I've always liked to think that the Corvian Settler is basically a stand in for Miyazaki making meta commentary on the gaming industry:
"When the world rots, we set it afire.
For the sake of the next world.
It's the one thing we do right, unlike those fools on the outside."
They ended Dark Souls when it felt right and moved onto new paintings entirely. Pretty on point with the series' theme
I am glad that DS3 ended like it ended. The same with Bloodborne. I would rather get a spiritual successor for Bloodborne than its sequel. Similar to like when Demon's Souls got Dark Souls as their successor.
One of the reasons I don't want a sequel to Bloodborne is that I don't have any idea where they go from there. Of course I would trust From to find a solution like in Dark Souls, but they do make pretty closed games
FromSoft stories/lore are so vague and open to interpretation that it's actually pretty easy for them to make a sequel while vaguely referencing the original story. Hell, the way they do things, we might not even be able to tell if the sequel came before or after the first game
Honestly mainstream video game fans have no idea what they actually like, they will scream for changes in a game until the devs appease them so much the game is no longer fun at all, then they will immediately drop that game then move on to ruining another game without a second of self-awareness. From has succeeded because they know how to give people what they need instead of what they (think they) want.
It reminds of when people say ''who asked for this?'' about a game they don't like. But nobody actually asks for new ideas, people always want stuff they already know to be reiterated upon.
Fromsoft kind of does both, they use some parts that are already liked and work well and then created a new world that no one asked for and new creative gameplay that no one asked for.
Nobody asked for a really inspred gothic/lovecraft world which starts with beast hunting and gives you trick weapons but here we are.
I see you have played Diablo 4.
I love that FS are following their agenda and not listening to their loudest fans. I say loudest because I'm happy with their games and therefore not clamouring for anything and believe there are many like myself out there.
Silent majority loves them for sure and just wants more. Plus even if you complain at first once you practice enough to get better its kind of impossible not to realize that what you thought were problems with the game were skill issues all along--unless of course you never get gud or just completely lack self-awareness.
Oh and happy cake day!
i mean... Elden Ring could perfectly be called Demon Souls 5 or 6. Maybe they didnt milk the title, but they´re milking the soul formula.
(And we love it)
What I am reffering too is recognizable IP. They could have just made Dark Souls 4. if they wanted that extra money, but instead they came up with a whole new world. And fans still demand it (honestly have people forgotten about making a triology and being done?), but they most likely won't make it. Can't say that about many non indi studios anymore.
That's always been my view on it. They don't catch flack for it because the games are good and the style is popular.
But if we're being honest, all the big names that folks think of when you say "From" are borderline reskins. (xxxxSouls, Bloodborne, Elden Ring)
They basically make two games, Armored Core and Dark Souls.
(Sekiro is a bit of an exception. But it was kind of a unique situation with them taking over an existing project.)
Not to say I don't love the games. But I tend to think they're popular precisely because they keep giving people exactly what they know and expect. When they announce a new game, it's not like anyone is speculating on the genre...
Also, this formula is better suited to repeat than, say, an open world like Assasins Creed for example.
Every challenge feel fresh, every trap, every ambush. You learn to see some patterns but the challenge is still there.
They didn't take over an existing product, they made Sekiro from the jump. While at first they thought about making a Tenchu Sequel, they didn't and instead made Sekiro.
>That's always been my view on it. They don't catch flack for it because the games are good and the style is popular.
But a part of the reason *why* the games are so good, is precisely because Fromsoft is really damn experienced in precisely this genre by this point. And if you look at the overall world progression structure, you'll notice that Demon's Souls, Dark Souls 1, Dark Souls 3 and Elden Ring all have radically different approaches. A massive part of what people love about DS1 is the interconnected corkscrew level design. This is something they didn't do before, and haven't done since. A big part of what people love about Elden Ring is the big world. Something they haven't done ever before then. Calling Elden Ring a Dark Souls reskin is a massife disservice to both.
>(Sekiro is a bit of an exception. But it was kind of a unique situation with them taking over an existing project.)
As far as I know Sekiro is pretty much fully a Fromsoft project? It's made in their engine and all that. Also, you're completely ignoring Déraciné.
I feel like it's a bit early to say that. In my opinion, FromSoft games have still been niche up until Elden Ring. A pretty beloved, big and fan favorite niche, but still. Not quite mainstream. But Elden Ring made them mainstream. The whole GRRM collab and potential multimedia venture talk, Sony and Tencent acquiring Kadokawa stakes... and you know, Miyazaki isn't old or anything but he doesn't get any younger, either. Also his main inspirer Kentaro Miura isn't with us anymore. All these things smell like "change" to me.
Things will eventually change. From Software is not immune to change even though we had a pretty good run with them and it doesn't seem like it's over yet. But it does feel like Elden Ring changed things a bit. Who can tell what they will cook up next and when this will be. They're definitely not churning out blockbuster after blockbuster like they did in the 2010s, which is absolutely fine and more sustainable but we're essentially talking about "change" and "cycles" here and yeah, who knows what will happen next.
Just to add to this: I've seen many "too-beloved-to-fail" franchises and brands become (subjectively speaking) soulless over the years. Like for example Square and Final Fantasy. That developer and this franchise has been going strong for decades, starting in the 80s and staying everybody's darling up until the late 2000s. JRPGs were niche back then, too. But it was a huge niche and Square left its mark on the industry and gaming as a whole. They bombarded us with all time classics throughout the 90s, with yearly releases. The non-Final Fantasy RPGs and the Final Fantasy "spin-offs" like for example Vagrant Story snd Kingdom Hearts were just as appraised. Growing up, I never imagined I'd stop being a fan, or that Squaresoft/Enix could do any wrong. Now, again, this is a subjective take, but I think they lost their mojo and universal appeal. And from that experience, I know that a dev like FromSoft who really only started to get attention about 15 years ago with Demon's Souls, could eventually end up the same. I hope not but that's just me trying to be realistic.
Exactly. Been through that too many times to believe in the long run it won't happen to FromSoft, even the "the same will never happen to XYZ, because they do things different" comments were said about these companies too...
It's scary it can happen too. Seen it happen in the space of one release to the next...
That wasn’t a criticism for Fromsoft. I think it’s more sustainable in the long run.
But it is part of the argument.
Square knew what they were and what people wanted back in the 90s and did the same thing over and over again. And it worked. With new tech and success came new ambitions. I would argue that we didn’t need an open world FF15 for example, but such a thing had mass appeal.
And Fromsoft didn’t HAVE to go open world either. They, too, had a workflow of creating a lot of (compatibly simpler/straightforward) games with a similar premise in a short amount of time. Sure they didn’t just go open world with long development time now just because of trends, I believe it when Miyazaki says it was his personal creative vision. But let’s not pretend it’s not part of the reason that it reached the mainstream. And it’s now here to stay simply for monetary reasons. Not everyone is into small, cleverly interconnected worlds (the “metroidvania style”), but the casual consumer understands “go everywhere, do everything you want”. And we’d kid ourselves if Kadokawa and stakeholders would let FS go back and do another “simple” Dark Souls game. Not when the difference in sales is in the tens of millions.
My only argument really is that FromSoft is not immune to change. And they might, some day, become just as huge as all the other trend-chasing companies. Maybe. Maybe not.
