This video earned my subscription. I'm so happy someone voiced my feelings about sequels (in general, but especially for FROM games). I'm anxious that so many people seem to want an Elden Ring 2, like many wanted a Sekiro 2, and I fear that one day FROMSOFT may actually listen to them. Sometimes sequels can result in great games and big improvements over the original works, but I would always rather see a spiritual successor that takes the concepts forwards, isn't constrained by whatever the original work established and can afford to be more inventive.
I do mostly agree. DS2 is one game that managed to sometimes capture the adventuring feel of the first 2/3rds of DS1 for me, but while some of the areas in DS2 feel like torture, a lot of the areas in DS3 feel like a chore. But yeah, all of them have plenty of stuff to like as well. ER is not without it's shortcomings but i think it did capture a lot of the positive aspects from everything before it.
As someone who has played these games since Demons' Souls, I can honestly say that Dark Souls 3 is my favorite of the three Souls games. While I agree that the boss fights were fantastic (specially some of the DLC ones), and I really liked the tighter gameplay, those aren't the reasons why it's my favorite. The main reason is what I feel the game is actually about: the futility of upholding the past, and faded and misunderstood legacy. All the things that were brought back from DS1 are far from their original glory. We see these things corrupted, misinterpreted, misappropriated, and even completely forgotten. All attempts by those in the game to continue upholding what they think is their glorious legacy has lead to so much horror and tragedy, that not even the beings who are supposed to continue the cycle, want to do so anymore (hence why you, the player, have to hunt them down), and if you decide to continue with this futile effort at the end of the game, the ending outright tells you that it's a wasted effort, and you're getting greatly diminished returns. I remember marveling at how much of the lore from DS1 was completely misconstrued and/or distorted by characters in DS3 (for instance, The Darkmoon Blades, The Abyss Watchers, and the different mage groups in the game are great examples of this)... and how much of it was just dismissed as "fan service" by so many fans. Also, so much of the lore in DS1 was cleared up and further explored in DS3, like what the Painted world was about, or how badly screwed humans were from the very beginning of Gwyn's reign. Even the boss fight with Slave Knight Gael has greater emotional and thematic impact than any of the fights in DS1 and DS2 (and that's saying a lot). For me, DS3 is the best of the three souls games, but for none of the reasons people seem to focus on, much less even notice.
The kicker is that the DLC plot hammers the point home even further. I did enjoy Dark Souls 3 quite a bit, but I still stand by my position that From does their best work with spiritual successors as opposed to actual sequels. As for a Bloodborne 2, I am of two minds. I feel like it's unique enough that revisiting the general setting could be viable, and it doesn't have the same theme of entropy as the other games. Case in point, I have thoroughly enjoyed the comics, and I think a sequel could explore more ways of humans trying to force the future into a specific direction and why a consciously chosen evolution is at best misunderstanding humanity and more likely a cul de sac.
While I disagree with many opinions you have, it was SO refreshing to meet another person who doesn't see these games as amazing bosses connected by hallways you gotta run through. I love these worlds, and it always saddens me to see people blaze through them on their first playthrough just to get to their bosses.
I too have this disagreement with souls community. Everyone complains about why they can't put bonefires near every boss. If they do that, they now have to make the game tougher and pull tricks like 3 phases. Level design actually makes the game fun. I treat it sort of like phase 1 of a fight, and try to optimise my way to the boss. Of course I hate iron keep but a middle ground would be the best.
i don’t think i want a “bloodborne 2” per se, but what i do want is a spiritual successor to bloodborne, like how dark souls was a spiritual successor to demons’ souls.
Bloodborne is actually in some ways a successor to Demon's Souls. There's evidence that, while in development, Bloodborne was going to take place in the same world as Demon's Souls.
I will be okay if FromSoftware keep making games using the Souls formula. Elden Ring may not be DS4 but it gives me what I crave. Really too, I do respect that FromSoftware have a story they want to tell and then move on, its just mind blowing to me that they will create a world with so much depth that someone like VaatiVidya can sustain a RUclips career and then just move on like it doesn’t matter. And yeah, I don’t want FromSoftware to be like these other companies and just run Dark Souls into the ground, but at the same time I just want to know what happens next, and it’s that same mentality where I don’t see DS3 as nostalgia bait because we are seeing what happened to the world after we “saved” it in DS1. Who knows, maybe they will eventually make a DS4 if they have a story that they are proud of.
