• @iforgotmyinstance
    link
    English
    161 year ago

    It’s bones are certainly clearly seen in DS3, but the narrative and world of ER put it above and beyond what the DS series achieved.

  • @RainyRat
    link
    141 year ago

    Scholar of the SECOND Sin.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    21 year ago

    Hot take but I’d rather play ds2 and I think this is an insult to ds2. 'Ate elden ring simple as.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 year ago

      I praise DS2 for going in a slightly different direction than “DS1 cycle forever, nothing matters”. Also, somehow, Elden Ring had worse balance and bosses than DS2.

      • Rat
        link
        21 year ago

        I always hated the cycles thing. It was just a way to explain more sequels and it cheapens the endings of dark souls 1. As much as I like the dark souls sequels it would have made much more sense to leave it at 1 tbh.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Or make the others prequels! There’s plenty of stuff to explore in the past. The Undead hunts? All the big kingdoms? Anyway, DS3 kinda rubs it in further by giving you the opposite of whatever ending you want (at least for the basic two). If you link, it just fades anyway. If you leave the flame to die, it just goes “lol, I’m back” later. Kind of ruins the “maybe this is the last one” narrative.

    • Grammaton Cleric
      link
      41 year ago

      I hate the names of everything and everyone in ER. FromSoft came up with cooler names in the DS/BB games.