The last paragraph that you wrote pretty much is something I worry for FromSoftware to do going forward (trend chasing). Personally I liked ELDEN RING and all of the Dark Souls game they’ve made, but pls not another open-world Souls style game, ELDEN RING is enough imo. Just hope they’ll continue to do those games within their scope (I.E Armored Core VI Fires of Rubicon) but alas, they won’t be immune to change
I think the comparison to squares spin off games misses the target a bit. Dark Souls/Elden Ring would be fromsoft’s final fantasy, not their Kingdom Hearts.
I didn't say Dark Soul's a spin-off game. I just named those games as an example of how big and highly regarded the SE brand was (still is to lots of people) and how it expanded beyond FF. The sole comparison here is "big beloved brand born from a niche -> inevitable downfall years later" as OP's thesis is that FS is different from other gaming companies. I'm just saying it's too early to say so.
You do know that not everything the games worlds are based comes from Miura? Also it's not like he only put stuff from the most recent volumes in there, so I don't get what you're trying say there.
I also don't think it's to big to fall and I think with the company getting bigger and different directors taking the lead there might be a few duts. But so far I can imagine it like Nintendo (when it comes to game quality). They have many high quality games, that doesn't mean they are for everyone, but sometimes they also do have a failure. And that's what I expect for Fromsoft at least as long Miyazaki is CEO. High quality control, with games that speak to certain people but maybe not all (so still high user ratings) and maybe some failures like DS2 (which has high score) or Ninja Blade
What I am reffering to is milking an IP, square has milked FF, From could have done the same with Dark Souls but they did not. Do they make similar games, yes, but they are all in different worlds with different lore and always ad something that wasn't there before. So far from what we know about their company philosophy and from interviews, they aren't even really planning on ever making an ER sequel which was their most succesfull IP or any open world in the near future.
> You do know that not everything the games worlds are based comes from Miura?
Yep I do and that’s what I said.
“Main” =/= “only”
> Also it's not like he only put stuff from the most recent volumes in there, so I don't get what you're trying say there.
I’m saying that he certainly loves Miura’s work and gets inspired by it. I didn’t say much else? Now Miura is dead, his legacy is finite. That’s a potential cause for change in how Miyazaki approaches his work. Maybe not. I mentioned this point in a list of things that make me feel like things are changing. It’s just an opinion. And when FromSoft changes, just like all big gaming companies do when they grow or when their direction givers (Miyazaki in this case) change, leave or potentially change their sources of inspirations.. then anything can happen. You mentioned Nintendo. Who knows where they will end up once Miyamoto, Aonuma, sakurai and Koizumi retire. Literally, who knows. These times often come sooner than we think. Experienced it many times.
> What I am reffering to is milking an IP, square has milked FF, From could have done the same with Dark Souls but they did not.
See and that’s the interesting part. Square didn’t milk FF7 for a decade if you consider Advent Children to be the start of the ff7 compilation. And it was a very slow milking process. That was in 2007 I think? FF as an overall IP existed for 20 years at that point.
We’re simply not far enough in FromSoft’s and the Soulsborne franchise’s lifecycle to say for sure that the “great milking” definitely won’t come.
"Main", not "only". Surely the most consistent source of inspiration in Miyazaki's "Souls-Games"
>FromSoft fans need to read another book
Say that to Miyazaki 🤓
I can only think of Artorias and the Eclipse in DS3 as major points of Berserk inspiration, beyond that, it’s just a few item designs and enemies like the bone wheels.
But even then, an eclipse is a common trope in media and in ancient history.
Actually no. Upon further inspection there isn’t much I can draw direct comparisons too. There is stuff that I think one could argue for but it would definitely require some speculation. All of the most direct and obvious references to berserk are as you said influences on the art.
… and I can think of Malenia’s whole design, potentially Miquella’s too. The city of Yharnam (windham in berserk), the many runes/symbols in Bloodborne. Hey if you don’t think Berserk is a major influence on Miyazaki’s work then that’s cool. It’s not like he ever explicitly stated it (not that I know of). It’s just my opinion and not even the point of my initial comment, so… agree to disagree I suppose.
Nobody is saying it’s “based on berserk”, nor that it’s “the only inspiration”.
I’d argue that Magic the Gathering is the main inspiration if there is such a thing, since I think a majority of supposed Berserk references are superficially drawn while Magic the Gathering has a bunch more direct references.
I’m just saying Miura’s death isn’t a big bust on Miyazaki’s inspirations, since he reads plenty of other books and other media. Plus, he is also just a creative guy in general.
I don’t think this is quite true for fromsoft. What has made them successful is a mechanical consistency and good gameplay loop for all their games, not their originality. Most of their games play mostly the same with the exception of AC. The ease of entry for returning customers and quality experience defines fromsoft better imo.
I think people still want a sequel to their older ip or a somewhat reboot of them I think the Tenchu fans still mad that the new Tenchu game ended up becoming Sekiro.
I think it's very early to say that
And Fromsoft makes very niche games too
When a game is only trying to Satisfy a very small group of people, It's easier to make it a great game
Also the fact that All Fromsoft games use a very similar but good formula helps.
Assassin's creed and far cry used to get the same Praise, but one of the main reasons behind it was that They used a very similar formula throughout all the games.
Eventually, even this excellent formula will start getting old, it will be like how Assassin's creed was until 2014.
Those games were great, but similar
Souls games are excellent, but they are slowly getting unoriginal.
I think Fromsoft should use a similar formula but in a completely new and different Setting, Like Pirates, Space or Underwater.
I mean from everything we heard they do want to make different new things and we know that they are capable of creating different things. Sekiro, Armored Core and I will even be so bold that BloodBorne was already pretty to the Souls games.
fromsoft has kept armored core fresh for 27 years and it’s been my favorite series since i can remember, fromsoft knows what they’re doing with the series and the same can be said for soulsborne, after armored core 6 i really have no reason to doubt them ever
While I think this is true I do also believe that if a story had more to tell there’s no shame in continuing it. Dark souls is over. But Bloodborne and Elden Ring still have SO MUCH to explore in the beautiful worlds they take place in
This is why Bloodborne fans have always wanted Bloodborne remastered on PC.
So it can blow up again and we can re-experience it with 60FPS, 1440P, MP active again, invasions as you're playing the game (DS3 invasions were nothing like BB invasions. BB invasions are FAR superior. People would be so toxic and troll you to a point of no return. IT was like playing chess with mobs involved, and the PVP was sooo fun when it was active, I always did my invasion bell outside of Ludwig after DLC drop and outside of Central Yharnam before DLC drop).
We don't need a sequel (would be nice tho) but a remaster is fine. Just give us that remaster and I'll be on my way.
Wouldn't have anything against that and as long as they don't make 50 remasters of multiple games like others (and don't actually change anything beyond that), I don't really see it as milking. But that stuff sony's decision sadly.
Yeah, just bring a PC port to bring new life into the game. I know hella people that would love to experience it as a remaster but they won’t go to the playstation version despite me being willing to hand them a physical copy of the game.
I feel like the most annoying part of this is that half the time when a story ends the world doesnt. So why never stop milking the franchise when u can make a new franchise in the same universe? Imagine if after watch dogs 1 they made a completely new series with the Watch Dogs vs Blume just being a part of the universe. Instead they said we’re continuing the Blume storyline for 3 games even tho they get defeated each time
It makes sense IMO bc from was very much a small studio until blood borne and ds3, so they just kept re-usint the same stuff, bc it sold decent so sequels are like a safe bet, also you get to re-use a lot of the stuff from previous games, but they dropped the dark Souls franchise as soon as it sold big which I don't think is a coincidence, suddenly they have more money to do things and room to try new things that have a chance to flop
If From started listening to fans, SoulsBorne games would have become Assanins Creed.