As someone who isn’t a big fan of DS3 but also started with it in the series (I rank it about where you do actually), I definitely agree with a lot of what you had to say about this game . I went from blindly hating it to blindly loving it, to being annoyed with it, to slowly starting to understand and respect it.
Never understood the r1 spam complaint for 3, you can do that with every souls game to more or less the same degree. 3 I always find a use for r1 and r2 and even though l2 is your main with twin blades I can find a use for r1. Sometimes a quick r1 swipe is what you need instead of committing to swinging both swords. or a charged attack. Think it's a legitimate skill issue I've seen people play ds3 and they just have zero sense of when and where to attack when enemies are that fast. In 1 it's super even to guage when an enemy can be hit with an r2 since the windup is so long and slow. Level design too I very much disagree. 1 fights you every second of the way for daring to enjoy it and ds2 fights your ability to pay attention since the threat is so minimal with how easy the combat is. 3 I always feel engaged outside of Faron swamp which is probably the worst level in the series. On tbe topic of the cake every ingredient is important. Level, enemy, visual, and bosses come together to give you the flavor of each area. It's like a great Zelda game where it's a holistic experience where every part that fails brings down the rest a little bit or even a lot. And on the lore in 3 and even 2 is more interesting. 1 is setting it up while 2 and 3 further explores ideas, characters, and themes of 1. I went from 3 to 1 back to back and I always remember thinking "man they were more interesting in 3". Miyazaki said that he didn't think we'd get 3 and then went on to say he got to explore more than he thought he would. It's not as "man I have to make a 3rd one? Time to phone it in" as ds1 fanboys like to paint.
I went from Elden Ring to DS1 then onwards, to be quite honest DS3 always felt like it was missing something. Most souls games feel that way tbh. But i definitely think it felt more prominent in DS3. Although levels look visually pleasing in DS3 I feel thats the only thing that its got going for it in terms of level design , as this guy mentions the lack of interconnectivity and the focus being more linear in order to progress to levels (I do recognize its subjective) makes the levels feel like they lack the seamless exploration and depth that DS1 had. As for lore I always felt DS1, DS2, and DS3 done a great job at displaying the core theme of series, but even then both DS2 and DS3 didn’t really expand/explore the lore as much as I had hoped. I always felt that Gwyn’s age of fire, his allies and his fears of the dark felt much more intriguing and IMO DS2/DS3 lacked the ingenuity DS1 has.
I think the point is that in ds3 most weapons 2 R1s do more damage than a fully charged R2 and comes out quicker so there's not a lot of incentive to do it although I'm pretty sure CR2s do more stagger damage. This is why elden ring is so much more engaging. With the stance damage system, jump attacks and charged r2s do the most but some attacks will only have time for an R1 or two. Not to mention with elden ring combat, positioning is wayyy more powerful than ds3 and certain combo branches can be baited out for the best punishes as opposed to the turn based feel of ds3 where you just roll, attack, roll, attack, roll twice, attack.
Nah, DS3 if enemy is staggarable you spam R1 until either it dies or you run out of stamina. If it lives, you gotta get ready for an ass whooping and dodge their 7 hit combo chain and then repeat the spam. If not staggerable then you get to utilise some wrinkles on your brain. Legitimately, the non boss combat of this game is whichever party is preemptive wins.
