Dark Souls lore thread #5

Dark Souls Lore Thread: Traditional Gaming Edition.

Please feel free to discuss any theories, speculations or ask any questions you may have about any of the souls games in the trilogy.

Previous thread here:

So we already know that Soul Stream and Soul Geyser are the same spell

>It should be noted that in Japanese, this is the same spell as "Soul Geyser" in Dark Souls 2. Also, the description of the spell in 2 calling it a family heirloom is erroneous; It is said to be An-Dil's (Aldia's) "legacy", suggesting that he created it.

The in-game translation is:
>"Sorcery imparted by the first of the Scholars, when Lothric and the Grand Archives were but young.
>The first of the Scholars doubted the linking of the fire, and was alleged to be a private mentor to the Royal Prince."

The source text is:
>"A sorcery taught by the First Sage, when Lothric and the Great Library first began. The First Sage was a skeptic of the fire-inheriting, and secretly tutored the prince."

That the translator changed sage to Scholar with a capital S is really suspicious and suggests that they might have heard something we don't know from Miyazaki. What we know is that the First Scholar doubted the linking of the fire, and was passing down Aldia's signature sorcery. Gee, I wonder who this could be.

In addition to all this: Remember how Aldia was making dragons and wyverns in Dark Souls 2?

Just thought it was pretty suspicious how there are two wyverns in Lothric seemingly guarding the path to the grand archive, and that when you kill them their bodies don't disappear until you also destroy the goop monsters that come out of their bodies (this doesn't happen with the ancient wyvern, which is presumably a real one since it's at the archdragon peak).

Reminder that DaS1 giants do in fact have faces

The Deep is referring to or at least related to Ash Lake and the liquid contained therein.
It's said in 3 that the Human Dregs, what one can assume to be the smallest unit of the Deep, constitutes the "bedrock of the world" and that they naturally sink to the bottom of a Human and presumably also the world. Considering the color of Human Dregs and the color of the "water" in Ash Lake, the lowest part of the entire Dark Souls world, its not a stretch to assume that they're one in the same or again related.
Also, if Human Dregs found there way down to Ash Lake, the water level would eventually rise given enough Dregs and time. Considering how much time has passed and how many humans presumably died in the time span between 1 and 3, it wouldn't be hard to assume how Ash Lake may have become a Deep Sea of Ash that would have continued to rise higher and higher, as Aldrich predicted.

While The Deep might be a physical, geographically set locale in the world, I find the connection with Ash Lake to be somewhat forced. Especially since you already visit a portion of it during the game in the form of Smouldering Lake, and it has none of the nonsense usually associated with the Deep or the contamination by the Abyss.

To be fair, using the Giant Blacksmith is an unfair example imo. If one was to assume the the "hollowed-out" face was the sign that a Giant had gone hollow in 2, and that Andre was able to go without hollowing because he always had purpose in his life (his smithing), then it's possible that the giant was able to stave of going hollow in much the same way, allowing him to keep his face.
It's a rather stupid theory but I think it deserves to be noted. Also, Giants may just take longer to go hollow than Humans. Maybe not enough time has passed since the Gwyn left to fire?

I don't think that Smouldering Lake is Ash Lake. The lowest you go in Smouldering Lake is Demon Ruins. In Dark Souls 1 Demon Ruins was still a ways above Lost Izalith (and the Flame of Chaos), and Lost Izalith was still above Ash Lake.
It would make sense if the reason Smouldering Lake was smouldering was because it was sitting right above Lost Izalith, similar to how a pot boils when placed over a flame (or in this case, the Chaos Flame). This makes even more sense considering the definition of "smouldering" is to "burn slowly with smoke but no flame" as it's stated that the Flame of Chaos has gone out.
Smouldering Lake is most likely comparable to the area where Ceaseless Discharge stands, while the Demon Ruins part is comparable to where all the the Capra's, Taurus', and Bitch Tits: Flamin' Hot Edition are.

Has anybody used Seek Guidance to thoroughly search for any hidden developer messages?

>Has anyone used Seek Guidance
Has anyone ever?

It lets you see/use non-white summon signs without using an ember.

Also, it's fun reading message sometimes and you don't ever really need more than 2 or 3 spell slots.

But yet you can still see the petrified archtrees that sustain the world from Smouldering Lake, where there was no hint of them in Lost Izalith.

And granted, while it is a fenced off area and not as open as the original, you can still see the trunks of trees stretching a fair ways into the distance as well.

