From Software Elden Ring - From Software's new game with writing by GRRM

[Caim]

Imagine illusionary object that vanish if you step on them. Now that'd be one hell of a trap for Miyazaki to spring on us.

 

[Egosphere]

Imagine illusionary object that vanish if you step on them. Now that'd be one hell of a trap for Miyazaki to spring on us.

There was a platform in Artorias of the Abyss which did that, leading you to Alvina and Sif.

Edit: the floor in the return to asylum can probably be counted as 'illusory' as well, sort of. Now you see it, now you're dead.

 

[The_Mask]

There was a platform in Artorias of the Abyss which did that, leading you to Alvina and Sif.

I wonder how intended it is that the first time you take the "leap of faith" you don't take fall damage, but after that, you do.

 

[Ryzer]

Looks like fake walls are back in Elden Ring.



One of the commenters elucidates:

Oh look, it's exactly just like Dark Souls. Nobody would have guessed.

 

[Ramnozack]

Looks like fake walls are back in Elden Ring.



One of the commenters elucidates:

Oh look, it's exactly just like Dark Souls. Nobody would have guessed.

Is this a bad thing?

 

[Ryzer]

Is this a bad thing?

In the same way, Is Call of duty #321 releasing each year a bad thing?

 

[NJClaw]

Is this a bad thing?

In the same way, Is Call of duty #321 releasing each year a bad thing?

Well, if you like Call of Duty I guess it's not.

This comparison has been repeated ad nauseam for the last 30 pages, but it doesn't really make much sense. The Dark Souls series won't become obsolete the moment Elden Ring gets released. And, even if it did, Dark Souls 3 wasn't released yesterday, but six years ago. SIX YEARS.

 

[Matador]

Patches.

 

[toro]

Is this a bad thing?

In the same way, Is Call of duty #321 releasing each year a bad thing?

The game will have flaws - that's a given - but pretending that it will be bad because it shares the same design philosophy/engine/assets as Dark Souls is just retarded at this point.

 

[Ramnozack]

Is this a bad thing?

In the same way, Is Call of duty #321 releasing each year a bad thing?

Well, if you like Call of Duty I guess it's not.

This comparison has been repeated ad nauseam for the last 30 pages, but it doesn't really make much sense. The Dark Souls series won't become obsolete the moment Elden Ring gets released. And, even if it did, Dark Souls 3 wasn't released yesterday, but six years ago. SIX YEARS.

Should they reinvent the wheel just to please people who want something different just for the sake of it being different? The core gameplay in souls is fun, why trash it and make something completely new when you can just iterate and improve on it instead? That's what people want, its what I want too.

 

[Greek Anime God]

This comparison has been repeated ad nauseam for the last 30 pages, but it doesn't really make much sense. The Dark Souls series won't become obsolete the moment Elden Ring gets released. And, even if it did, Dark Souls 3 wasn't released yesterday, but six years ago. SIX YEARS.

Six years and they still can't come up with anything new. Half of what was good about Demon's Souls was that it was fresh, the other half that it took some risks and won the lottery. Since then the games have stayed the same within the formula and at the same time gotten worse. CoD is the same in some regards.

 

[Ryzer]

when you can just iterate and improve on it instead? That's what people want, its what I want too.

But they didn't improve it one bit, it is the same freaking gameplay from Dark Souls 3, nothing has changed at all... Even better, the engine remains the same, everything from Dark Souls 3 remain the same.
As the poster above argued, What made Demons Souls great was innovation.
This chapter is already creatively bankrupt, this game is only here to squeeze people's money...
If one honest individual reviews it in the future, he would rate it extremely severely for being a poor uninspired husk of a game released in 2007.

 

[Caim]

Elden Ring might be derivative shit, but it is that good derivative shit.

 

[NJClaw]

Six years and they still can't come up with anything new. Half of what was good about Demon's Souls was that it was fresh, the other half that it took some risks and won the lottery. Since then the games have stayed the same within the formula and at the same time gotten worse. CoD is the same in some regards.

You're all conveniently forgetting that FS released Dark Souls 2, Bloodborne, and Sekiro in the span of 5 years. All of them changed the formula enough to become unique in their own way. How you can unequivocally determine that FS is creatively bankrupt because Elden Ring uses the same engine of DS3 is beyond me.

 

[Anonymous Wife Scholar]

Bloodborne

Thank you NJClaw anon! Good strong Emilia Romagna friend anon! I do love you anon! I do!

 

[Silva]

Six years and they still can't come up with anything new. Half of what was good about Demon's Souls was that it was fresh [...] Since then the games have stayed the same within the formula and at the same time gotten worse.

Ok, I agree that FS could be bolder and try something actually new for a change, but saying the "formula actually got worse" is bullshit. If one forgets the purely commercial entries (DS2 & 3), it's clear that Dark Souls 1, Bloodborne and Sekiro evolved the formula in interesting directions and results.

That said, yeah, it's clear FS is milking this cow for too long now. I wish they took a break and tried their hand at something new.

 

[toro]

But they didn't improve it one bit, it is the same freaking gameplay from Dark Souls 3, nothing has changed at all... Even better, the engine remains the same, everything from Dark Souls 3 remain the same. As the poster above argued, What made Demons Souls great was innovation.

Demon's Souls did not appear out of the blue. It was a spiritual successor to King's Field series which is composed of 7 games.

If From Software was not autistic enough to iterate on King's Fields design formula then you would not have Demon's Souls.

It looks to me that you underestimate or you simply don't understand how important iteration is in software development.

This chapter is already creatively bankrupt, this game is only here to squeeze people's money...

That's like your opinion. There are millions of Dark Souls players would can say otherwise. Toothless argument.