Souls combat can get a bit spammy in general. 1 powerful move is what u end up spamming. In DS3, it was universally the R1. ER managed ro mitigate this by the stance system, and the speed of combat. In some openings, u can barely get an R1, but in longer openings Charged R2s are better than multiple R1s
ngl bloodborne (especially combat and bosses) is highly underdeveloped. I wanna see sequel just to see ideas come to something, not left halfbacked in the past
Lets test it, I'll come back here in 30yrs and we'll see who dies first. Dont hate DaS3 far from it, its much better than 2 for me, but 3 is forgettable for me, even after platting it. Even the ost, every fan drools over it, but I for the life of me cant remember even the tone of it. I think it might be cause deep down I just feel its unneeded and a sort of band aid fix that was the mess that was 2. Edit: Gods, I love BB, always end up replaying it in october, for some reason. And I shiver in cold sweat at the chance of BB2 or BB being ported to pc by Bluepoint, please dont use their services, I will die on this hill: Demon's Souls Remake is a Final Fantasy with From's gameplay, you cant look me in the eyes and say ''it doesnt look like its art direction is made by Square Enix'' like how do you make the most deplorable enemy, that grape in the lore, look sympathetic? Fat ministers looked sadistic, that they enjoy torturing the weak, but blue point made them look like theyre afflicted and what theyre doing isnt cause the enjoy it, but are made to by the King.
Yeah I'm gonna be honest I don't want dark souls 4, or elden ring 2, I feel like elden ring was what I want, just more games in a similar gameplay/style, that's all I need, I don't need a connected series, hell, the whackier and more different they make the next soulsborne, the better
This guy gets it. Yet, I'm also the type of dude who thinks farron keep is the best swamp fromsoft has designed, so I'm maybe a bit too much of a ds3 fan boy.
Its not even a sequel for bloodborne that i want.. Its a PC PORT GODDAMNIT.. Though, I am guilty of wanting a Sekiro Sequel despite knowing that it will probably never get one.
What I can see them do is make a new DS4 game maybe 10-15 years later just like they did with AC6.Maybe not a DS4 as a sequal but a new game that is the aftermath of the painting. But even then don't expect it in the next 10 years XD
Y'all gonna be absolutely blindsided when they release Bright Souls
This video earned my subscription. I'm so happy someone voiced my feelings about sequels (in general, but especially for FROM games). I'm anxious that so many people seem to want an Elden Ring 2, like many wanted a Sekiro 2, and I fear that one day FROMSOFT may actually listen to them. Sometimes sequels can result in great games and big improvements over the original works, but I would always rather see a spiritual successor that takes the concepts forwards, isn't constrained by whatever the original work established and can afford to be more inventive.
I do mostly agree. DS2 is one game that managed to sometimes capture the adventuring feel of the first 2/3rds of DS1 for me, but while some of the areas in DS2 feel like torture, a lot of the areas in DS3 feel like a chore.
But yeah, all of them have plenty of stuff to like as well. ER is not without it's shortcomings but i think it did capture a lot of the positive aspects from everything before it.
As someone who has played these games since Demons' Souls, I can honestly say that Dark Souls 3 is my favorite of the three Souls games. While I agree that the boss fights were fantastic (specially some of the DLC ones), and I really liked the tighter gameplay, those aren't the reasons why it's my favorite. The main reason is what I feel the game is actually about: the futility of upholding the past, and faded and misunderstood legacy. All the things that were brought back from DS1 are far from their original glory. We see these things corrupted, misinterpreted, misappropriated, and even completely forgotten. All attempts by those in the game to continue upholding what they think is their glorious legacy has lead to so much horror and tragedy, that not even the beings who are supposed to continue the cycle, want to do so anymore (hence why you, the player, have to hunt them down), and if you decide to continue with this futile effort at the end of the game, the ending outright tells you that it's a wasted effort, and you're getting greatly diminished returns. I remember marveling at how much of the lore from DS1 was completely misconstrued and/or distorted by characters in DS3 (for instance, The Darkmoon Blades, The Abyss Watchers, and the different mage groups in the game are great examples of this)... and how much of it was just dismissed as "fan service" by so many fans. Also, so much of the lore in DS1 was cleared up and further explored in DS3, like what the Painted world was about, or how badly screwed humans were from the very beginning of Gwyn's reign. Even the boss fight with Slave Knight Gael has greater emotional and thematic impact than any of the fights in DS1 and DS2 (and that's saying a lot). For me, DS3 is the best of the three souls games, but for none of the reasons people seem to focus on, much less even notice.
Keep up the good work,
Also you remind me of DJ Peach Cobbler. (Not a bad thing)
"Dark Souls 3 is a game that's thinking about ending things."