It also wouldn't make much sense for the lake to be burning as a result of sitting on top of Izalith proper, since the descriptions make it clear that the Chaos Flame of Izalith has died long before the game started, and whatever embers of its power are left presumably go down with the Old Demon King when you murder it.

Hell, if the timeline was different, I'd argue that the reason Smouldering Lake burns is as a prelude to the birth of a new First Flame. As if while the surface grew cold and covered in ash and literally without a sun, the roots of the world were burning in preparation for a new rebirth. But I have nothing to sustain that theory.

I was more joking but no, I haven't tried it yet.
Were there any hidden messages in 2?
I know a few of weapons in 3 have a skill similar to Seek Guidance called "Guiding Light". Cleric's Candlestick (from the Deacon's Souls and Scholar's Candlestick (from the Scholars in the Grand Archives) are the only ones I know to have this skill.
You don't think From would hide lore messages about the Deep/Rosaria behind the the skill of the Cleric's Candlestick and lore messages about the Princes/Angels/Gertrude behind the skill of the Scholar's Candlestick, right?

Reminder that DaS2 giants do in fact have faces

>and Lost Izalith was still above Ash Lake.

No it wasn't, you can see the demon ruins and ash lake from tomb of giants and all 3 seem to be on pretty much the same level, if anything, Izalith would be under Ash lake.

>You don't think From would hide lore messages about the Deep/Rosaria behind the the skill of the Cleric's Candlestick and lore messages about the Princes/Angels/Gertrude behind the skill of the Scholar's Candlestick, right?

No if it were anything, it would be something short, vague, and ambiguous.
Nothing that would explain any actual key elements of the story.
Most likely just highlighting an fake wall or hidden path.

I don't think there were any hidden developer messages in Dark Souls 2, or nobody ever went through the trouble of searching for them.

could easily be just an early version of the giant design which didn't get used

>Reminder that DaS1 giants do in fact have faces

Yes! Hello!

It may be difficult to see -I'm really bad at resolution- but I went on a little field trip around DS3 to just sort of document that: The Giant Slaves do indeed have holes in their faces.

They're difficult to see because their masks obscure the holes in their faces and the holes aren't DEEP, but: I've circled them in red and tried to take screenshots with their heads -just right- so the gap is visible.

I also included a picture of a ds2 giant and a tree knot because a friend said their faces reminded them of treeknots.

Did anyone else feel like the religion prophesying the coming of an age of water was a subtle attempt at linking Dark Souls to Bloodborne?

Giants in 2 had faces that looked like shit, so when what'shisname took over they just decapitated the giants and gave them gaping holes for faces, they missed a couple here and there though. in 3, they seem to have retconed the giants from 1 into not having faces as seen here:

Now what on earth would make you think that?

Reminder: Aldrich's name in the source text is Eldritch

No.

Not everything has to be directly connected.
Not all Pixar movies happen in the same universe and timeline.
Rugrats is not all one of Anjelica's dreams.
Ed, Edd, and Eddy doesn't take place in purgatory.

There's no need to pretend Bloodborne is a part of the same story and it doesn't help either story.

From frequently use monomythical structures when shaping their mythology, and they love leaving in little teases and easter eggs of their other games, but it's not meta-narrative.
It's just them having fun.
Frankly it would probably hard to flesh out some religious pantheon oriented around fire symbolism without eventually touching upon water.

Dark Souls is thematically very different from Bloodborne.
The Deep that functions here in Dark Souls seems to be some pure, uncorrupted, and intentionally forgotten form of darkness, and is directly juxtaposed with the fire.
Bodies of water in Bloodborne act as metaphysical barriers between planes of existence which can be bent, broken, and traversed.
Dark Souls has barely ever touched water, while Bloodborne is basically a lovesong Lovecraft and his association of aquatic and cosmic horror.

I just wonder that if what you say is true, then where did the "water" in Ash Lake go, there's barely any in Smouldering Lake. And only the tops of the Archtrees can be seen in Smouldering Lake, not the roots. This puts Smouldering Lake on par with Nito's Lair, a ways lower than the roof vantage point you get on Demon Ruins from Tomb of the Giants, and again, roughly on the same level as Demon Ruins.
You can see onto the top of Demon Ruins from roughly the center of Tomb of Giants. If you go deeper to the entrance of Nito's Lair you can just see the tops of the Archtrees from Ash Lake like in pic related. You're still above the cloud cover and can't see the roots or lake itself clearly. Considering how high the cloud cover of Ash Lake when you're standing on the beach compared to how much farther down Lost Izalith is from Demon Ruins, I think its safe to say that Ash Lake is beneath Lost Izalith.
It is definitely and debatable point however.

