Is Elden different enough to justify the rebranding?

Is Elden different enough to justify the rebranding?

Attached: 1625368251975.png (1280x720, 622.47K)

You can jump

Bloodborne has more in common with Dark Souls than Elden Ring does.

It is literally the same exact shit.

explain

wowie zowie another elden ringie rooie threadie wedie wowie zowie coom coom zoomie wowie zowie boom boom

It's more accurately Dark Souls 3.5

yea, it doesnt take place in the same setting.

>from game
>different

I think there are more differences between Demon Souls and the remaster than between Dark Souls 2 and 3

Souls games have dense, intricate worlds with character and soul. Elden shit has an empty open world with a retarded horned horse that can double jump and obvious reused assets from 3. Yes it needs a different name, it's an insult to Souls games.

explain yourself, user.

Attached: 1646000201909.gif (288x377, 1.83M)

>empty world
>reused assets
>insult to souls games
I guess every souls game is an insult to souls games

i dont see how you can say that considering DS2 is a branching hub and DS3 is a straight line

I’m just shitposting. I quit this series after Dark Souls 1 when I realized they made the same goddamn game twice in a row

Doesnt bother me at all, I wouldnt mind if more devs took the approach of keeping their game formula but switching out all the IP stuff around it, keeps things feeling fresh but letting them refine their basic game

How will fromdrones ever recover from this post

Aside from your fear of women and minorities what makes the remake so different?

Yea no

They even used the same YOU DIED sound, font and everything from the previous Dark Souls.

Fair. They've now remade it four times but this time you have to ride a horse between bosses.

pstrannies will never admit it though so GL with that
well there are rumours it's coming to pc soon though, maybe then

Not really, no. And I love Elden Ring. But it's clearly Dark Souls 4 with a bunch of quality of life improvements and some new abilities. It's the appropriate amount of gameplay expansion one would expect from a sequel. As in, if it had been called Dark Souls 4, it would easily have been one of the greatest game sequels ever made.

all that was manageable but they literally have basilisks. like, not even a similar enemy that does curse stuff, just straight up dark souls basilisks

The foremost response consists of the highest possible quality.

Enemies, animations, even weapon arts are straight up ripped from dark souls you actual retard.

Wait until you guys hear about this call of duty franchise

Also they have Patches. Which is fucking hilarious and I didn't mind it.

no, it isn't. when "ds4" comes out and its open world then you will realize this

Same as Eternal Ring being King's Field 3.5

tbf patches has been there since before souls in armored core

Yes, it doesn't share the same lore at all. Like even remotely.

Unironically less rehashed than Fromtrash. Even Pokémon is changing up their formula more

No, that's the point of rebranding.

Dark souls have no lore. Like even remotely.

I would be less willing to buy it if it was called Dark Souls 4.

So does this mean we are really never going to get a dark souls 4? They weren’t bullshitting? I just want a game like Elden ring without the open world bullshit. Just give me the legacy dungeons. So basically, ds4

You did get a Dark Souls 4 but you have to fillet it yourself

its open world, so people who excepted tight linear levels would have been disappointed if dark souls 4 was suddenly a botw clone.