-Jacob Geller
The kicker is that the DLC plot hammers the point home even further. I did enjoy Dark Souls 3 quite a bit, but I still stand by my position that From does their best work with spiritual successors as opposed to actual sequels.
As for a Bloodborne 2, I am of two minds. I feel like it's unique enough that revisiting the general setting could be viable, and it doesn't have the same theme of entropy as the other games. Case in point, I have thoroughly enjoyed the comics, and I think a sequel could explore more ways of humans trying to force the future into a specific direction and why a consciously chosen evolution is at best misunderstanding humanity and more likely a cul de sac.
While I disagree with many opinions you have, it was SO refreshing to meet another person who doesn't see these games as amazing bosses connected by hallways you gotta run through. I love these worlds, and it always saddens me to see people blaze through them on their first playthrough just to get to their bosses.
I too have this disagreement with souls community. Everyone complains about why they can't put bonefires near every boss. If they do that, they now have to make the game tougher and pull tricks like 3 phases.
Level design actually makes the game fun. I treat it sort of like phase 1 of a fight, and try to optimise my way to the boss. Of course I hate iron keep but a middle ground would be the best.
i don’t think i want a “bloodborne 2” per se, but what i do want is a spiritual successor to bloodborne, like how dark souls was a spiritual successor to demons’ souls.
Bloodborne is actually in some ways a successor to Demon's Souls. There's evidence that, while in development, Bloodborne was going to take place in the same world as Demon's Souls.
I will be okay if FromSoftware keep making games using the Souls formula. Elden Ring may not be DS4 but it gives me what I crave. Really too, I do respect that FromSoftware have a story they want to tell and then move on, its just mind blowing to me that they will create a world with so much depth that someone like VaatiVidya can sustain a RUclips career and then just move on like it doesn’t matter. And yeah, I don’t want FromSoftware to be like these other companies and just run Dark Souls into the ground, but at the same time I just want to know what happens next, and it’s that same mentality where I don’t see DS3 as nostalgia bait because we are seeing what happened to the world after we “saved” it in DS1.
Who knows, maybe they will eventually make a DS4 if they have a story that they are proud of.
Your views and subs will blow up soon. Your DS1 video hit my recommended today and I'm checking out all your stuff, it's great
Played DS2 for 8 hours today and now I’m going to bed watching dark souls video essays IM ADDICTED TO FROMSOFT
As someone who isn’t a big fan of DS3 but also started with it in the series (I rank it about where you do actually), I definitely agree with a lot of what you had to say about this game . I went from blindly hating it to blindly loving it, to being annoyed with it, to slowly starting to understand and respect it.
Never understood the r1 spam complaint for 3, you can do that with every souls game to more or less the same degree. 3 I always find a use for r1 and r2 and even though l2 is your main with twin blades I can find a use for r1. Sometimes a quick r1 swipe is what you need instead of committing to swinging both swords. or a charged attack. Think it's a legitimate skill issue I've seen people play ds3 and they just have zero sense of when and where to attack when enemies are that fast. In 1 it's super even to guage when an enemy can be hit with an r2 since the windup is so long and slow. Level design too I very much disagree. 1 fights you every second of the way for daring to enjoy it and ds2 fights your ability to pay attention since the threat is so minimal with how easy the combat is. 3 I always feel engaged outside of Faron swamp which is probably the worst level in the series.
On tbe topic of the cake every ingredient is important. Level, enemy, visual, and bosses come together to give you the flavor of each area. It's like a great Zelda game where it's a holistic experience where every part that fails brings down the rest a little bit or even a lot.
And on the lore in 3 and even 2 is more interesting. 1 is setting it up while 2 and 3 further explores ideas, characters, and themes of 1. I went from 3 to 1 back to back and I always remember thinking "man they were more interesting in 3". Miyazaki said that he didn't think we'd get 3 and then went on to say he got to explore more than he thought he would. It's not as "man I have to make a 3rd one? Time to phone it in" as ds1 fanboys like to paint.
