So every Fromsoft or even RPG thread wouldn't become Bloodborne circlejerking. I love the game but this for me personally is the most irritating thing in Gaming Side.
"The witcher 3 is a great ga-"
"BLOODBORNE WAS ROBBED"
"Fromsoft working on new IP's"
"BLOODBORNE 2 BLOODBORNE 2 BLOODBORNE 2"
"Playing through dark souls 3"
"YEAH BUT HAVE YOU PLAYED BLOODBORNE"
Yeah, I loved the game but I think it was so many people's first Souls game 'cause it was accessible and was a first big exclusive for the console.
But God, it's become annoying. Like, people trying to shove it into that "Lore/Setting/Plot" thread when Souls games clearly don't have good plots. People will try to shove the game into every thread possible. It's especially annoying when they try to start downplaying the Souls games as if Bloodborne did something miraculously different except cater to people who didn't have enough patience for Souls.
I think it could be good if it came from a place of them actually wanting to do it, whereas I feel like they were pressured into DkS 2 and 3 by Namco. Like think of if Bloodborne 2 was the Dark Souls to Bloodborne's Demon's Souls.
People forget that both games also had co-directors which definitely lessened the attention spent while also allowing to fulfill roles related to being the president of the company. That is a pretty good way to handle these things.
Yeah, I loved the game but I think it was so many people's first Souls game 'cause it was accessible and was a first big exclusive for the console.
But God, it's become annoying. Like, people trying to shove it into that "Lore/Setting/Plot" thread when Souls games clearly don't have good plots. People will try to shove the game into every thread possible. It's especially annoying when they try to start downplaying the Souls games as if Bloodborne did something miraculously different except cater to people who didn't have enough patience for Souls.
I disagree, and I absolutely think Dark Souls 1 and Bloodborne belong in that thread, as I discussed about it in some detail there.
People just have different opinions, that's how discussion forums work. No one is "trying to shove" it there, they just think it deserves to be there.
I also disagree with some games posted there, but I don't need to be nearly as annoying about my disagreement as people are when it comes to Souls games and story. I can just read their reasoning, disagree and move on. Or engage in discussion if I so desire. I don't need to question if their opinion is even "valid".
I think it could be good if it came from a place of them actually wanting to do it, whereas I feel like they were pressured into DkS 2 and 3 by Namco. Like think of if Bloodborne 2 was the Dark Souls to Bloodborne's Demon's Souls.
But if they're making a change as drastic as the one from Demon's to Dark, then they should give it a different name and be free to do whatever they want with it, only keeping core mechanics.
Keep trick weapons, they're amazing, but don't tie yourself to the established world of Bloodborne. Unless they just want to keep it a cosmic horror story and the mechanics, but set in a completely different part of the world, with no mention whatsoever of previous events, but that would also be a disappointing sequel, in a way. Make it a new IP but keep the spirit, that's the way of making it the Dark Souls to Bloodborne's Demon's Souls.
I'd prefer a Spiritual Successor to Lost Kingdoms...
So much potential wasted on the Gamecube. The CCG concept is so widely popular from a digital standpoint right now, it would be the perfect time to revisit it.
"It doesn't necessarily mean he's not going to work on a Dark Souls-like game," explained a translator, "so he would definitely bring some of the good things - that could be some in-game elements, some of the product development experience - he would definitely bring those to a new Dark Souls-like game or Dark Souls-like franchise in the future."
When asked what he meant by a Dark Souls-like game, he explained, "It could be a dark fantasy game that has an element [...] of the accomplishment of overcoming difficulties, which is very unique to the Dark Souls franchise."
"From Software believes all the things we have learned in the past titles can be best reflected in the future only by starting work on a new franchise or series", he explained. "That's the philosophy behind us trying to make a decision about leaving the Dark Souls franchise."
Just like Bloodborne did then. They kinda haven't revealed if it's going to be first person or not have they? Game could potentially have the same structure, gameplay and mechanics as Dark Souls but moved into the King's Field first person view?
Just like Bloodborne did then. They kinda haven't revealed if it's going to be first person or not have they? Game could potentially have the same structure, gameplay and mechanics as Dark Souls but moved into the King's Field first person view?
I love the Souls game, but I hope this is a whole new take not a sequel. My favorite games they've made Souls wise are all the first ones: Demon's, Dark and Bloodborne.
As much as I'm ok playing Dark 2 and 3, they just don't hold that something special that the others do, if that makes sense.
So I'd love to see a game with the Souls mechanics, lore story telling and level design but in a whole new world. Could be Sci-fi as so many have said on GAF.
