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

[CrunchyHemorrhoids]

It's also interesting to me because there seem to be two main camps in regards to game development. Those who figure that asset reuse is great because it can keep costs down and allow devs to focus on content creation.

In Fromsoft's case it's more likely to mean that most of their artists/focus/resources are being used on a different (nextgen) project instead. See DS2->BB.

 

[perfectslumbers]

Oh also this is the only game where riding a horse actually looked fun, every other game I've ever played horses/mounts have been the worst part

 

[Silva]

Oh also this is the only game where riding a horse actually looked fun, every other game I've ever played horses/mounts have been the worst part

Bitch plis. Mount & Blade, Ghost of Sushi, Witcher, Red Dead, all have fun horse riding.

 

[The_Mask]

Witcher,

*insert picture of Roach being on top of a house here*

 

[perfectslumbers]

Oh also this is the only game where riding a horse actually looked fun, every other game I've ever played horses/mounts have been the worst part

Bitch plis. Mount & Blade, Ghost of Sushi, Witcher, Red Dead, all have fun horse riding.

You do you

Can't comment on console games but Witcher's horse felt terrible and I just sprinted around, Geralt felt terrible too though tbh. Mount and blade felt awkward to ride but everything feels awkward in that game, felt great to one shot people with my lance though.

 

[Silva]

Yeah Witcher riding was so-so. But Ghost of Sushi and Red Dead 2 have great riding.

(Pity that the only thing great in them)

 

[Wunderbar]

I expected it to look like a new intellectual property, not like a lazy asset flip with zero new ideas.

You can only blame yourself for having set unreasonable expectations.

It was clear from the start that this was going to be Dark Souls 4 under a different name. They just wanted to build a world without being restrained by the lore already established by the series, and that's what they did.

bullcrap.

Dark Souls was different enough from Demon's Souls. Dark Souls 2 had more differences from Dark Souls. Dark Souls 3, for all its faults, was different enough from previous games. Bloodborne, a proper new IP, looked like a new IP. Elden ring looks so lazy it's a borderline asset flip.

"a world without being restrained by the lore" yeah, but it's still gonna have the usual Muhyazaki crap like Patches, Onion Knight, Kiln Yggdrasil, Maiden-in-black-this-time-with-one-eye, etc. Why bother with "the new world with a new lore" if you are going to rehash the old lore anyway?

The gameplay of the previous entries is fun and works, what's wrong with wanting more of the same?

because their gameplay is becoming worse and worse. Souls games never had great mechanics, deep character building or complex combat. They were fun because they were fresh and original, and because they lacked the usual popamole elements of other contemporary games.

Meeting Patches the first time around was cool and unexpected, meeting him the second time around was funny because you already knew he's gonna pull some kind of trick on you, meeting him the third time was annoying.

This time around it's gonna be the old and tired gameplay formula + old and rehashed ideas + popamole ubisoft gamedesign.

 

[Black Angel]

 

[perfectslumbers]

Dark Souls was different enough from Demon's Souls. Dark Souls 2 had more differences from Dark Souls. Dark Souls 3, for all its faults, was different enough from previous games. Bloodborne, a proper new IP, looked like a new IP. Elden ring looks so lazy it's a borderline asset flip.

I think it's a stretch to say that DS2 and DS3 were very different from Dark Souls. DS2 had uh... torches and adaptability. And DS3 killed all builds by removing poise and fat rolls and armor upgrading and made every boss do 15 hit combos, excellent new features. DS3 also reused lots of animations and assets from Bloodborne (although did it in a way that made the game very different from Bloodborne.) Elden Ring is an asset and animation flip from ds3 but it has an open world and some Sekiro features. I was hoping at least that it would restore some of the potential playstyle variety from DS1 but considering how much it ports of DS3 I doubt that will happen.

Dark Souls 3 was fun, but Demons and Dark Souls 1 were atmospheric and had worlds that drew you in. Frankly I didn't find DS1 fun at all, it was a horrible nightmare that I was utterly entranced by. That's what I wanted out of Elden Ring more than anything, but I doubt that will happen. It will still be a fun game, I mean I got to ng +7 on DS3 whereas I only beat DS1 once, but DS1 is one of my favourite games ever because it's compelling while DS3 is, like most games, merely fun.

 

[HoboForEternity]

watched the gameplay, now i am all IN

 

[ChaDargo]

It looked like some kinda glossy alpha bullshit. Any serious encounter was scripted... What am I reading in this thread ffs

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

Elden Ring is an open world Dark Souls which was an open world Demon's Souls.

Sheeeeit.

Miyazaki you did it again.

 

[Star Citizen]

watched the gameplay, now i am all IN

Gonna get Elden Ring tattooed on my back this weekend I rate.

 

[ChaDargo]

Dark Souls was different enough from Demon's Souls. Dark Souls 2 had more differences from Dark Souls. Dark Souls 3, for all its faults, was different enough from previous games. Bloodborne, a proper new IP, looked like a new IP. Elden ring looks so lazy it's a borderline asset flip.

