More Souls is still fine and dandy for me right now. The Souls games are essentially comfort food at this point. They're games that I know I'm going to enjoy a great deal, regardless of how familiar they are from one to the next. They have an intrinsic quality and level of depth to just about everything that most other games still can't match.

...Would really like to receive some details with whatever's happening with this Bloodborne 'expansion', though.

It is starting to wear thin, at least in parts. I'm not sold on sci-fi Souls yet, but I do feel their repertoire is well and truly saturated with bonfires, undead, and the like. From knows fantasy aesthetics so well that I'm not done with dark medieval Europe yet, so I'd say that them retreading the same iconography is a bigger qualm for me.

I saw 3 and it looks just like 1 and 2. I'm tired of the same enemy animations, samey-looking undead enemies, the samey-looking environments. Seriously, how many steeples and castles and collapsed stone buildings before enough is enough. I'm particularly tired of the same player animations and weapon variants. The same armor styles, the same stat system, the same death/hollow/retrieval mechanic.

It's all the same, the only differences probably being the bosses and the route you'll have to take through a very familiar aesthetic. I thought I would have been OK with more of the same, but after watching the game in action I realized how boring it's all becoming. I want different everything, aesthetics, engine, movement, weapons, armor, animation, enemies, environment, time period. A story worth giving a shit about would be nice, too.

I've not even played 2 yet, so I don't honestly know, but you would hope they'd try at least expand on it and bring in new things. But at the same time what can you really do?

I'm fine with another "Souls" game. Bloodborne was different enough that you could probably hitch your wagon to that going forward. I'm sure it's not the only game that will be made in that world, with that engine. Maybe it won't be Bloodborne 2. Maybe it'll be a spiritual successor, IE Demon's Souls to Dark Souls. Maybe BloodDead or something (not really. Bad name).

As far as Dark Souls 3, I'm pretty damn excited. I like the look of everything so far. I mean, they aren't going to show off everything, and there are things they'll want to keep secret. It DID look very similar to "traditional" beginning Souls-areas. I'm sure it'll branch out more though. If you want to believe the whole, "this is a turning point for the series" talk (which I would. Why not, it's from Miyazaki himself), then expect this to be the last Souls game that looks/plays like this. I guess? I don't know what they have in store for the future, but I'm on board with Sci-fi Souls, Grand Theft Souls, Ninja Souls, or whatever the hell they wanna do. I greatly enjoy playing these games, and I hope they continue making high-quality games for a long time

There definitely need to be major changes. The mystique, dread and overall difficulty falls drastically with every Souls game since people are really getting good at the gameplay and basic principles of builds. DS2 was my 3rd Souls game (started on Demon's) and although I enjoyed it I can hardly see playing something like that yet again with the same childlike glee and awe.

So after seeing this video I went to see if Miyazaki is directing this one. Turns out he is, and he promises a certain bar of quality with this game. Only the final product will tell of course but I tend to believe him. That said, however, this seems only superficially similar to what I fell in love with with Demon's Souls. Whereas Demon's was original, bold, daring, imaginative, mysterious, and innovative the Dark Souls series has been a derivative, safe, unimaginative, known quantity. I'll probably skip this in favor of the coming Bloodborne dlc.

I'm still really excited for 3. It has been a while since I played a Souls game (last I played it was when the last DLC for 2 was released), since I don't have a Playstation. So I'm itching to get me some Souls again. But I'm the type of person that does several playthroughs of the Souls games so I don't mind more of the same.

1 Souls please my good man.

I am happy with the formula, I just want a new room in which to apply it every time. It's worked so far for me except with dark souls 2, which was poo mostly because it didn't stick to the formula.

My option wasn't on there - if it's more of DSI then I'm in, but if it's more of 2 I couldn't care less. The pacing of the first one was just much better in terms of spacing the bosses out, and making exploring actually exciting. Two was just a boss rush and I didn't really enjoy it. I still might pass, I could just be done with these games.

If they take it more back in the direction of DS I'm all on board. More of DS2 though? Meh, I'll rather skip it in that case, DS2 was enough DS2 for me...

More of the same is fine with me. From what I've seen Dark Souls 3 looks like it's going to be just more dark souls but faster, which is good enough for me.