I went from Elden Ring to DS1 then onwards, to be quite honest DS3 always felt like it was missing something. Most souls games feel that way tbh. But i definitely think it felt more prominent in DS3. Although levels look visually pleasing in DS3 I feel thats the only thing that its got going for it in terms of level design , as this guy mentions the lack of interconnectivity and the focus being more linear in order to progress to levels (I do recognize its subjective) makes the levels feel like they lack the seamless exploration and depth that DS1 had. As for lore I always felt DS1, DS2, and DS3 done a great job at displaying the core theme of series, but even then both DS2 and DS3 didn’t really expand/explore the lore as much as I had hoped. I always felt that Gwyn’s age of fire, his allies and his fears of the dark felt much more intriguing and IMO DS2/DS3 lacked the ingenuity DS1 has.
I think the point is that in ds3 most weapons 2 R1s do more damage than a fully charged R2 and comes out quicker so there's not a lot of incentive to do it although I'm pretty sure CR2s do more stagger damage. This is why elden ring is so much more engaging. With the stance damage system, jump attacks and charged r2s do the most but some attacks will only have time for an R1 or two. Not to mention with elden ring combat, positioning is wayyy more powerful than ds3 and certain combo branches can be baited out for the best punishes as opposed to the turn based feel of ds3 where you just roll, attack, roll, attack, roll twice, attack.
Nah, DS3 if enemy is staggarable you spam R1 until either it dies or you run out of stamina. If it lives, you gotta get ready for an ass whooping and dodge their 7 hit combo chain and then repeat the spam. If not staggerable then you get to utilise some wrinkles on your brain. Legitimately, the non boss combat of this game is whichever party is preemptive wins.
Souls combat can get a bit spammy in general. 1 powerful move is what u end up spamming. In DS3, it was universally the R1. ER managed ro mitigate this by the stance system, and the speed of combat. In some openings, u can barely get an R1, but in longer openings Charged R2s are better than multiple R1s
ngl bloodborne (especially combat and bosses) is highly underdeveloped. I wanna see sequel just to see ideas come to something, not left halfbacked in the past
Jr Peach Cobbler has some amazing Dark Souls videos
Liked and subscribed. I'm in the 500 club 😂
Lets test it, I'll come back here in 30yrs and we'll see who dies first.
Dont hate DaS3 far from it, its much better than 2 for me, but 3 is forgettable for me, even after platting it. Even the ost, every fan drools over it, but I for the life of me cant remember even the tone of it. I think it might be cause deep down I just feel its unneeded and a sort of band aid fix that was the mess that was 2.
Edit: Gods, I love BB, always end up replaying it in october, for some reason. And I shiver in cold sweat at the chance of BB2 or BB being ported to pc by Bluepoint, please dont use their services, I will die on this hill: Demon's Souls Remake is a Final Fantasy with From's gameplay, you cant look me in the eyes and say ''it doesnt look like its art direction is made by Square Enix'' like how do you make the most deplorable enemy, that grape in the lore, look sympathetic? Fat ministers looked sadistic, that they enjoy torturing the weak, but blue point made them look like theyre afflicted and what theyre doing isnt cause the enjoy it, but are made to by the King.
Yeah I'm gonna be honest I don't want dark souls 4, or elden ring 2, I feel like elden ring was what I want, just more games in a similar gameplay/style, that's all I need, I don't need a connected series, hell, the whackier and more different they make the next soulsborne, the better
Elden Ring is the Hard Reboot of Darksouls.
This is an amazing video essay 😭
The catholic church is a fun time with an ultra greatsword
agree
This guy gets it. Yet, I'm also the type of dude who thinks farron keep is the best swamp fromsoft has designed, so I'm maybe a bit too much of a ds3 fan boy.
Another banger of a video
Keep going❤
Great vid.
2:17 disliked and reported
One day I will be able to say "When this kid had less than 400 subs, I was there "
Glazing
Its not even a sequel for bloodborne that i want.. Its a PC PORT GODDAMNIT..
Though, I am guilty of wanting a Sekiro Sequel despite knowing that it will probably never get one.
What I can see them do is make a new DS4 game maybe 10-15 years later just like they did with AC6.Maybe not a DS4 as a sequal but a new game that is the aftermath of the painting. But even then don't expect it in the next 10 years XD