which is why the cinematic today contradicts the actual in-game lore and cannot be taken as fact because the party quite vividly remembers their parasite insertion and the mindflayer who infected them, so it cannot be the Emperor anymore no matter how one tries to roleplay it.

Personally I enjoyed the narrative of Early Access far more as I found it fascinatingly consistent and wonderfully in-depth with danger looming around every corner. It truly felt like a very serious, intricate and mature gritty story with severe consequences that really wanted to explore the theme of not knowing who to trust.

[Linked Image from bg3.wiki] Minthara's Compendium Of Issues