Compare the height of the cloud cover in and it's height in pic related.
I'm just not sold on Lost Izalith being the lowest point in the world.

I think the reference is really just a reference. Maybe some of the believers somehow saw something of an alternate universe and thought it was the future.

Honestly, considering HOW MUCH they make allusions to bloodborne, what with the entirety of Irithyll, Pontiff Sully, the black eyes making people into beasts, the straight up not-on-fire watchdogs of the old lords around the place, and the Deep tying itself in with churches, like the blood did in yharnam, I don't think it's just a little nod.
Honestly I think that all the bloodborne references in DS3 paint the picture that bloodborne happens not necessarily int he future or the past or anything. It's an "other" to the cycle of dark souls, a possible outcome that aldritch and sully are tapping into. Considering how DS3 tries really hard to bring all of the souls stuff together, I like that they make bloodborne part of it too.

If we go with the whole "everything is getting pulled towards lothric" idea, it does make sense though. Ash Lake would be way lower than Izalith, but when they're getting pulled towards firelink, lothric, and the kiln, things start overlapping eachother. It seems to me that you have places being forced together by reality falling apart pretty constantly in DS3, what with Carthus being a tiny underground that is underneath a swamp, or the dungeons of Irithyll leading to another separate lord of Cinder, when it was probably more likely that the profane capital was originally somewhere else, ruled by yhorm. Otherwise, Irithyll would just rule it, wouldn't they?

I booted up the game just to confirm, and no, Izalith is definitively either deeper or on the same level as Ash lake.

You say "deeper in tomb of giants" as if you went a mile deeper, but no, you actually go UP from the bonfire, go past patches and you can see the hole to ash lake before you even have to fight the first dog.

Not to mention that even tomb of giants doesn't sit atop of the arch trees since you can see that the trunks go further up.

The whole theory of "the entire world is built on top of archtrees" sounds very neat, but it's not actually like that. Now, Lorddran itself is on top of the arch trees, but the same doesn't go for everywhere else. In fact, if we want to get into the lore stuff my theory would be that Gwyn built his kingdom on top of the archtrees just to say that he literally built his domain on top of the ashes of the previous one. Both literally and figuratively.

And here you can see that the demon ruins, not even Izalith are far below tomb of giants.

True, I forgot about that fact that in Dark Souls 3 the lands were converging, time is convoluted in Dark Souls 1, and elevators at the top of towers take you to lava fortresses in the sky in 2. Does make speculating on some things a tad bit more difficult lol.
Again, it's pretty ambiguous as to which one is lower.
I still wonder where the Kiln of the First Flame is after all this time. If you look at the intro for Dark Souls 1 and assume the "land of gray crags, archtrees, and everlasting dragons" is Ash Lake (before the waterworks were installed of course), then where the First Flame was found was an insane distance below Ash Lake or Lost Izalith.
Does anyone know if the Kiln of the First Flame was built directly on the First Flame, or was it somehow moved higher to the surface and then built?
It would be a real let down if the reason the Flame of Chaos went out and the First Flame was going out was because they were both below Ash Lake and they had a leaky roof.

I'm pretty sure the elevator in DS2 was more of a designer mistake than an intentional mindfuck.

Also I think the Flame of Chaos went out because in the end, it's an attempt to recreate the first flame, and no one freakin kindled it. The last kindler might have been the Ivory King, and it's been a long ass time since that. I think it just died out, and demons slowly died along with it.

Yeah, Dark Souls 2 had a lot of problems with its level transitions but I don't it was an accident, just a risk that didn't pay off as well as they'd hoped. I think the developers intentionally tried to go for an adventure with a larger geographical scope than Dark Souls 1 and tried to use the area transitions as a way for it to happen, skipping all the boring leg work from hiking from one part of a continent to another. Some worked for the most part like Majula -> Heide's or Shaded Woods -> Drangleic Castle but other like Earthen Peak -> Iron Keep were just lazy.
On an unrelated note, I wonder if the Deep/First Flame and the Abyss/Chaos Flame are parallels. If I recall, the Abyss was created when Manus'/Furtive Pygmy's Humanity went wild. What if this created a twisted, malformed version of the Deep much in the same way that the Chaos Flame was a twisted, malformed version of the First Flame? Dark Souls 3 states that originally the Deep was tranquil and peaceful place after all.