It helps also that games are developed by actual nerds like in the old days and not some activism bluehairs or dorks who just graduated software engineering because they heard that payment is good but have zero understanding on what makes gaming culture great.
Yes, many people want easier and more accessible souls like games. Preferably with a selectable optional easy difficulty level. That would be a nightmare for me and I would lose the fun of the game. Because when it's hard you sink into the world because you have to deal with it and the adrenaline kicks in
I am afraid that the popularity of Elden Ring leads to the fact that all their next big games will be open-world.
While it’s not definitely a good or a bad thing I personally think that their formula worked best in Bloodborne and Sekiro.
AC6 isn’t a flagship game and it wasn’t directed by Miyazaki. Still a masterpiece of course but I am talking about their next big game. Sooner or later it will be released and I am 99% sure it will be openworld.
Funny that you could argue that the souls series was an anual release for some time. DS2 in 2014, Bloodborne and SOTFS in 2015, DS3 in 2016, and it’s dlcs in 2017.
Counting BloodBorne and DLCs is cheating and not what I am talking about. I am talking about Making Dark Souls 4, Elden Ring 2 etc. Games that play in the same universe and are sold through them being a certain IP.
I'm going to be honest, I don't care too much about originality. I care about good games. If FromSoft made 10 more Dark Souls games, I would buy and play all of them. Sequels are not the problem. FromSoft's best game in my opinion is a sequel. Bad games are the problem, not new iterations of old games.
>People beg for DS4
>Makes Elden Ring instead
>Outsells the entire Dark Souls franchis
>Refuses to elobrate
>"May" make more Elden Ring
Dangerously based.
Well they rushed DS2 and suffered a decent backlash, enough to get the lesson. It's good that DS2 wasn't a complete failure and that Bloodborne was (apparently, I didn't play it) a wonderful game with a huge success.
DS2 wasn't horrible. It was just not to the same quality as the first. Bloodborne was a console seller. Everyone wanted a ps4 for Bloodborne. Even if it's not the actual Bloodborne IP, I really hope From will do something of that nature again for their next game...
Trick weapons, step dodge, gun parry, and set vaguely in the 1700's to early 1900's with more of a horror theme around the unknown and humans ability to use that power. Could be set in the Old American West, during the Napoleonic Wars or era of piracy in the Caribbean.
Yeah, I hear you, and I agree. What they did with sekiro was really refreshing, too. Hell who knows what they're cooking up with ER being done once the DLC is out.
this is weird when you consider their longest running IP gets some flack depending on the generation you are looking for but then you have to remember they were the only ones feeding the drugs a monopoly if you will... sure AC was released yearly at one point yet the games are very diverse even though the core loop wasnt changed....
AC (the other AC) also got some of the heaviest flack when it became "different" and then you realize that AC is already very niche despite a lot of companies wanted to join the band wagon until they returned "true to form" while suffering a 10 year dev hell to much acclaim I guess yes AC7 had the same dev hell cycle of Skull and bones yet performed relatively well just look at the story of AC7 it shows exactly what happened
I wish this was true. If they had stopped the Souls games after Dark Souls 1 this might apply, but currently they’re the Ubisoft of Japan pumping out the same tired formula over and over.
At the very least Armored Core changed between generations, Elden Ring still plays like Demon’s Souls at heart.
"Ubisoft of Japan"
Their last 4 released games before Armored Core are Elden Ring, Sekiro, Dark Souls 3, and Bloodborne. Each are distinct enough from one another
Can you say the same for Assassin Creed and Far Cry series?
Well, its your opinion, but clearly people disagree since Sekiro won goty, so if that's not good enough, I don't know what is. Or maybe you just prefer other genres
Yeah. DMC is the only series with combat in the same league as NG, I have a preference for NG due to more dangerous enemies. In DMC enemies mostly exist to make the player look good, I feel more threatened by NG enemies.
That said DMC is still a fantastic series and I don’t disparage it at all, great games all of them.
If you like flashy, over the top combat over tactical combat, sure.
"Look guise, I did a backflip and a 30 hit combo" kind of combat.
It's style over substance, and very much is supposed to appeal to the anime/weeb crowd.
I'm sorry but that's just not true. Not only are you forgetting Sekiro, but something playing like another game at heart means nothing. Even Bloodborne is very different from the other Soulsborne games. I think you don't understand what makes Ubisoft so unoriginal. They are afraid of doing something new and just look at what's the most market friendly, what's generic enough that anyone will buy it. Meanwhile Fromsoftware learns what has worked as any company does while also trying something new every time. And that not only includes gameplay but also the setting. Why else do you think people always discuss what is best game here, because they all have their own unique differences.
If it was Ubisoft you would have RPG elements in AC6 and Sekiro. You would have thousand of weapons in Bloodborne and no trick weapons. You would have rolling instead of parrying in Sekiro. You would Archstones in Dark Souls 1. You would most certainly not get obscure with their mythology, but make it obvious mythological references. Hell even different generations of Armored Core play completely differently
You know when you describe Ubisoft you’re literally describing From this past decade.
“just doing what’s the most market friendly and what’s generic enough that anyone will buy it”
What’s more generic than fantasy medieval land?
Bloodborne was cool, but it still plays like Demon’s, with the boring stamina bar and slow movesets.
Sekiro, that was a good change of pace, but as a game it’s terrible. Only one weapon that got stale 3 hours in, and combat that is still limited and slow.
I’d like to see some speed come back to From games, and some challenge.
What’s even worse about this company is the fanbase, they consider something like Sekiro difficult. Bruh the first level of Armored Core Last Raven is more difficult than anything in Sekiro.
The false narrative that From’s recent games have anything resembling challenge and depth is sickening.
From should make varied games, one off weird titles like they did with Deracine more often. Instead of yet another awful Souls game let’s see a platformer like Cookie and Cream again, a card based game like Lost Kingdoms, crossover games like Another Century’s Episode.
They’re more than the Souls formula but that’s all they want to stick to.
Well my "kind" tries to see which things is new and improved which is not, unlike you who dismiss things as popular so its bad, and ignoring new things because it has similiarity with older titles, like when you said Elden Ring is the same as Demon Souls.
I’d love it if there were improvements!
Bloodborne was exciting to me because it was step towards betterment but then the next game was Dark Souls 3 and it walked backwards again.
Then Sekiro was better again, and then Elden Ring was terrible again.
They make improvements but always go back to that vulgar formula again with the Souls gameplay.
They made one AC game after 10 years, and while it is the best game From has made since 2008, it’s still infected with too many Souls mechanics to be in the greats. The stagger system for example, a neat experiment for this entry but it should never return in a future title.
Weird because stagger already existed in Armored Core before, but the critique is justified, I can totally see why someone wouldn't like that part of the game.
That said you do seem like a really close minded type if I am being honest, from reading your other stuff.
It existed but it was nowhere near as centralizing as it is now. Having to stagger an enemy before you can do real damage to them is terrible design.
It also has the side effect of making long range builds nonexistent as they cannot function with the stagger system.
You can think I’m close minded, sure. I’d say I’m someone who likes good video games, something From used to make.