I'm done I think. 300h+ in Dark Souls. 3 playthroughs of Demon's and two of Dark Souls 2. At this point I've done enough of that combat for a lifetime, the AI needs to change at this point at LEAST. When I can just waltz into the new games and know exactly how to break the enemies almost from the start, something is wrong. The mystique and atmosphere of the franchise has dwindled over time as it gets more focused on mechanics without actually shaking them up at all...

I want more of what Dark Souls represents, but I don't neccessarily want more Dark Souls at this point.

This will be the last Dark Souls confirmed, this will be the last "souls game" confirmed (wish I remembered the details of what Miyazaki said), DS3 improves on a lot of DS2 issues confirmed. This is the way to wrap it up. I'm excited even if they throw the Souls style games out the window once it's done and has received its patches and DLC.

5/5 would platinum again says the one who only ever played the network test of DS2

*sigh* I love this series for better or worse. When DaS3 comes out I will put in hundreds of hours into it like I have for the previous games, and like before I will spend half of those hours complaining about it. I'm not great at putting together an argument or explaining my criticisms, writing and speaking are not things I enjoy, but I want to say something short. The souls series needs to evolve. They need to add depth and skill where there once was nothing. It's certainly not the only problem with the series but it's one I can make a okay argument for, shields. In DeS and DaS shields were too good. It's too easy to hold it up wait till the enemy clangs off then counter-attack. It's also too easy to simply circle strafe with your shield up and back-stab someone. So they tried to fix this in DaS2, not by adding some level of depth of skill to it but instead just nerfing them. This led to people giving up shields much sooner than the previous games. Now here comes BB which not only drops shields as a whole, it mocks it as a tool for the passive when they themselves made shields the way they are. It's not out yet I know but DaS3 looks like it's just going to be a return to form with as much thought put into shields, rolling, parrying, backstabs, R1R1, etc. as the previous games. Maybe the Souls game I want is one that is impossible or at least so different that it won't even be recognizable, hell I don't know exactly what the Souls game I want looks like.

There's a artist by the name of Plague of Gripes who's a fan of the series and I share a lot of his criticism on this. He's pretty vocal on this topic and can make a far better and more intelligible argument on this. If you're willing to dig a little he tries to explain his criticisms on this reddit thread. Unfortunately he's never put all of his thoughts on the matter in one place.

tl:dr I feel the Souls series needs more depth and mechanics added into it before they just fall into complacency with thunderous applause.

I'll echo what @bollard said as far as my feelings on where they should be taking inspiration from for DS3. I enjoyed my time with DS2 but the world just didn't seem to have the same mystique and atmosphere in the way it was put together. My favourite thing about these games is just exploring and figuring out the world, after Demons Souls I felt like Dark Souls 1 was such an improvement as far as building a world/universe and I ate that shit up, then going to DS2 for some reason it just didn't have the same weight to it. I'll be going dark as far as media goes for DS3 until the QL and will certainly be picking it up when it comes out, but if it's just more DS2 I'd rather they take a break from the souls/blood games for a while.

Edit: I remember when I saw the GC announcement thinking it was really soon for another one of these games, for some reason it feels like the last couple were spaced out a little more.

@yummylee said:

My thoughts exactly. I'm OK with iteration and small improvements to the same formula for this series. There are no games that provide the same experience that this series does and until somebody steps up to the plate to compete these guys don't need to worry too much about making huge changes. I do hope that they stick true to the claims that Dark Souls 3 is the last in the series and move on to a new game; but the game itself doesn't need to totally change the world. It's like expecting Coca-Cola to update their formula and make it even more flavorful and refreshing - they probably could, but who's fucking with Coca-Cola (or Coca-Cola Classic, whatever it's called) right now? Nobody.

@unholymike123: Plague needs to get back to building that damn fence.

I haven't played Bloodborne yet but I already don't want another "more is more" sequel. That's what DSII tried to do which was a disappointing.

I am down for more Souls, but I think I'll be less charitable should they try to come back to the well after this without some more radical changes. It's not exactly like the world is abundant with clones of Dark Souls (just Lords of the Fallen), but I'd like From to do something a little different and crazy rather than play it safe.

