Do you want future Souls games to continue with open world formula from Elden Ring or go back to old linear?

[Jane]

The Dark Souls 2 approach was perfection - open first half, linear second half. I think this is the best fit for Souls gameplay because in the beginning, it gives new players multiple options to progress and lets experienced players choose where to go to build their character how they want, then once you're used to the game and have your character built, it's just a gauntlet of finely-tuned challenges until the end. The "open first half" works well with Dark Souls' interconnected zones but it could work well with ER's open world as well.

 

[Kalik]

I'd like to see a mix...I love long games and I love Elden Ring but the game was almost too big with too many reskinned/recycled bosses...I'd rather have a slightly smaller, streamlined game with more original enemies

 

[Pancracio17]

Deep down people must realize theres no going back. Open world Dark Souls worked and it was received better than ever, traditional Dark Souls is now open world. Though im sure theyll return to more linear games in other spinoffs like Sekiro or Bloodborne.

 

[Nameless]

I'm down for whatever.

 

[Thisisme]

I want both. And I don't know if I would call Souls games linear necessarily as they all seemed to have branching paths integrated into their world design.

i've found elden ring extremely hard to replay, i'm so fucking sick of limgrave and the other starting areas that i'm incapable of playing more than a few hours before giving up

but at the same time the first playthought was magical

so i don't know, just let them cook i guess

Click to shrink...

Same. It demands an extreme time investment to find the right items for the build you want to play with because you have to remember which dungeon it was in whereas with Souls games it's harder to miss items. You just pick them up as you progress.

 

[Alek]

I liked Elden Ring but I think it has problems the further you go into it. I think the design gets weaker and exploration gets much less rewarding as you stop finding things you can actually use if you're already commited to a build. I'd like to see continue with the open world formula and seek to resolve those issues because I don't think they've perfected that style yet.

Bloodborne, Dark Souls 3, I think those games are pretty much perfect. I'd be happy with more of that style, too, sure.

 

[Keldroc]

Elden Ring sold multiple times what the others did. They will all be open world from now on.

 

[CHC]

More linear, for sure. Elden Ring was cool, I loved it, but if it weren't for the massive under-world, I'm not sure I would have had many (or any) moments of "where the fuck AM I?" Whereas that was always the best feeling and hit me dozens of times in Dark Souls 1, Bloodborne, etc.

 

[DeliciousSunnyD!]

I think that Elden Ring is definitively their best game yet, but I wouldn't even really call it an open world game. To me, it's more like an extremely wide-linear game.

I think From should just keep doing what they want to do and I'll be there for it, that's the real secret to success.

 

[Dan-o]

I love both

Do Elden Ring open world, do future Dark Souls/Sekiro/Bloodborne games linear.

Click to shrink...

This is the way.
But also, I appreciate your positivity. :)

 

[Zeal543]

I was burned out with ER before I even got 50% of the way through, although that may be on top of all the previous games. I'd like more stuff like bloodborne or dark souls over ER.

 

[Zinogah]

I want them to try ER again, but just on a smaller and less bloated scale. Souls-like games legitimately don't have any business being anywhere near that big. A mix of linear and open games would be nice, though. I suppose.

 

[Akela]

A smaller scale open world could be interesting. A dense cityscape like Yharnam but instead of the cutting the world up into separate distinct levels with a couple of entrances and exits between them, instead there's hundreds of overlapping branching paths to different areas. The Elden Ring style overworld is cut down to some smaller open areas in and around the city with most of map is essentially being one huge interconnected dungeon.

 

[Servbot24]

I like linear personally, but who cares what I want. What matters is what the developers enjoy making.

 

[StrappingYoungLance]

I think that Elden Ring is definitively their best game yet, but I wouldn't even really call it an open world game. To me, it's more like an extremely wide-linear game.

I think From should just keep doing what they want to do and I'll be there for it, that's the real secret to success.

Click to shrink...

It's absolutely an open world game though, but I think I get what you mean, open world almost undersells how crafted that world feels.

I liked Elden Ring but I think it has problems the further you go into it. I think the design gets weaker and exploration gets much less rewarding as you stop finding things you can actually use if you're already commited to a build. I'd like to see continue with the open world formula and seek to resolve those issues because I don't think they've perfected that style yet.



Bloodborne, Dark Souls 3, I think those games are pretty much perfect. I'd be happy with more of that style, too, sure.

Click to shrink...

This feels like the right attitude. A lot of people here are acting like From had their one shot at an open world and because it had X flaws they should never do it again as though From wouldn't learn anything from Elden Ring.

 

[Liam Allen-Miller]

I would certainly like both, but if they do go back to the previous approach next I do hope they take another stab at the open world concept in the future!

 

[-Le Monde-]

The open world exploration was a nice change of pace. But nothing will ever top Demon Souls design for me. It just felt perfect.

Come on sony! Give us DS2 by BP.

 

[ToTheMoon]

I'm still working my way through it (I'm the person who made the thread about whether to use a horse a few months back...), but honestly the open world level design is not good. Playing through it with a horse has only cemented that belief in me.