I think it's a stretch to say that DS2 and DS3 were very different from Dark Souls. DS2 had uh... torches and adaptability. And DS3 killed all builds by removing poise and fat rolls and armor upgrading and made every boss do 15 hit combos, excellent new features. DS3 also reused lots of animations and assets from Bloodborne (although did it in a way that made the game very different from Bloodborne.) Elden Ring is an asset and animation flip from ds3 but it has an open world and some Sekiro features. I was hoping at least that it would restore some of the potential playstyle variety from DS1 but considering how much it ports of DS3 I doubt that will happen.

Dark Souls 3 was fun, but Demons and Dark Souls 1 were atmospheric and had worlds that drew you in. Frankly I didn't find DS1 fun at all, it was a horrible nightmare that I was utterly entranced by. That's what I wanted out of Elden Ring more than anything, but I doubt that will happen. It will still be a fun game, I mean I got to ng +7 on DS3 whereas I only beat DS1 once, but DS1 is one of my favourite games ever because it's compelling while DS3 is, like most games, merely fun.

My only regret is that DS1 is a laggy piece of shit so I never got to properly destroy it. It's like a hot drunk girl I always wanted to bang but she keeps passing out and it makes it too awkward to continue.

 

[ChaDargo]

I expected it to look like a new intellectual property, not like a lazy asset flip with zero new ideas.

You can only blame yourself for having set unreasonable expectations.

It was clear from the start that this was going to be Dark Souls 4 under a different name. They just wanted to build a world without being restrained by the lore already established by the series, and that's what they did.

bullcrap.

Dark Souls was different enough from Demon's Souls. Dark Souls 2 had more differences from Dark Souls. Dark Souls 3, for all its faults, was different enough from previous games. Bloodborne, a proper new IP, looked like a new IP. Elden ring looks so lazy it's a borderline asset flip.

"a world without being restrained by the lore" yeah, but it's still gonna have the usual Muhyazaki crap like Patches, Onion Knight, Kiln Yggdrasil, Maiden-in-black-this-time-with-one-eye, etc. Why bother with "the new world with a new lore" if you are going to rehash the old lore anyway?

The gameplay of the previous entries is fun and works, what's wrong with wanting more of the same?

because their gameplay is becoming worse and worse. Souls games never had great mechanics, deep character building or complex combat. They were fun because they were fresh and original, and because they lacked the usual popamole elements of other contemporary games.

Meeting Patches the first time around was cool and unexpected, meeting him the second time around was funny because you already knew he's gonna pull some kind of trick on you, meeting him the third time was annoying.

This time around it's gonna be the old and tired gameplay formula + old and rehashed ideas + popamole ubisoft gamedesign.

Bro, the game is in alpha 2-3 months from launch. Watch the video again. The only real-time battles are vs shit that's easier than a basic bitch enemy in the intro of DS1. Any of the big boss fights are fucking scripted, hence the cuts. Notice the cuts.

And for the fucking love of CHRIST. I forgot it because I just expected it to be a meme by now. THEY INTRODUCED SKYRIM DRAGONS. THE FUCKING DRAGON IS A SKYRIM DRAGON.

Fuck this game. It won't come out until next summer and it will be shit.

 

[Wunderbar]

Dark Souls was different enough from Demon's Souls. Dark Souls 2 had more differences from Dark Souls. Dark Souls 3, for all its faults, was different enough from previous games. Bloodborne, a proper new IP, looked like a new IP. Elden ring looks so lazy it's a borderline asset flip.

I think it's a stretch to say that DS2 and DS3 were very different from Dark Souls. DS2 had uh... torches and adaptability. And DS3 killed all builds by removing poise and fat rolls and armor upgrading and made every boss do 15 hit combos, excellent new features. DS3 also reused lots of animations and assets from Bloodborne (although did it in a way that made the game very different from Bloodborne.) Elden Ring is an asset and animation flip from ds3 but it has an open world and some Sekiro features. I was hoping at least that it would restore some of the potential playstyle variety from DS1 but considering how much it ports of DS3 I doubt that will happen.

Dark Souls 3 was fun, but Demons and Dark Souls 1 were atmospheric and had worlds that drew you in. Frankly I didn't find DS1 fun at all, it was a horrible nightmare that I was utterly entranced by. That's what I wanted out of Elden Ring more than anything, but I doubt that will happen. It will still be a fun game, I mean I got to ng +7 on DS3 whereas I only beat DS1 once, but DS1 is one of my favourite games ever because it's compelling while DS3 is, like most games, merely fun.

My only regret is that DS1 is a laggy piece of shit so I never got to properly destroy it. It's like a hot drunk girl I always wanted to bang but she keeps passing out and it makes it too awkward to continue.

the remastered version runs at stable 60 fps. The downside is that some of the textures look plastic because of changes in the lighting engine.