If one honest individual reviews it in the future, he would rate it extremely severely for being a poor uninspired husk of a game released in 2007.

If you would be a honest person then you would just shut the fuck and wait for the game to be released.

 

[Jaedar]

Demon's Souls did not appear out of blue. It was a spiritual successor to King's Field series which is composed of 7 games.

"No one" has played kings field though.

I wonder if most people just played demons/dark souls, assumed it was created out of thin air by some huge leap of creativity and have been continually let down since since from never did another leap. I also haven't played king's field, but as I understand it froms history is best seen as a pretty steady iteration from kings field to souls. Looking at their wikipedia page, it does seem like they have scrapped development of all their other series though, so I guess long term from fans have good cause to be upset (oh noes, are we the baddies?).

 

[deem]

From Software developed a lot of games.



When it comes to releasing similar games for 13 years, I think that there is huge originality problem in general in the video game milieu. I think there are a number of contributing factors, one of them being the nature of creativity. You can't just sit and come up with something. The creative process involves practice, and only after a while you stumble on something original. It seems to me that the way games are produced, excludes this vital element, so you end up with a copy of a copy of a copy. It is not like other art forms, you can't just pick up a brush or a camera and be creative.

 

[Egosphere]

The pattern is clear.
Dark Souls 2 (Souls)
Bloodborne (Innovation)
Dark Souls 3 (Souls)
Sekiro (Innovation)
Elden Ring (Souls)

Looking forward to more innovation in their next title

 

[Salvo]

The pattern is clear.
Dark Souls 2 (Souls)
Bloodborne (Innovation)
Dark Souls 3 (Souls)
Sekiro (Innovation)
Elden Ring (Souls)

Looking forward to more innovation in their next title

>Bloodborne
>Innovation

k

 

[Egosphere]

The pattern is clear.
Dark Souls 2 (Souls)
Bloodborne (Innovation)
Dark Souls 3 (Souls)
Sekiro (Innovation)
Elden Ring (Souls)

Looking forward to more innovation in their next title

>Bloodborne
>Innovation

k

Dashes when locked on, no rolling
Trick weapons
No shields
Insight mechanic
Rallying
Chalice dungeons
Firearms
No hollow or soul form
Radical departure in art direction from predecessors
Greater emphasis on speed: Gascoigne faster than Artorias.

Negative 'innovation' included straying closer to the arpg genre: less stats, less armour sets, less 'magic'

 

[cvv]

The pattern is clear.
Dark Souls 2 (Souls)
Bloodborne (Innovation)
Dark Souls 3 (Souls)
Sekiro (Innovation)
Elden Ring (Souls)

Meh, too simplistic. DS2 had a lot of innovation in the narrow context of the DS formula. And you can argue Sekiro would be a better game without most of the "innovations". DS3 is the only FS game so far without any major innovation. We'll see about ER.

 

[ㅤㅤㅤ]

Demon's Souls did not appear out of the blue. It was a spiritual successor to King's Field series which is composed of 7 games.

The leap between System Shock and Bioshock is smaller than the one between King's Field and Demon's Souls. If Demon's Souls had been just another King's Field game would it have blown up as it did? It was the opposite of a trend chasing series entry that Elden Ring is. If you're telling me that Elden Ring is the same game as King's Field with small iterative changes then you are being a retard for the sake of being a retard. The Souls series got big because the team was seemingly doomed and without any expectations did whatever they wanted. That did include carrying over ideas from previous games but creativity always works like this.

I don't have a horse in this race but I think what some people are critical of is the direction the iterations are going in and that the fans of the series are very selective about which games they make soy faces over. The DS series somehow escaping the same scrutiny as other big open world online popamole games face. You even make the same arguments as people you likely have a low opinion of:

That's like your opinion. There are millions of Dark Souls players would can say otherwise. Toothless argument.

Assassin's Creed Valhalla sold well too. What kind of argument is this?

Negative 'innovation' included straying closer to the arpg genre, less stats, less armour sets, less 'magic'

Stats in action games will never stop being shit imho, the less stats the better since player skill is emphasized anyway. Unlockable skills are bordering on what is okay.

 

[toro]

The leap between System Shock and Bioshock is smaller than the one between King's Field and Demon's Souls. If Demon's Souls had been just another King's Field game would it have blown up as it did? It was the opposite of a trend chasing series entry that Elden Ring is. If you're telling me that Elden Ring is the same game as King's Field with small iterative changes then you are being a retard for the sake of being a retard. The Souls series got big because the team was seemingly doomed and without any expectations did whatever they wanted. That did include carrying over ideas from previous games but creativity always works like this.

I did no say what you pretend that I said. Demon's Souls would not exist without King's Field. Get over it.

I don't have a horse in this race but I think what some people are critical of is the direction the iterations are going in and that the fans of the series are very selective about which games they make soy faces over. The DS series somehow escaping the same scrutiny as other big open world online popamole games face.

Elden Ring is the most anticipated title for 2022 because ... fans of the series are very selective about which games they make soy faces over!? Wtf!??

Most Dark Souls fans are anticipating the game because they like what From Software is offering. Nobody said that the game will be perfect. Do you like to project much?

You even make the same arguments as people you likely have a low opinion of:

I did not know that you know how I fell about people but now you should know that I have a really low opinion about you. Can you live with it?

That's like your opinion. There are millions of Dark Souls players would can say otherwise. Toothless argument.

Assassin's Creed Valhalla sold well too. What kind of argument is this?

That was exactly my point. Ask Ryzer because he started with this bullshit.

Spoiler

Stop embarrassing yourself. You and Ryzer are just strawing bullshit because reasons!?