I just got done rage quitting for the first time in in DS1 and I'm already hooked on the lore.
Anyone have a good YouTube series or something?

>pic semi-related
>pyromancer op

I think it was just gradually fading out ever since you killed Bed of Chaos. It just took a while, for whatever reason. Maybe it's a matter of it taking that long for all the demons to die off. Maybe it lasted a comparable amount of time to how long the First Flame did before it needed to be kindled the first time (we don't exactly know how long the Age of the Gods lasted.)

I did love the fact that demons were dead in Dark Souls 3 from the dying of the light.

It just makes the concept of the Abyss that much more alien, I think, that even demons are born from the flame, and they also must contend with the dying of the light.

For as fucking bad as feel saying this, VaatiVidya ain't TOO terrible. He can make some assumptions but for the most part they ain't too far-fetched but he has been know to then base assumptions on top of assumptions which is a no-no in my book.
I've heard EpicNameBro also has a good series of lore videos up but I've yet to watch them. He seemed to be the go to guy for lore when Vaati starting shilling out for Patreon money every video.
I'd say watch both with a grain of salt and see what you agree with and drop what you don't, and you'll probably get a decent grasp on the lore.

It really does make them seem more like the malformed and ill-conceived Humans they were created as than random chaotic murder machines or lawful evil horned-man-in-a-suit other demons in fantasy tend to be.

Alright, I'll check em both out. Thanks man.

>Humans
You can't call the people of Lost Izalith Humans for sure, I don't think. Remember, Gwyn's people are the Giants/Gods, implied to be animated by shards of his Lord Soul. Humans are the Pygmy's, beings with shards of the Dark Soul. The people of Lost Izalith are most likely the unnamed people of the Witch, who had shards of her Lord Soul. So they're about as human as the Giants are.

No problem. I got my own fine memories of getting completely butt frustrated as Dark Souls "artificial difficulty" while simultaneously loving every minute of trying to beat Sif at level ~30.

Was that how it worked? I was under the impression that the Pygmy split his Lord Soul onto everything that would be human, but I thought The Witch of Izalith only split her Lord Soul among her daughters, Gywn only split his Lord Soul among the 4kids and Seath, and Nito didn't split his at all since he's fucking greedy. I guess the Witch's Souls could have been split further by her daughters but Gywn's I'm less positive on. I doubt Gwynevere is that much of a slut.
Also, why do you only return like 3 Lord Souls to the First Flame. You turn over almost all of Gwyn's (albeit in 5 pieces (4kids+1 from Seath)), almost none of Izalith's (only the Witch's, none of her daughters'), and all of Nito's, but only the small portion of the Pygmy's that you posses in the form of Humanity. Unless the Dark Souls doesn't lose power when split, you gave very little of it to th Flame. That never made sense to me

That's why the kindling is only temporary. If you somehow managed to get the whole 4 souls and link the fire, maybe this time it would last.

No fire can burn forever if you keep taking parts of it.

Just speculating, of course.

>I thought The Witch of Izalith only split her Lord Soul among her daughters
This is never stated one way or another. I said 'for sure' because we can't know.

>Gywn only split his Lord Soul among the 4kids and Seath
I'm pretty sure Dark Souls 1 mentions that the Giants and Gods bare small bits of his.

>Nito didn't split his at all since he's fucking greedy
I know for a fact, though, that Dark Souls 1 tells us that the skeletons are animated with tiny slivers of Nito's Lord Soul.

It seems like pieces of Lord Souls are generally what makes beings 'living'. Else they'd still be Hollows. The crawling beings we all see at the start of DS1's intro are all the same 'species', and it's only the way the different Lord Souls act within them that makes them different.

Trying to turn over all of the Pygmy's Soul would require you to throw all of humanity into the fire.

The undead have already been feeding shards of the dark soul to the fire to reverse their hollowing and for the rite of kindling (boost estus).

>Unless the Dark Souls doesn't lose power when split

That's -what I think at least- is the big deal about The Dark Soul.

The Dark Soul is the most powerful soul not because of it's own physical might, but simply because it does not diminish itself through splitting apart: it's capable of multiplying itself endlessly.

Fucking manlet min-maxing munchkin.

Ahh is Vaati fishing for ideas?