 

[ChaDargo]

I guarantee that someone who gives a fuck more than I do will make a move-for-move side-by-side representation of this shitty dragon.

I only give a fuck enough to spend 1 minute to present this:





(P.S. Dragons are shit in Skyrim and only mediocre if you mod the fuck out of them)

(P.P.S. Yeah, Crispy, it's autism to not want one of the best game developers in history to resort to making Skyrim dragons and posting a shitty alpha build of their bullshit. You're a faggot.)

 

[wahrk]

I guarantee that someone who gives a fuck more than I do will make a move-for-move side-by-side representation of this shitty dragon.

I’m doubtful such a person exists…

 

[Jaedar]

Once upon a time, I had an apple fanboy coworker. He'd watch the apple showcases, not to inform himself as a consumer, but more as a "so this is what I'll get when I inevitably consoom this years product". This was weird to me, but after seeing this elden ring video I understand. I know I'm going to buy and play it, because even mediocre from soft is better than most other games. But at the same time I'm kind of resigned to the fact that it won't be very good or novel. "Oh look, this time I'll get varied casting animations on my soul arrows". "Oh, the soul gain graphics is yellow now, neat".



Still, it's been like 6 years since ds3. Is it really so shameful to want another go?

(yes)

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

It's like a hot drunk girl I always wanted to bang but she keeps passing out and it makes it too awkward to continue.

Rookie.

 

[Cyberarmy]

Imagine people raging over Gothic 2 using Gothic 1 graphics and animations.

 

[meanwhileInPoland]

It is more like Elex2 reusing Gothic 1 animations:D But I agree, it is stupid point to get assblasted about. Like for fuck sake how many spear thrust animations you can come up with? It is just a pointless waste of time/resources.
Spellcasting looks great and smooth as fuck and spells are cast from the tip of the staff like in DS2 and not from the middle like in DS1/DS3

 

[NJClaw]

Wunderbar, I guess our feelings towards this game just come from very different places, because I can't understand half of your complaints. Specifically, I can't understand why they apply to ER and not to the entire series.

Dark Souls was different enough from Demon's Souls. Dark Souls 2 had more differences from Dark Souls. Dark Souls 3, for all its faults, was different enough from previous games. Bloodborne, a proper new IP, looked like a new IP. Elden ring looks so lazy it's a borderline asset flip.

So you're specifically only talking about how the game looks? Not about gameplay story elements, only looks? In that case, yes, the game looks like a DS3 DLC. I'm fine with that because I would buy a DS3 DLC right now for any amount of money. If I can be sure that the gameplay will be reminiscent of anything from Demon's Souls to Sekiro.

"a world without being restrained by the lore" yeah, but it's still gonna have the usual Muhyazaki crap like Patches, Onion Knight, Kiln Yggdrasil, Maiden-in-black-this-time-with-one-eye, etc. Why bother with "the new world with a new lore" if you are going to rehash the old lore anyway?

Because a game with "Dark Souls" in its title comes with certain expectations. If they fail to meet even a single one of those expectations, their fans are ready to grab the virtual pitchforks and start a shitstorm that can easily last for up to 7 years. People are still bitching about DS2 not being faithful enough to DS, and about DS3 being too faithful to it. How can you blame them for wanting a fresh start?

Meeting Patches the first time around was cool and unexpected, meeting him the second time around was funny because you already knew he's gonna pull some kind of trick on you, meeting him the third time was annoying.

And what about meeting him for the fourth time? And the fifth?

If by the third time you were already annoyed, this complaint stands for DS2, Bloodborne, and DS3. Everything you're saying (apart from the 100% assets reuse) applies to all recent FS games. If you were already tired of the decline of the series after DS2, expecting things to chance with ER after they were exactly the same in BB and DS3 doesn't make much sense.

because their gameplay is becoming worse and worse. Souls games never had great mechanics, deep character building or complex combat. They were fun because they were fresh and original, and because they lacked the usual popamole elements of other contemporary games.

[...]

This time around it's gonna be the old and tired gameplay formula + old and rehashed ideas + popamole ubisoft gamedesign.

The Ubisoft game design worries me too, but the "old and tired gameplay formula" is all but tired to me.

I'm still playing all souls games on a yearly basis, some of them more than once per year. I'm still trying to do a 100% run of BB without dying. I'm excited to try the upcoming mods for DS3. If all this isn't true for you, maybe you should have tuned down your expectations when they said they were going to make another game very similar to Dark Souls. I remember having a discussion here where someone said "no no this isn't true", but hey, who's laughing now?

 

[Caim]

Allah willing, may all those who D1P will be struck with blindness, baldness and perpetual hemorrhoids.

 

[Alienman]

I guarantee that someone who gives a fuck more than I do will make a move-for-move side-by-side representation of this shitty dragon.

Isn't that a big wyrm?