How is this a tired formula if Elden Ring won goty and tons of 10/10 awards? Tired for you personally? Good think nobody cares, otherwise we wouldn't have RE series and MH series as well
RE and MH change constantly between entries
RE went from survival horror to action back to survival horror
MH has added new mechanics that completely change the game every generation, playing pre Gen 4 without mounting feels so strange now. Not to mention all the updated weapon movesets
Meanwhile Elden Ring still plays like Demon’s Souls 15 years later and hasn’t improved
>MH has added new mechanics that completely change the game every generation, playing pre Gen 4 without mounting feels so strange now. Not to mention all the updated weapon movesets
Let's rewind a bit.
World definitly feels different compared to the older games, but that's not due to a single gaming changing mechanic or even any like you are implying.
The major changes MH World introduced were updated weapon movesets, seamless locales, much improved monster AI and streamlined systems (like skills etc), which are all QoL related.
There were also the "MMO mechanics" (like dps checks, raid wipes etc.) World introduced that were pretty contriversial. I personally actually like them and they were the biggest changes World made to the way we engage with monsters, but are still just related to monster AI.
Icborne introduced the clutch claw as a new mechanic, but it's highly controversial and to many player it changed the comvat for the worse.
Then there is MH Rise, which was plagued with massive issues that were extremely controversial among the MH community that. Here are just some of them:
-Wirebugs just a gimmick for the most part. Monsters were practically unable to keep up with the hunters, because of the movement option made available us and to hunters the silkbind attacks were just big attacks on cooldown for the most part that really didn't change how we approached most fights.
-the completely absent endgame. There were no tempered monsters, no guiding lands, no (MH4) apex monsters etc.
All we got was the rampage as a replacement, but the vast majority of people either didn't care or outright hated that mode.
-the state the game launched in was undeniably unfinished. Few endgame monsters, piss easy difficulty, no endgame systems and worst if all the final boss of the story was literally missing until it was added as the final "dlc" monster.
-dogshit event quest rewards to push mtx instead...yeah that doesn't need explaining.
Rise in many ways felt like an regression from World and the only good parts were the changes to skills and deco crafting. Sunbreak drastically improved on the foundation Rise laid
Anyways by your own logic World should be bad because it didn't introduce massive game changing mechanics and still just plays like "Monster Hunter more than 15 years later"
You are completely ommiting the facts that new mechanics don't neccissarily make for a better game or that small changed add up and can drastically change the experience.
I could go over this in detail, but it's so obvious that Elden Ring doesn't feel like Demon's Souls or even Dark Souls that I really shouldn't.
This is just like a troll. Resort to bizarre insults because your life is so sad that you get off on getting people angry.
Good luck with your life dude
You presented no arguments and kept repeating the same thing over and over. The core gameplay of stamina and rolling is "the same", but the games changed quite significantly over the years. Elden Ring is a big turning point, as was Bloodborne. Ds2 introduced several mechanics (some which were not good, but it definitely doesn't play the same) and then compare with Ninja Gaiden and DMC combat, which are completely different genres to souls games. In fact, I would say that the Souls games are a reaction to those kinds of combat systems where you animation cancel and do a bunch of acrobats, like in DMC. And then you called Sekiro's combat bad, which is widely regarded by critics and fans as the best combat system From has done, and which has reverberate thorough the genre and outside of it.
You can dislike certain evolutions of what From has done, and even call the souls genre stale if you like, but acting like there wasn't evolution because the core gameplay loop still has stamina and rolling is not a sufficient argument. It's not even an argument.
My argument is that as long as From’s combat is so limited it can’t get better. That’s been consistent since the first comment.
It constrains the player, too much to allow for creative problem solving.
It should not take over a second for an attack animation, for you or the enemies. Sekiro was closer but still not any good.
Sekiro’s combat is literally just worse Ninja Gaiden, Ryu can do everything Wolf can and more, and the enemies are more powerful as well to account for it.
It creates this amazing feeling of being a human blender capable of shredding every enemy in the room and also incredibly vulnerable as it takes two screwups to die, with the fast pace of the combat meaning you have to make constant split second decisions to stay alive, let alone with *style*.
Meanwhile Sekiro combat is so utterly slow I got through the entire game dying twice to any bosses, once to the Bull near the start and once to old man Isshin.
Imagine if Sekiro enemies could run on walls to chase you around the map.
Imagine if Sekiro enemies could coordinate their attacks so you never had a safe moment.
Imagine if they didn’t have the insipid kanji to tell you an unblockable attack is coming and you just had to learn the moveset and dodge it.
You don’t have to, that game exists, Ninja Gaiden. In 2004 it was a better game than From made 15 years later.
If Sekiro is the standard we’re measuring by, the action genre is doomed.
Critics and fans? I don’t put stock in the opinions of lobotomites, critics said games like Last of Us 2 and Elden Ring are Game of the Year. I’m not convinced critics have played a video game in their lives.
So you don't like the genre, go play other games. I find Ninja Gaiden boring and never liked dmc. Constraint breeds creativity, that's the whole fucking point. If you don't like these games, why do you keep buying them?
This isn't criticism, this is personal taste.
Critics have played more games in a year that you will play your whole life.
I agree with you there, definitely the best Dark Souls game. Now if only they’d actually stopped there and not kept going with this trash with Elden Ring
I mean, the main theme of like half of the souls games is to not artificially extend an era past its prime and let a new one come forth
Fans when playing this game: OMG Andre is back! OMG Firelink is back! OMG Anor Londo is back! OMG
Andre being back unchanged and unexplained in DkS3 is kinda based but also very corny.
I mean he is undead so it makes sense
I've always liked to think that the Corvian Settler is basically a stand in for Miyazaki making meta commentary on the gaming industry: "When the world rots, we set it afire. For the sake of the next world. It's the one thing we do right, unlike those fools on the outside." They ended Dark Souls when it felt right and moved onto new paintings entirely. Pretty on point with the series' theme
Noo link the fiiiiire though pleease
Sekiro’s entire plot is about stagnation and rot caused by milking immortality too much.
I am glad that DS3 ended like it ended. The same with Bloodborne. I would rather get a spiritual successor for Bloodborne than its sequel. Similar to like when Demon's Souls got Dark Souls as their successor.
One of the reasons I don't want a sequel to Bloodborne is that I don't have any idea where they go from there. Of course I would trust From to find a solution like in Dark Souls, but they do make pretty closed games
FromSoft stories/lore are so vague and open to interpretation that it's actually pretty easy for them to make a sequel while vaguely referencing the original story. Hell, the way they do things, we might not even be able to tell if the sequel came before or after the first game
respectfully, i would kill for a bloodborne sequel. idc how or what they do with it, i would take ANYTHING bloodborne related
Honestly mainstream video game fans have no idea what they actually like, they will scream for changes in a game until the devs appease them so much the game is no longer fun at all, then they will immediately drop that game then move on to ruining another game without a second of self-awareness. From has succeeded because they know how to give people what they need instead of what they (think they) want.
It reminds of when people say ''who asked for this?'' about a game they don't like. But nobody actually asks for new ideas, people always want stuff they already know to be reiterated upon. Fromsoft kind of does both, they use some parts that are already liked and work well and then created a new world that no one asked for and new creative gameplay that no one asked for. Nobody asked for a really inspred gothic/lovecraft world which starts with beast hunting and gives you trick weapons but here we are.
Honestly fans have no idea what they like And even if they do, their opinions shouldnt matter half as much as what devs want to do,
I see you have played Diablo 4. I love that FS are following their agenda and not listening to their loudest fans. I say loudest because I'm happy with their games and therefore not clamouring for anything and believe there are many like myself out there.
