maniac

I doubt it. Wouldn't be surprised if elden ring gets 2 more sequels.

They'll never fully strafe away from this system. So the games will always be similar.

Dumbass

except they already did this with sekiro

sekiro is not a souls game aside from being challenging like a souls game lol

Sekiro is very much a souls like game. It has many of the same gameplay features and UI. It's even the same controls for the most part. They tweaked it a bit for sure to make the parry much more prominent but it's not a completely different game lmao. It's the same s*** with more parrying and a different setting

People will argue to the moon and back but it's incredibly obvious it's the exact same developers lmfao. Just because they tweak some features and slap a new coat of paint doesn't mean this is not the same type of game

Again. None of this is a bad thing. People are obsessed with this style of gameplay. I am completely fine with them milking it and tweaking it here and there with slightly different variations of the same thing.

When it loses its magic is when they should switch it up. It'd be different if they were pulling an assassins creed. But they're not. It's just largely the same excellent game with a few changes here and there with each new iteration

how on earth is it the same UI?

no stamina bar, no magic, no secondary right hand weapon to toggle between, no left hand weapon or shield whatsoever

and thats before you even talk about the changed/added mechanics like the stealth, grappling hook, focus on 1v1 combat encounters, the complete lack of an RPG levelling up system, and of course the parrying being the focus rather than rolling/blocking.

but no difficult game with sword developed by fromsoftware = souls game lol

“It’S jUst dArK sOulS!!!”
Dark souls has never looked this good(and this is just a network test)

shut the f***kkk up

Dark Souls 1 is a horrible entry for newcomers imo if we speaking From Soft because all of their contemporary games (Bloodborne, DS3, Sekiro & from the looks ER) have been much more fluent, polished and fast paced compared to DS1

Sure, its the real entry point of Soulsborne/like games (fully disrespecting Demons Souls bc most bosses were gimmick bosses) but as someone who got into their work later and isn’t blinded by nostalgia, i can confidently say i hold both BB & DS3 in a much higher regard

DS1 suffers from feeling clunky, being that much more unwelcoming to new players and half of the boss roster sucking ass (which to me is supposed to be the main attraction in these games)

that's...kinda what benig a dark souls game is

"souls" is pretty much about the difficulty and interconnected world, not the aesthetic and setting

so any game that is difficult and interconnected is a souls game? that is a very loose definition.

the best way to define it is through gameplay, and imo sekiro plays like a different game mechanically because of what i wrote above.

it's not a souls game it's just souls esque

literally all the main From games count as souls games. it's just the difficulty and gameplay

the only difference is sekiro promotes constant attacking vs spaced out attacks. In the most general terms obviously

and thats before you even talk about the changed/added mechanics like the stealth, grappling hook, focus on 1v1 combat encounters, the complete lack of an RPG levelling up system, and of course the parrying being the focus rather than rolling/blocking.

and yet most of this has been adopted into elden ring. just cause they did something different doesn't mean it's not souls.

Man, you usually are a great poster but if reinventing their formula on almost every entry is „milking“ to you then you either only play Inscryption, Disco Elyisum, What remains of edith finch and the witness or you got no business calling what from software is doing milking.

Because they defined a whole new genre on their own that goes on par with story action adventures, ego shooters, metroidvanias, isometric rpgs with pause, 3D platformers etc.

Assassins creed had incredibly flaws in its design the combat was not thought out at all and the first few entries worked purely because of the spectacular presentation and marketing.

But now you see all these big budget games like AC and GOW slowly implementing the systems of the souls titles because they are just as well thought out as a 2D platformer that goes from left to right and are absolutely timeless

yeah so? i never said elden ring wasn't souls-like, i was making the case for sekiro.

elden ring's combat is an extension of dark souls 3, that much is obvious. but sekiro does not play like dark souls 3 whatsoever.

I agree, i think Ds1 is one of their worst games ( still an amazing game ) but starting with the newer games would only make it harder to play the older ones. If you start with Ds1 you’re going to appreciate Ds3 much more especially since there’s so many references and throwbacks to Ds1 in 3

To each their own broski. I understand they invented their own thing. But after playing through all of them except dark souls 2, I never felt like I was really playing anything different. There are differences but imo it's a variation of the same thing. I don't think it's a Nad thing. It's an excellent combat system that is largely influential nowadays. They just don't want to move past that and there's no problem with it.

Now when the day comes when they finally leave this genre behind entirely. That's gonna be really something interesting. But I'll gladly play each game they drop even if i feel they're all incredibly similar. It's been going on for over a decade now. And I am interested if they make something drastically different.

Elden Ring is still going to be amazing. I'm just bringing up the point that it's all about the same with different gimmicks. There's even a Goddess of some sort in each of them (except sekiro if I remember correctly) I think people will definitely be more accepting of this stance in 5 or so years.

Also Sekiro might look like souls on the surface ( even that is pushing it ) but the way the game is played is entirely different

There’s a reason people say "as soon as i stopped playing it as Dark souls it clicked/got easier"

It's still about the same imo except parrying is far more prevalent and vital now rather than optional. Instead of utilizing offense more like in bloodborne, this time you play more defensively

Thats why i would say Bloodborne is the best starting point it was my first From Soft and love at first sight

I agree on the lore part, but you dont have to have played DS1 actively yourself. If you do some digging beforehand and familiarize yourself with the DS1 events and characters that would be enough to experience a lot of the cool fan service in DS3. And most of it (like all the lore) is cryptic or burried anyway.. DS3 is a great experience with or without you fully grasping the world and story and from a gameplay standpoint just the most responsive

I played DS1 first, but i love the world more than i love actually playing it. Replaying DS3 rn and its my defenitive fav Souls entry

Bloodborne is still their magnum opus though, and probably forever will be. Even Miyazaki himself knows it

I think Sekiro is even more aggressive than Bloodborne and DS. Since parrying is a way to fight back instead of just defending yourself. You’re meant to break the posture bar so attacking and then parrying are both going for the same thing. You don’t really ever need to roll back and wait for the enemy to attack or finish attacking.

I see where you’re coming from, Bloodborne is definitely one if their best and you could argue it’s their magnum opus for sure, but personally i think Sekiro is better