He can't do it on /v/ anymore after all, not since they got paranoid about him stealing their shit and stopped having threads.

Well, where can find timeline of first dark souls? and history information about it? help, plz

>4kids+1 from Seath
What? May be i am retarded so so, but only children of Gwyn is Gwyndolin, Gwynevere and the god of war

>What? May be i am retarded so so, but only children of Gwyn is Gwyndolin, Gwynevere and the god of war

The other user, he's affectionately reffering to the "4 kings" as the "4kids" it's a joke, but, yeah:

Gwyn shared small portions of his soul to his god-men, his children (though that may not have counted? Sex and all), but he gave his 2 largest portions to the 4 human lords known as "The 4 kings" and Seath whom were both considered by Gwyn to be honorary dukes.

thank you, user. Do you know some good compiliation of all information/speculation/ Because, its all very scattered in internet

Other than fucking Gwyndolin up Gwyn always seemed like a decent god. His best friend was human, some of his most trusted vassals were human, not too arrogant to associate with mortals and all.

I suffer from SMA Type 2 since birth and because of it I have very poor reflexes. So I have a question for the veterans of the video games: how punishing are the game series on its lowest difficulty for someone with poor reflexes (specially the ones on PS4/XB1, Bloodborn and Dark Souls 3 as I own both systems)? I could always watch a Let's Play on YouTube but it's never the same as playing.

I'm thinking of getting the Board Game through the Kickstarter as a way to experience the world without the video games but I'm not sure.

Not directly Lore related but it is because of the Lore I want to play.

>Do you know some good compiliation of all information/speculation/ Because, its all very scattered in internet

The only guys I can recommend at the moment who have any sort of consistancy are the youtubers VaatiVidya and The Silver Mont.

Vaati has a sketchy history of having stolen most of his material and I believe that, but he's a convenient evil if you just want to fucking catch up.

I haven't found anyone making any lore videos of dark souls 3 yet -which I find interesting- so if you're in these threads you're on the cutting room floor of lore development!

There's no difficulty so you're going to have a hard time. I too have absolute abysmal reflexes (though I don't think I have any specific condition), but I managed to beat Demon's to Dark souls 2 without too much difficulty by being a huge turtle so you might manage.

3 and Bloodborne nerf turtling a TON though, so those two might be impossible for you, I know I've been having a lot of trouble in 3.

Yeah, cept for the whole linking of the fire thing. That sucks. Dick.

What? Self sacrifice to prevent the world from falling into shit is bad?

Dark Souls has 1 difficulty. It is called dark souls. I'd give it a shot. You can get the older games cheap nowadays, though Dark Souls 3 or bloodborne might be exceptionally difficult due to their quicker more erratic enemies

Continuing on my previous post, do any of the game use joystick clicking? Due to my health I can't do it on controllers.

I don't own the last gen and my PC is garbage. So it has to be games on PS4 or XB1 sadly.

Clicking the stick makes you jump, but jumping is NEVER required in any Souls game, so you're good on that front.

It's my first souls game. It took me at least 3 hours but I've finally gotten somewhat competent and beaten the Abyss Watchers. Literally collected 70k souls from them, you get an average of maybe 500 souls from the darkwraiths slaughtering the mobs outside the boss room so that's a rough estimate of how many times i got my face pushed in.


So got 3 more bosses to finish off i guess?

Knowing a typical souls game there should be something deeper than just a glorified fetch quest.

Only real mindscrew in 3 is what's behind the king's garden.

Archdragon Peak isn't necessarily "real", it's likelier to be the Ashen One's meditation dream.

You have a lot more than 3 bosses to deal with

Why do you guys hate Vaati?

It's more jealousy than anything.

The dude's making a six-figure salary playing video games and crafting stories built on lore he almost certainly learns, word-for-word, from places like Veeky Forums or Reddit.

He's pretty much doing what all of us want to do; live rich and comfy as the "ideas guy", stealing ideas from other people.

Assuming you've fought the Deacons of the Deep?

You've got 11 bosses left.

That's not it. Think darkness.

Darkness ahead
In short try torch

Despair ahead.
Try Sword.

So, what are the embers the firekeeper sees in her vision? And since when are firekeepers not supposed to have eyes?

>So, what are the embers the firekeeper sees in her vision?

The fire resets if nobody lights it, the embers are the wisps of what-used-to-be-but-will-be-again.

It's basically a choice between, "keep the flame going for another couple hundred years" or "let it die, endure the Age of Dark for a thousand years, and let the First Flame reset back to full power."