Yeah, more Dark Souls is perfectly fine for me. I would be perfectly happy with just more of it, just more polished and refined, which is exactly what DS3 looks like. I don't have the luxury of owning a PS4 (and didn't have a PS3) so I'm only 2 / 4 out of the entire franchise. That leaves me pretty excited for number 3.

I'm down for one more proper Souls game, but after this I think they need to hit up the ol' drawing board. If next year they come around and are all like "Check it, Bloodborne 2!", than I think Souls fatigue will set in.

Personally, I don't think they need to change the formula of gameplay too much. Every DS game is going to have a few new features and get rid of old ones. I think the most important thing to me is the world fun to explore, are the bosses unique and interesting to fight, and do they expand on the lore in a meaningful way?

If it does then I'm in; it's the reason I even played Bloodborne. Before I saw the quick look I wasn't interested in playing, but after seeing how interesting the setting was I wanted to dive in immediately. I can see if you have no interest in the story of these games, or how they tie together, why you would feel fatigue.

For me, I hope they stop after DS3 and continue on to make another game in a unique setting, with similar story telling mechanics, and gameplay derived from their older ones. I just hope they don't milk these games till they dry up and stop selling.

They should change it up. I feel that in most things and the Souls series is no different. Do something unique with a series that was born out of the desire for change.

I'm likely not gonna play Dark Souls III. I've put possibly 2000 hours into this series, starting with Demon's Souls, and I'm sick of the same mechanics, limited controls, wooden NPCs and terrible looking protagonists. The world has gotten stale for me too. Besides, it's hard to be enthusiastic knowing I'd have to wait a full year so that FromSoftware couldn't screw me over with another incompatible Steam re-release. I want to experience new adventures.

I really didn't like Bloodborne, so yeah, more actual Souls please. I really hate sequels that try to reinvent the series (Mass Effect 2, Diablo III, Dragon Age 2, Bloodborne if you want to count it as a sequel, etc.).

It is for me.

I'm fine with more of the same. I didn't play bloodborne so it's been awhile since I had a new souls styled game. That being said, they might be getting close to it not being enough. I'm not quite as hyped as I was for Dark Souls 2. If they try to push out a 4th game a year later then I'll be wanting them to pump the breaks a bit.

Yes of course. They're on 3 excellent games in a row at this point so it becomes more difficult to make an even better one; however even if the game is merely decent it will be enjoyable; especially the first time through it. That exploration feeling is still unmatched.

I really liked Lords of the Fallen and there's no doubt that's the worst "Souls" game, and this game will probably be anywhere between slightly better than Demon's Souls to on par with Dark Souls II (the best game in the series). It's not going to be better than the Witcher 3 since that would require near gameplay perfection given the absence of any story whatsoever.

I would anticipate a Siegmeyer/Solaire facsimile so that should make some people happy.

210 hours in Bloodborne on one character and still not bored with it.

@nosferat2: Bloodborne 2 is guaranteed, that's the nature of exclusive contracts; also it came out when there were almost no objectively good retail games on PS4 so of course it sold well.

I'd like a spell system overhaul, but other than that I'm happy with more Dark Souls. I don't see the point in changing something that works just for the sake of making it different. That's why modern music sucks.

Get off my lawn! *shakes fist*

I'm excited for more Dark Souls, but then I never played Demon Souls, and wasn't a fan of Dark Souls 2 so it's a little more fresh to me. Also, I like the looks of what they're doing with the combat and there's always room for surprises in well-crafted locations, interesting new boss battles, and exciting new Covenants.

On that note, where I really would like to see big improvements is with the covenant system. This time it needs to be cool AND functional, which would be a first.

I think the underlying formula is still quite sound. Really the things are making me tired with the series are the ancillary things around it that haven't been addressed. For example, I'm really sick of them having the same shitty camera system that freaks out in enclosed spaces game after game after game. It's about time that gets fixed. They also need to include things like a functional means of comparing items when you are shopping at NPCs. No excuse to not have that at this point.

If they address all the little usability stuff, I think they're good so long as they don't clone old enemies like they did in DSII.

They're in the unenviable territory where they're probably going to piss off half of the fanbase no matter what they do. If it's more of the same, people will whine that it's nothing new. If it's different, people will whine that it got away from the mechanics and feel of other Souls games. Internet.