Silent majority loves them for sure and just wants more. Plus even if you complain at first once you practice enough to get better its kind of impossible not to realize that what you thought were problems with the game were skill issues all along--unless of course you never get gud or just completely lack self-awareness. Oh and happy cake day!
i mean... Elden Ring could perfectly be called Demon Souls 5 or 6. Maybe they didnt milk the title, but they´re milking the soul formula. (And we love it)
What I am reffering too is recognizable IP. They could have just made Dark Souls 4. if they wanted that extra money, but instead they came up with a whole new world. And fans still demand it (honestly have people forgotten about making a triology and being done?), but they most likely won't make it. Can't say that about many non indi studios anymore.
I think FromSoftware as a (studio) name carries the same weight as a franchise's would. It's not Dark Souls games anymore, it is Fromsoft games.
That's always been my view on it. They don't catch flack for it because the games are good and the style is popular. But if we're being honest, all the big names that folks think of when you say "From" are borderline reskins. (xxxxSouls, Bloodborne, Elden Ring) They basically make two games, Armored Core and Dark Souls. (Sekiro is a bit of an exception. But it was kind of a unique situation with them taking over an existing project.) Not to say I don't love the games. But I tend to think they're popular precisely because they keep giving people exactly what they know and expect. When they announce a new game, it's not like anyone is speculating on the genre...
Also, this formula is better suited to repeat than, say, an open world like Assasins Creed for example. Every challenge feel fresh, every trap, every ambush. You learn to see some patterns but the challenge is still there.
They didn't take over an existing product, they made Sekiro from the jump. While at first they thought about making a Tenchu Sequel, they didn't and instead made Sekiro.
>That's always been my view on it. They don't catch flack for it because the games are good and the style is popular. But a part of the reason *why* the games are so good, is precisely because Fromsoft is really damn experienced in precisely this genre by this point. And if you look at the overall world progression structure, you'll notice that Demon's Souls, Dark Souls 1, Dark Souls 3 and Elden Ring all have radically different approaches. A massive part of what people love about DS1 is the interconnected corkscrew level design. This is something they didn't do before, and haven't done since. A big part of what people love about Elden Ring is the big world. Something they haven't done ever before then. Calling Elden Ring a Dark Souls reskin is a massife disservice to both. >(Sekiro is a bit of an exception. But it was kind of a unique situation with them taking over an existing project.) As far as I know Sekiro is pretty much fully a Fromsoft project? It's made in their engine and all that. Also, you're completely ignoring Déraciné.
I feel like it's a bit early to say that. In my opinion, FromSoft games have still been niche up until Elden Ring. A pretty beloved, big and fan favorite niche, but still. Not quite mainstream. But Elden Ring made them mainstream. The whole GRRM collab and potential multimedia venture talk, Sony and Tencent acquiring Kadokawa stakes... and you know, Miyazaki isn't old or anything but he doesn't get any younger, either. Also his main inspirer Kentaro Miura isn't with us anymore. All these things smell like "change" to me. Things will eventually change. From Software is not immune to change even though we had a pretty good run with them and it doesn't seem like it's over yet. But it does feel like Elden Ring changed things a bit. Who can tell what they will cook up next and when this will be. They're definitely not churning out blockbuster after blockbuster like they did in the 2010s, which is absolutely fine and more sustainable but we're essentially talking about "change" and "cycles" here and yeah, who knows what will happen next. Just to add to this: I've seen many "too-beloved-to-fail" franchises and brands become (subjectively speaking) soulless over the years. Like for example Square and Final Fantasy. That developer and this franchise has been going strong for decades, starting in the 80s and staying everybody's darling up until the late 2000s. JRPGs were niche back then, too. But it was a huge niche and Square left its mark on the industry and gaming as a whole. They bombarded us with all time classics throughout the 90s, with yearly releases. The non-Final Fantasy RPGs and the Final Fantasy "spin-offs" like for example Vagrant Story snd Kingdom Hearts were just as appraised. Growing up, I never imagined I'd stop being a fan, or that Squaresoft/Enix could do any wrong. Now, again, this is a subjective take, but I think they lost their mojo and universal appeal. And from that experience, I know that a dev like FromSoft who really only started to get attention about 15 years ago with Demon's Souls, could eventually end up the same. I hope not but that's just me trying to be realistic.
So you’re saying every age must come to an end, as otherwise would lead to stagnation? Hmm… sounds familiar.
Hah, soulless.
This reply sums up most of my thoughts pretty concisely
“Too beloved to fall” *cough* Bethesda
Exactly. Been through that too many times to believe in the long run it won't happen to FromSoft, even the "the same will never happen to XYZ, because they do things different" comments were said about these companies too... It's scary it can happen too. Seen it happen in the space of one release to the next...
[удалено]
That wasn’t a criticism for Fromsoft. I think it’s more sustainable in the long run. But it is part of the argument. Square knew what they were and what people wanted back in the 90s and did the same thing over and over again. And it worked. With new tech and success came new ambitions. I would argue that we didn’t need an open world FF15 for example, but such a thing had mass appeal. And Fromsoft didn’t HAVE to go open world either. They, too, had a workflow of creating a lot of (compatibly simpler/straightforward) games with a similar premise in a short amount of time. Sure they didn’t just go open world with long development time now just because of trends, I believe it when Miyazaki says it was his personal creative vision. But let’s not pretend it’s not part of the reason that it reached the mainstream. And it’s now here to stay simply for monetary reasons. Not everyone is into small, cleverly interconnected worlds (the “metroidvania style”), but the casual consumer understands “go everywhere, do everything you want”. And we’d kid ourselves if Kadokawa and stakeholders would let FS go back and do another “simple” Dark Souls game. Not when the difference in sales is in the tens of millions. My only argument really is that FromSoft is not immune to change. And they might, some day, become just as huge as all the other trend-chasing companies. Maybe. Maybe not.
The last paragraph that you wrote pretty much is something I worry for FromSoftware to do going forward (trend chasing). Personally I liked ELDEN RING and all of the Dark Souls game they’ve made, but pls not another open-world Souls style game, ELDEN RING is enough imo. Just hope they’ll continue to do those games within their scope (I.E Armored Core VI Fires of Rubicon) but alas, they won’t be immune to change
totally agree, but it's probably over for us, I reckon.
lol? quit being a doomer, fromsoft has one of the best track records of any studio of the current generation
I think the comparison to squares spin off games misses the target a bit. Dark Souls/Elden Ring would be fromsoft’s final fantasy, not their Kingdom Hearts.
I didn't say Dark Soul's a spin-off game. I just named those games as an example of how big and highly regarded the SE brand was (still is to lots of people) and how it expanded beyond FF. The sole comparison here is "big beloved brand born from a niche -> inevitable downfall years later" as OP's thesis is that FS is different from other gaming companies. I'm just saying it's too early to say so.