Would make for a really nice twist on the formula though, I think (plenty of the dev team from the King's Field/Shadow Tower Abyss days are still making games there at From even now). At least whilst they retire the Dark Souls series for the time being (which will inevitably be back at some point anyway).
Miyazaki has never disappointed when he shares his thoughts. I'm glad he wants to leave dark souls behind and I await whatever he decides to settle on.
Yeah, I loved the game but I think it was so many people's first Souls game 'cause it was accessible and was a first big exclusive for the console.
But God, it's become annoying. Like, people trying to shove it into that "Lore/Setting/Plot" thread when Souls games clearly don't have good plots. People will try to shove the game into every thread possible. It's especially annoying when they try to start downplaying the Souls games as if Bloodborne did something miraculously different except cater to people who didn't have enough patience for Souls.
I want a sequel to best the best game of this generation. It just so happens to be an exclusive. Not wanting a game to get a sequel because it exclusive is even more selfish. I have a feeling that is why a lot of people don't want Bloodborne 2 to happen.
I agree with the idea that souls-like games should not have sequels;Keep the same gameplay with a few minor changes like they did in BB by adding firearms but in a new setting/universe etc.
I love bloodborne but i don't think a sequel will have the same impact again.
Verendus said From has a 3 game deal with Sony there are are least 2 more PS exclusives coming. I just hope neither of those games is VR only or even designed primarily with VR in mind.
Verendus said From has a 3 game deal with Sony there are are least 2 more PS exclusives coming. I just hope neither of those games is VR only or even designed primarily with VR in mind.
So every Fromsoft or even RPG thread wouldn't become Bloodborne circlejerking. I love the game but this for me personally is the most irritating thing in Gaming Side.
"The witcher 3 is a great ga-"
"BLOODBORNE WAS ROBBED"
"Fromsoft working on new IP's"
"BLOODBORNE 2 BLOODBORNE 2 BLOODBORNE 2"
"Playing through dark souls 3"
"YEAH BUT HAVE YOU PLAYED BLOODBORNE"
It's a great game for sure and one of my all time favorites but it doesn't need to be involved every discussion of anything loosely connected to it go the point where it consumes all discussion.
yes coming from someone who baited Bloodborne fans into a witcher 3 thread
Fwiw I also believe all the people clamoring for Bloodborne 2 will be the same people complaining and making "Bloodborne 2: what went wrong?" Threads when they realize that From can't recapture the same magic of the first game by reusing the IP. Better to just make a new franchise and adopt some of its innovations and create a new world instead which is absolutely what the souls game in the OP will do since according to a GAF translation and other sources, it is a new IP which is for the best.
Now you know how Demon's Souls fans felt when all the kids started playing Dark Souls.
I think a lot of the clamouring for Bloodborne 2 is just because it's pretty obvious and a lot of people, especially on GAF, have no patience whatsoever.
I think it could be good if it came from a place of them actually wanting to do it, whereas I feel like they were pressured into DkS 2 and 3 by Namco. Like think of if Bloodborne 2 was the Dark Souls to Bloodborne's Demon's Souls.
Namco doesn't own Dark Souls, they just help Fromsoft distribute it outside of Japan so there isn't really any way they could "pressure" them into making anything. Someone else at Fromsoft wanted to make a dark souls game so Miyazaki let them and we got Dark Souls 2, Miyazaki felt that he should be the one to finish his series and had plenty of ideas on how to do it and we got Dark Souls III.
I agree with your line of thinking but it leads me to think they will make a Bloodborne 2. Assuming the talk of two more Sony exclusives coming is accurate, I don't think From Software would fill those slots with new IP now that they are owned by Kadokawa.
I think the two exclusives will be Bloodborne 2 and a new Armored Core (with exclusive PSVR mode). And their new IP will be something they would own. It would seem like very bad business for From Software to be giving away their new IPs right now. They would want to avoid Platinum's plight.
The wierd game has me interested. Not suprised about a new Armored Core and I hope the "dark souls esque" game ins't Dark Souls 4 or Bloodborne 2. I'd rather they create a new atmosphere while using similar mechanics found in BB or Dark Souls or else we will get a situation like Dark Souls 2 and 3 where they aren't explaining anything new and are for the most part treading similar waters story wise. I also feel like BB was its own contained story and doesn't need a sequel similar to DS 1.
or they can make Bleedborne, the spiritual successor to Bloodborne that's multiplatform much like they did with Dark Souls. Still has that atmospheric victorian setting without the exclusivity.
I want a sequel to best the best game of this generation. It just so happens to be an exclusive. Not wanting a game to get a sequel because it exclusive is even more selfish. I have a feeling that is why a lot of people don't want Bloodborne 2 to happen.