Outside of making money off of it, I've never seen the problem with "stealing" lore theories. It's the exact same shit everybody else in the community does, it's how people eventually come to a consensus on what they believe part of the lore to be (and very rarely do people just come to those conclusions on their own).

Nah dude you can see it from Irithyll

Yes, but how do you travel there? The dragon torso stone description states that the worshippers picture the peak in their minds.

Yeah, a majority of lore theories are built up by multiple people coming up with and agreeing on different theories stemming from speculation, seeing what fits best.
It's the fact that he makes 6k a month regurgitating those theories and putting some mildly edited gameplay footage over it that kinda bugs me. But I guess he's still putting in more effort than people who make 10 times that just recording themselves playing and screaming at games, so hard to be too butthurt about it.

With this being the last dark souls I wonder what he'll do now.

Bloodborne 2 & 3.

Miyazaki considers Bloodborne to be a souls game, in its own way, he's not making another one of those either.

Maybe not right away, but Bloodborne was one of the PS4's highest selling titles, and From are contracted for two more games with Sony. They'll give it a few years, a couple of other devs will try their hand at Souls-likes (like The Surge, from the Lords of the Fallen guys, hopefully they do a better job this time round), then when the potential for over-saturation has dropped From will make another Souls-in-all-but-name.

He'll do what every other YouTube celebrity does, either diversify or go back to bagging groceries.

it IS a real location that physically exists

BUT

you never visit it for real

LotF hurt my feelings to be honest. How do you look at Dark Souls 1 & 2 and go "if only this was a single player only game with no character creation and Bioware tier dialogue options"?

Plus making the combat twice as slow and half as responsive and satisfying, in a boring world with little exploration, no kind of interesting lore to pick through. I'm hopeful that some other dev will get it right sometime, but I'm not holding my breath for The Surge. Ni-oh seems to be the closest anyone else has gotten so far, but even that seems kind of removed from the heart of a Souls game, it's just simulating it mechanically and throwing a few new toys on top.

we could have had a good Souls clone

Armored Souls

God, I hate that MMO-tier armor design. One of the main reasons I like Dark Souls is because the grand majority of weapon and armor designs are fairly realistic. LotF and BBF both were on the more fantasy side of the spectrum.

>the grand majority of weapon and armor designs are fairly realistic

You forgot, "and therefore badass."

I'm pretty sure Miyazaki already said there's not going to be a Bloodborne 2 or a Dark Souls 4. They'll make something new, probably Blood Beast Ayy Souls

>Loyce Knight set didn't return in 3

good
Frog Mouths are worthless on foot anyway.

Weird, because Yhorm most certainly has a face.

More evidence of it being giant hollowing?

Only if you're a casual.

I wouldn't go as far as to say Vaati is an evil. I myself would much rather watch a condensed anthology video of lore than take hours shifting through /v/ and reddit threads just so some paranoid assholes (half of whom are anonymous and therefore give up any right to real ownership, that's how Veeky Forums works) can feel like they accomplished something.

Vaati himself isn't too bad, it's his "fans" that are fucking cancer and should die in a fire.

We're probably getting something like a re-imagined Armored Core. I'm not excited.

Working nine years on essentially the same series, I'm not surprised he wants to stop, for his sake and the sake of the market. It's been a game a year for three years now, if they carried on people would get tired of them pretty quick.
But they sell too well to just abandon entirely, and so far, they're the only ones that seem capable of delivering this specific niche effectively. Even arguably the worst game in the series, DS2, most people will agree is still a very good game, if not up to the standards of the rest of the Souls games. So that's why I think they'll stop for maybe two years, put out a couple of different titles that'll sell acceptably well, nothing outstanding.
Then, E3 2018, Miyazaki on stage, the lights dim, the screen lights up with a screech and a blaze of flame, showing the title Dragon's Souls. Let me dream.

Is his fanbase cancer? I never really venture too far into youtube comments.

I'm pretty certain that they'll keep making souls-like games, it's just that the dark souls universe is over, and i for one am happy for it because frankly i'm getting tired of it.

But come on, this is the company that has made 20+ armored core games, i seriously doubt they'll stop making souls games when they've made just 5.

I'd even go so far as to argue that Dark Souls 2 is better than Dark Souls 3 in a lot of major respects.

That said, I do hope for something like this homebrew for the next game, if only because I'm interested to see what he does with the sci-fi genre.