I'm of the opinion that all the Souls games to date are somewhere between good and great, and I expect no different from DSIII. However, that they're mostly so beloved has DSIII primed for overzealous comments about how it doesn't hold a candle to (insert favorite Souls game). You saw a bit of this with DSII, but this will be likely be in full force for DSIII with a large contingent of people acting like it's a much worse game than it is because they went into it ready to nitpick it to death.

It's going to be "cool" to hate on DSIII because what was once a niche series is releasing a new game quicker than many expected and crossing over into mainstream acceptance, so the people who played Demon's and DSI are going to reject it and claim series fatigue out of a desire to act/feel special for being in on the series early. I don't think it's going to really matter how good/bad the game actually is; I think a bunch of people are just waiting to label it the worst Souls game.

I hope I'm wrong. I hope people give it a fair shake and realize that there's not really anything like the Souls games before they eagerly crap on DSIII and say they've had their fill of the series. More of a great thing should be enough, but I get the sense that a bunch of people won't be impressed unless DSIII manages to be "NEW!" greatness that feels both fresh and familiar, which is a freaking tall order. I guess we'll see soon enough.

Strike while the iron is hot, I guess.

@humanity Souls is never more of the same because the game is based on discovery. The fact that you are going through new environments and fighting new bosses is what makes a Souls game for me.

Bloodborne was amazing because I thought I was just going to go in and destroy everything given my 1000+ hours of PVP spread across both DS1 and DS2, but the enemy and boss mechanics still manage to defy my expectations (I always keep my Vitality low to force myself to learn how to dodge their movesets instead of tanking their damage).

We already know about some of the new mechanics being implemented into the combat and I'm confident that From is going to keep players on their toes.

@notnert427: I think you're totally right. I didn't get Demon's Souls until about a year after it released (I got it in 2010), but I seem to be in the minority of people that started with Demon's Souls. I think that's a very annoying part of the Souls community, where people want to feel "special" because they played Demon's Souls when it came out. I love every game. I thought DSII was amazing (and it was, and still is seemingly, cool to hate on that game), and Bloodborne was just as good. I remember people bitching about Dark Souls when it came out because of changes it made compared to Demon's Souls. In particular, I think Dark Souls gets looked at unbelievably positively because it was so unique at the time, and it was a lot of peoples' first game in the series. I'll admit it was the game that obsessed me, but people look at it with those ol' rose colored glasses. And I agree that people already seem to have this labeled as "worst Souls game". I hope everyone does play it and judge it objectively based on what kind of game it is. I'm rambling now, but I'm very, very excited for DSIII

@golguin: also agree here. The sense of discovery, the atmosphere, the grand levels and unique, majestic (sometimes) boss battles are what I love the most. Well said!

@fredchuckdave: and I definitely have no problem with Bloodborne 2. I was guessing it was an inevitability (regardless of what it ends up being called). I hope the games make lots of money so they can continue making more, and making them better.

@golguin: Well I made this thread specifically to test the waters and get opinions like yours for example.

It seems the majority of people thus far are happy to play more Souls games without significant changes to the formula. (whether those Souls games resemble DS1 or DS2 is really not that important because despite what most might think the two are not that different from one another)

I'm actually surprised by how many people are fine with more of the same. I like these games as much as the next guy but the ever present bugs, bad camera and awkward lock-on with certain bosses have really started to grind down that wall of infatuation I used to have with the series. Also as some pointed out, I used to love the dark fantasy aesthetics with fluted armor and ruined castles, but I'm ready to move on.

My sentiments are similar to what our old friend Patrick Klepek had to say on this topic. He argues that despite while the Souls games have some of the initial charm back when these games didn't exist, he'd still be ok with more Souls games--he even refers to the franchise as "[his] Call of Duty." He references Miyazaki's comments on how Dark Souls 3 is "a turning point for the franchise" and the fact that gap between Souls games was much wider in the past. He expresses his desire that the Souls games keep changing the theme (with special emphasis on a "futuristic Dark Souls" example) a desire that I think is possible given the positive reaction to Bloodborne.

I personally don't feel equipped to say that I have Souls fatigue until this game is released, but I do hope that Dark Souls 3 manages to change things up a bit more than what it may seem given that it still uses the fantasy Europe theme. In any case, a successful Souls game is one that defies expectations, and given that they haven't failed me on that yet, I am going to trust them.