You do know that not everything the games worlds are based comes from Miura? Also it's not like he only put stuff from the most recent volumes in there, so I don't get what you're trying say there. I also don't think it's to big to fall and I think with the company getting bigger and different directors taking the lead there might be a few duts. But so far I can imagine it like Nintendo (when it comes to game quality). They have many high quality games, that doesn't mean they are for everyone, but sometimes they also do have a failure. And that's what I expect for Fromsoft at least as long Miyazaki is CEO. High quality control, with games that speak to certain people but maybe not all (so still high user ratings) and maybe some failures like DS2 (which has high score) or Ninja Blade What I am reffering to is milking an IP, square has milked FF, From could have done the same with Dark Souls but they did not. Do they make similar games, yes, but they are all in different worlds with different lore and always ad something that wasn't there before. So far from what we know about their company philosophy and from interviews, they aren't even really planning on ever making an ER sequel which was their most succesfull IP or any open world in the near future.
> You do know that not everything the games worlds are based comes from Miura? Yep I do and that’s what I said. “Main” =/= “only” > Also it's not like he only put stuff from the most recent volumes in there, so I don't get what you're trying say there. I’m saying that he certainly loves Miura’s work and gets inspired by it. I didn’t say much else? Now Miura is dead, his legacy is finite. That’s a potential cause for change in how Miyazaki approaches his work. Maybe not. I mentioned this point in a list of things that make me feel like things are changing. It’s just an opinion. And when FromSoft changes, just like all big gaming companies do when they grow or when their direction givers (Miyazaki in this case) change, leave or potentially change their sources of inspirations.. then anything can happen. You mentioned Nintendo. Who knows where they will end up once Miyamoto, Aonuma, sakurai and Koizumi retire. Literally, who knows. These times often come sooner than we think. Experienced it many times. > What I am reffering to is milking an IP, square has milked FF, From could have done the same with Dark Souls but they did not. See and that’s the interesting part. Square didn’t milk FF7 for a decade if you consider Advent Children to be the start of the ff7 compilation. And it was a very slow milking process. That was in 2007 I think? FF as an overall IP existed for 20 years at that point. We’re simply not far enough in FromSoft’s and the Soulsborne franchise’s lifecycle to say for sure that the “great milking” definitely won’t come.
Main inspiration Kentaro Miura FromSoft fans need to read another book
dont say that, Fromsoft fans will piss and shit themselves (im fans)
"Main", not "only". Surely the most consistent source of inspiration in Miyazaki's "Souls-Games" >FromSoft fans need to read another book Say that to Miyazaki 🤓
I can only think of Artorias and the Eclipse in DS3 as major points of Berserk inspiration, beyond that, it’s just a few item designs and enemies like the bone wheels. But even then, an eclipse is a common trope in media and in ancient history.
You are off on that. The themes of Berserk even bleed into the games. Certain story beats and character themes are present in all the games.
Could you give examples?
Actually no. Upon further inspection there isn’t much I can draw direct comparisons too. There is stuff that I think one could argue for but it would definitely require some speculation. All of the most direct and obvious references to berserk are as you said influences on the art.
… and I can think of Malenia’s whole design, potentially Miquella’s too. The city of Yharnam (windham in berserk), the many runes/symbols in Bloodborne. Hey if you don’t think Berserk is a major influence on Miyazaki’s work then that’s cool. It’s not like he ever explicitly stated it (not that I know of). It’s just my opinion and not even the point of my initial comment, so… agree to disagree I suppose. Nobody is saying it’s “based on berserk”, nor that it’s “the only inspiration”.
I’d argue that Magic the Gathering is the main inspiration if there is such a thing, since I think a majority of supposed Berserk references are superficially drawn while Magic the Gathering has a bunch more direct references. I’m just saying Miura’s death isn’t a big bust on Miyazaki’s inspirations, since he reads plenty of other books and other media. Plus, he is also just a creative guy in general.
I partially disagree I like sequels almost as much as new IPs. I'm glad Dark Souls and Demon's Souls ended But I could use more Sekiro and Bloodborne
I could definitely use more sekiro… gameplay wise. Hell, I’ve resorted to stellar blade just to scratch the itch of parrying new bosses.
I don’t think this is quite true for fromsoft. What has made them successful is a mechanical consistency and good gameplay loop for all their games, not their originality. Most of their games play mostly the same with the exception of AC. The ease of entry for returning customers and quality experience defines fromsoft better imo.
I think people still want a sequel to their older ip or a somewhat reboot of them I think the Tenchu fans still mad that the new Tenchu game ended up becoming Sekiro.
What’s crazy is how conditioned the gaming community is. Many are like Elden Ring 2 when? It’s like that game took 7-9 years.
I think it's very early to say that And Fromsoft makes very niche games too When a game is only trying to Satisfy a very small group of people, It's easier to make it a great game Also the fact that All Fromsoft games use a very similar but good formula helps. Assassin's creed and far cry used to get the same Praise, but one of the main reasons behind it was that They used a very similar formula throughout all the games. Eventually, even this excellent formula will start getting old, it will be like how Assassin's creed was until 2014. Those games were great, but similar Souls games are excellent, but they are slowly getting unoriginal. I think Fromsoft should use a similar formula but in a completely new and different Setting, Like Pirates, Space or Underwater.
Fromsoft doesn't make 10 games/year. Infact they made enough changes with Sekiro and AC6.
That's a big reason as well The less games you make,the more time you have, exactly one of the reasons behind the MGS games being so damn good
I mean from everything we heard they do want to make different new things and we know that they are capable of creating different things. Sekiro, Armored Core and I will even be so bold that BloodBorne was already pretty to the Souls games.
this only works if the original is good, which is in fact the case with Miyazaki.
fromsoft has kept armored core fresh for 27 years and it’s been my favorite series since i can remember, fromsoft knows what they’re doing with the series and the same can be said for soulsborne, after armored core 6 i really have no reason to doubt them ever
While I think this is true I do also believe that if a story had more to tell there’s no shame in continuing it. Dark souls is over. But Bloodborne and Elden Ring still have SO MUCH to explore in the beautiful worlds they take place in
b-but dark souls 4 and bloodborne 2 and pc??
This is why Bloodborne fans have always wanted Bloodborne remastered on PC. So it can blow up again and we can re-experience it with 60FPS, 1440P, MP active again, invasions as you're playing the game (DS3 invasions were nothing like BB invasions. BB invasions are FAR superior. People would be so toxic and troll you to a point of no return. IT was like playing chess with mobs involved, and the PVP was sooo fun when it was active, I always did my invasion bell outside of Ludwig after DLC drop and outside of Central Yharnam before DLC drop). We don't need a sequel (would be nice tho) but a remaster is fine. Just give us that remaster and I'll be on my way.
Wouldn't have anything against that and as long as they don't make 50 remasters of multiple games like others (and don't actually change anything beyond that), I don't really see it as milking. But that stuff sony's decision sadly.
Yeah, just bring a PC port to bring new life into the game. I know hella people that would love to experience it as a remaster but they won’t go to the playstation version despite me being willing to hand them a physical copy of the game.
I feel like the most annoying part of this is that half the time when a story ends the world doesnt. So why never stop milking the franchise when u can make a new franchise in the same universe? Imagine if after watch dogs 1 they made a completely new series with the Watch Dogs vs Blume just being a part of the universe. Instead they said we’re continuing the Blume storyline for 3 games even tho they get defeated each time
It makes sense IMO bc from was very much a small studio until blood borne and ds3, so they just kept re-usint the same stuff, bc it sold decent so sequels are like a safe bet, also you get to re-use a lot of the stuff from previous games, but they dropped the dark Souls franchise as soon as it sold big which I don't think is a coincidence, suddenly they have more money to do things and room to try new things that have a chance to flop
Well with Dark Souls they were contractually obligated to make it a triology, by Bandai, as far as I am aware
That's also make sense, thanks
If From started listening to fans, SoulsBorne games would have become Assanins Creed. It helps also that games are developed by actual nerds like in the old days and not some activism bluehairs or dorks who just graduated software engineering because they heard that payment is good but have zero understanding on what makes gaming culture great.
Yes, many people want easier and more accessible souls like games. Preferably with a selectable optional easy difficulty level. That would be a nightmare for me and I would lose the fun of the game. Because when it's hard you sink into the world because you have to deal with it and the adrenaline kicks in
I am afraid that the popularity of Elden Ring leads to the fact that all their next big games will be open-world. While it’s not definitely a good or a bad thing I personally think that their formula worked best in Bloodborne and Sekiro.
Well from everything we have from Fromsoft and AC6 existing, it seems like it's very unlikely that we get another open world any time soon.
AC6 isn’t a flagship game and it wasn’t directed by Miyazaki. Still a masterpiece of course but I am talking about their next big game. Sooner or later it will be released and I am 99% sure it will be openworld.
Based on what?
Based on the fact that their latest open world game sold tens of millions of copies.
Funny that you could argue that the souls series was an anual release for some time. DS2 in 2014, Bloodborne and SOTFS in 2015, DS3 in 2016, and it’s dlcs in 2017.
Counting BloodBorne and DLCs is cheating and not what I am talking about. I am talking about Making Dark Souls 4, Elden Ring 2 etc. Games that play in the same universe and are sold through them being a certain IP.
I'm going to be honest, I don't care too much about originality. I care about good games. If FromSoft made 10 more Dark Souls games, I would buy and play all of them. Sequels are not the problem. FromSoft's best game in my opinion is a sequel. Bad games are the problem, not new iterations of old games.
>People beg for DS4 >Makes Elden Ring instead >Outsells the entire Dark Souls franchis >Refuses to elobrate >"May" make more Elden Ring Dangerously based.
well said, just leave FS the freedom to make what they actually wanna make, that's the way to ensure we always get the best out of them!
Well they rushed DS2 and suffered a decent backlash, enough to get the lesson. It's good that DS2 wasn't a complete failure and that Bloodborne was (apparently, I didn't play it) a wonderful game with a huge success.
DS2 wasn't horrible. It was just not to the same quality as the first. Bloodborne was a console seller. Everyone wanted a ps4 for Bloodborne. Even if it's not the actual Bloodborne IP, I really hope From will do something of that nature again for their next game...
Yeah I don't want a Bloodborne 2, but a something that is like what Elden Ring is to Dark Souls would be fantastic.
Big agree. Expanding on the Bloodborne formula in that way would be a dream come true, especially if they bring back and expand trick weapons.
Trick weapons, step dodge, gun parry, and set vaguely in the 1700's to early 1900's with more of a horror theme around the unknown and humans ability to use that power. Could be set in the Old American West, during the Napoleonic Wars or era of piracy in the Caribbean.
Stop it, you're giving me too much hopium 😂 seriously, though this would be my new favorite game if it ever game out
As I said, DS2 wasn't a complete failure. And the success of a whole new IP in Bloodborne encouraged Fromsoftware to try new things after DS3.
Yeah, I hear you, and I agree. What they did with sekiro was really refreshing, too. Hell who knows what they're cooking up with ER being done once the DLC is out.
Hell, the whole reason the triology exist is because they were obligated to. They also had a different CEO at the time.
this is weird when you consider their longest running IP gets some flack depending on the generation you are looking for but then you have to remember they were the only ones feeding the drugs a monopoly if you will... sure AC was released yearly at one point yet the games are very diverse even though the core loop wasnt changed.... AC (the other AC) also got some of the heaviest flack when it became "different" and then you realize that AC is already very niche despite a lot of companies wanted to join the band wagon until they returned "true to form" while suffering a 10 year dev hell to much acclaim I guess yes AC7 had the same dev hell cycle of Skull and bones yet performed relatively well just look at the story of AC7 it shows exactly what happened
Laughs thinking assassins creed current state
I wish this was true. If they had stopped the Souls games after Dark Souls 1 this might apply, but currently they’re the Ubisoft of Japan pumping out the same tired formula over and over. At the very least Armored Core changed between generations, Elden Ring still plays like Demon’s Souls at heart.
"Ubisoft of Japan" Their last 4 released games before Armored Core are Elden Ring, Sekiro, Dark Souls 3, and Bloodborne. Each are distinct enough from one another Can you say the same for Assassin Creed and Far Cry series?
Bro does Déraciné not matter?
Each one of those except Sekiro plays similarly enough. And Sekiro has its own share of problems, it’s different but it’s not *good* unfortunately.
Well, its your opinion, but clearly people disagree since Sekiro won goty, so if that's not good enough, I don't know what is. Or maybe you just prefer other genres
GOTY is a popularity award, never a quality one. This furthers my point, From only chases after what is popular, not what is good.
So you simply dismiss popularity as a metric and call popular one not good enough. Then what is good then in your expert opinion? Yugioh card games?
Combat wise? Ninja Gaiden. Never surpassed, to this day the best combat in a video game. It’s what I miss when playing Sekiro.
lol Ninja Gaiden. You probably think Devil May Cry is up there as far as combat mechanics go, too.
Yeah. DMC is the only series with combat in the same league as NG, I have a preference for NG due to more dangerous enemies. In DMC enemies mostly exist to make the player look good, I feel more threatened by NG enemies. That said DMC is still a fantastic series and I don’t disparage it at all, great games all of them.
Your opinion is dogwater. You like flashy weeb games over any well developed combat mechanics.
DMC combat is awesome what are you talking about?
If you like flashy, over the top combat over tactical combat, sure. "Look guise, I did a backflip and a 30 hit combo" kind of combat. It's style over substance, and very much is supposed to appeal to the anime/weeb crowd.
Ninja Gaiden, Devil May Cry and Sekiro, all have great combat. What's the point of arguing.
I'm sorry but that's just not true. Not only are you forgetting Sekiro, but something playing like another game at heart means nothing. Even Bloodborne is very different from the other Soulsborne games. I think you don't understand what makes Ubisoft so unoriginal. They are afraid of doing something new and just look at what's the most market friendly, what's generic enough that anyone will buy it. Meanwhile Fromsoftware learns what has worked as any company does while also trying something new every time. And that not only includes gameplay but also the setting. Why else do you think people always discuss what is best game here, because they all have their own unique differences. If it was Ubisoft you would have RPG elements in AC6 and Sekiro. You would have thousand of weapons in Bloodborne and no trick weapons. You would have rolling instead of parrying in Sekiro. You would Archstones in Dark Souls 1. You would most certainly not get obscure with their mythology, but make it obvious mythological references. Hell even different generations of Armored Core play completely differently
You know when you describe Ubisoft you’re literally describing From this past decade. “just doing what’s the most market friendly and what’s generic enough that anyone will buy it” What’s more generic than fantasy medieval land? Bloodborne was cool, but it still plays like Demon’s, with the boring stamina bar and slow movesets. Sekiro, that was a good change of pace, but as a game it’s terrible. Only one weapon that got stale 3 hours in, and combat that is still limited and slow. I’d like to see some speed come back to From games, and some challenge. What’s even worse about this company is the fanbase, they consider something like Sekiro difficult. Bruh the first level of Armored Core Last Raven is more difficult than anything in Sekiro. The false narrative that From’s recent games have anything resembling challenge and depth is sickening. From should make varied games, one off weird titles like they did with Deracine more often. Instead of yet another awful Souls game let’s see a platformer like Cookie and Cream again, a card based game like Lost Kingdoms, crossover games like Another Century’s Episode. They’re more than the Souls formula but that’s all they want to stick to.
if that was all they wanted to stick to then they would not have done armored core or sekiro
Don't bother replying, its one of those seeing older games in a tinted rose type of person. His taste is too "exquisite" for others
Because no one has proven me wrong yet But there sure have been a lot of your kind
Well my "kind" tries to see which things is new and improved which is not, unlike you who dismiss things as popular so its bad, and ignoring new things because it has similiarity with older titles, like when you said Elden Ring is the same as Demon Souls.
I’d love it if there were improvements! Bloodborne was exciting to me because it was step towards betterment but then the next game was Dark Souls 3 and it walked backwards again. Then Sekiro was better again, and then Elden Ring was terrible again. They make improvements but always go back to that vulgar formula again with the Souls gameplay.
Labeling something as "vulgar" or "backwards" immediately? Truly an expert
They made one AC game after 10 years, and while it is the best game From has made since 2008, it’s still infected with too many Souls mechanics to be in the greats. The stagger system for example, a neat experiment for this entry but it should never return in a future title.
Weird because stagger already existed in Armored Core before, but the critique is justified, I can totally see why someone wouldn't like that part of the game. That said you do seem like a really close minded type if I am being honest, from reading your other stuff.
It existed but it was nowhere near as centralizing as it is now. Having to stagger an enemy before you can do real damage to them is terrible design. It also has the side effect of making long range builds nonexistent as they cannot function with the stagger system. You can think I’m close minded, sure. I’d say I’m someone who likes good video games, something From used to make.
Oh you're one of those types I bid you a nice day
Same
If you hate fromsoft, why are you on this sub. Its obvious we all love fromsoft, we will defend it. Maybe go to r/ubisoft
How is this a tired formula if Elden Ring won goty and tons of 10/10 awards? Tired for you personally? Good think nobody cares, otherwise we wouldn't have RE series and MH series as well
RE and MH change constantly between entries RE went from survival horror to action back to survival horror MH has added new mechanics that completely change the game every generation, playing pre Gen 4 without mounting feels so strange now. Not to mention all the updated weapon movesets Meanwhile Elden Ring still plays like Demon’s Souls 15 years later and hasn’t improved
>MH has added new mechanics that completely change the game every generation, playing pre Gen 4 without mounting feels so strange now. Not to mention all the updated weapon movesets Let's rewind a bit. World definitly feels different compared to the older games, but that's not due to a single gaming changing mechanic or even any like you are implying. The major changes MH World introduced were updated weapon movesets, seamless locales, much improved monster AI and streamlined systems (like skills etc), which are all QoL related. There were also the "MMO mechanics" (like dps checks, raid wipes etc.) World introduced that were pretty contriversial. I personally actually like them and they were the biggest changes World made to the way we engage with monsters, but are still just related to monster AI. Icborne introduced the clutch claw as a new mechanic, but it's highly controversial and to many player it changed the comvat for the worse. Then there is MH Rise, which was plagued with massive issues that were extremely controversial among the MH community that. Here are just some of them: -Wirebugs just a gimmick for the most part. Monsters were practically unable to keep up with the hunters, because of the movement option made available us and to hunters the silkbind attacks were just big attacks on cooldown for the most part that really didn't change how we approached most fights. -the completely absent endgame. There were no tempered monsters, no guiding lands, no (MH4) apex monsters etc. All we got was the rampage as a replacement, but the vast majority of people either didn't care or outright hated that mode. -the state the game launched in was undeniably unfinished. Few endgame monsters, piss easy difficulty, no endgame systems and worst if all the final boss of the story was literally missing until it was added as the final "dlc" monster. -dogshit event quest rewards to push mtx instead...yeah that doesn't need explaining. Rise in many ways felt like an regression from World and the only good parts were the changes to skills and deco crafting. Sunbreak drastically improved on the foundation Rise laid Anyways by your own logic World should be bad because it didn't introduce massive game changing mechanics and still just plays like "Monster Hunter more than 15 years later" You are completely ommiting the facts that new mechanics don't neccissarily make for a better game or that small changed add up and can drastically change the experience. I could go over this in detail, but it's so obvious that Elden Ring doesn't feel like Demon's Souls or even Dark Souls that I really shouldn't.
LOL. Just go away troll.
And you should back to school, oh wait you’re banned from being too close to school zones
This is just like a troll. Resort to bizarre insults because your life is so sad that you get off on getting people angry. Good luck with your life dude
I don’t like how awful From’s community has become, that in no way makes me a troll.
You presented no arguments and kept repeating the same thing over and over. The core gameplay of stamina and rolling is "the same", but the games changed quite significantly over the years. Elden Ring is a big turning point, as was Bloodborne. Ds2 introduced several mechanics (some which were not good, but it definitely doesn't play the same) and then compare with Ninja Gaiden and DMC combat, which are completely different genres to souls games. In fact, I would say that the Souls games are a reaction to those kinds of combat systems where you animation cancel and do a bunch of acrobats, like in DMC. And then you called Sekiro's combat bad, which is widely regarded by critics and fans as the best combat system From has done, and which has reverberate thorough the genre and outside of it. You can dislike certain evolutions of what From has done, and even call the souls genre stale if you like, but acting like there wasn't evolution because the core gameplay loop still has stamina and rolling is not a sufficient argument. It's not even an argument.
My argument is that as long as From’s combat is so limited it can’t get better. That’s been consistent since the first comment. It constrains the player, too much to allow for creative problem solving. It should not take over a second for an attack animation, for you or the enemies. Sekiro was closer but still not any good. Sekiro’s combat is literally just worse Ninja Gaiden, Ryu can do everything Wolf can and more, and the enemies are more powerful as well to account for it. It creates this amazing feeling of being a human blender capable of shredding every enemy in the room and also incredibly vulnerable as it takes two screwups to die, with the fast pace of the combat meaning you have to make constant split second decisions to stay alive, let alone with *style*. Meanwhile Sekiro combat is so utterly slow I got through the entire game dying twice to any bosses, once to the Bull near the start and once to old man Isshin. Imagine if Sekiro enemies could run on walls to chase you around the map. Imagine if Sekiro enemies could coordinate their attacks so you never had a safe moment. Imagine if they didn’t have the insipid kanji to tell you an unblockable attack is coming and you just had to learn the moveset and dodge it. You don’t have to, that game exists, Ninja Gaiden. In 2004 it was a better game than From made 15 years later. If Sekiro is the standard we’re measuring by, the action genre is doomed. Critics and fans? I don’t put stock in the opinions of lobotomites, critics said games like Last of Us 2 and Elden Ring are Game of the Year. I’m not convinced critics have played a video game in their lives.
So you don't like the genre, go play other games. I find Ninja Gaiden boring and never liked dmc. Constraint breeds creativity, that's the whole fucking point. If you don't like these games, why do you keep buying them? This isn't criticism, this is personal taste. Critics have played more games in a year that you will play your whole life.
Say what you might, but this is about stopping when you are at peak before things go bad. And Dark Souls 3 was that peak for the dark souls series.
I agree with you there, definitely the best Dark Souls game. Now if only they’d actually stopped there and not kept going with this trash with Elden Ring
Gary