I don't think the open world is a good fit for the gameplay that a Souls game is trying to create, and I don't think they're executing it well. The game's gorgeous and grand, but Dark Souls 1 also felt huge and grand and was linear, so I'm confident they can create those same vistas and sense-of-scale in a space that works better for the type of game they want to make.

 

[DeliciousSunnyD!]

It's absolutely an open world game though, but I think I get what you mean, open world almost undersells how crafted that world feels.

Click to shrink...

Yeah the world is meticulously crafted like a linear game, but I mean in the sense that the player literally cannot access the final parts of the game world at the start of the game. By definition, it's not an "open" world. There is a linear progression, even if within that linear progression there are wide parts that allow for a bunch of player choice.

That's what I mean by it being a wide-linear game. People have used "wide-linear" to describe linear games before that have environments slightly larger than very strict corridors but I've always thought that's been slightly inaccurate. That those games are often just linear level design games with slightly larger linear corridors.

Elden Ring is a huge game with big environments, but to see every element of its world there is still some level of order that must be completed. Even if there's some choice in the order. And not only that, but the visual and game design language in the game IMO tries to guide the player into a certain kind of order of operation too.

I said "wide-linear", but it could be more fair to say its game design is a hybrid between linear and open world. But it's not really either fully. It's literally Dark Souls, but where the individual zones/biomes were much larger in scope and where the "bonfire boss run" is also blown up in scope to be a larger-yet-linear gauntlet. The Leyndell gating is the same thing as Anor Londo in Dark Souls, it's just all the environments before that "exploration/skill" check gate are far larger in scope/breadth.

 

[vixolus]

I like Elden ring. I think it nailed it. The legacy dungeons are great and the exploration was rewarding like nothing else. I think i would take a slightly smaller "scope" if it meant less boss reuse and oddities like random mohg in the sewers or margit and morgott leyndell stuff. Idc about the lore dont lecture me on it.

 

[Rob]

I really want a return to linear. Elden Ring's open world just didn't connect with me at all.

 

[NabiscoFelt]

This feels like the right attitude. A lot of people here are acting like From had their one shot at an open world and because it had X flaws they should never do it again as though From wouldn't learn anything from Elden Ring.

Click to shrink...

Personally speaking, I'm not sure how they'd be able to make an open world game with a Souls format appeal to me. The idea just conceptually doesn't gel with me, I don't find Souls stuff to be rewarding enough to push me to explore an open world

But complaints like repeated content and bloat, which are far more common, could definitely be addressed

 

[Cheesy]

I'd be happy with either but would prefer more open world stuff.

 

[XrossExam]

Linear makes things more memorable and less drawn out. There's no question that the level design in Demon's Souls/Dark Souls 1/3, Sekiro, and Bloodborne are all fantastic. Also, the densely packed areas are much more visually appealing, such as the crowded streets in Bloodborne than the vast open lands of Elden Ring. Additionally, I never found the Souls games as being very linear, they always have branching paths and they still feel large when you are going through them for the first time.

Elden Ring's areas get a bit uninteresting after a while. I do think going back to a more linear design may be a step back but I think it's for the best.

Honestly, I'd rather see FromSoftware branch out from the Souls formula at this point. Thankfully they are with Armored Core 6, but let's see even more experimentation. Ninja Blade was not a good game but it had potential and some really cool cutscenes. I can imagine a balls-to-the-wall action game by FromSoftware such as Ninja Blade 2 being a banger with the budget and resources they have now.

 

[Mechaplum]

I'm playing through Sekiro now, and it's so much better than ER's open world. Bosses are a few tiers higher to fight as well.

 

[naff]

would love them to revisit the labyrinthine interconnected hubs of Dark Souls with some of the benefits of Elden's Ring's more open area's. a tighter, more focused experience generally though is what i'd like, like a lot of Elden Ring's area's just felt like a lot of nothing. it led to some neat discoveries, but a lot of these area's could've been a bit smaller.

 

[Zolbrod]

They can coexist.
Dark Souls should stay Dark Souls, Elden Ring can be its own thing.

 

[Alpheus]

I wouldn't mind more of the open world but they need to give the player a double jump to course correct in mid air, if they really wanted to leverage that mechanic. I'd love it if the DLC and other follow ups to ER had Shulva (DS2 DLC) level puzzles brought forward into a Souls game with jumping mechanics. That kind of combination would be my dream as far as exploration design wants go. Well, aside from adding a grappling hook.

 

[Sotha_Sil]

Back to Sekiro's style of wider open levels, please. Just back to Sekiro in general.

 

[SJPN]

Souls as a series can end. If we get another Elden Ring style open world epic, along side a focused Bloodbourne sequel.

 

[wtd2009]

Love both! As long as the dungeons are fun and the travel is not tedious then I don't really care.

 

[Menchi]

Parallel series please

 

[Noisepurge]

Elden Ring 2 should be open world. Dark Souls 4 or Bloodborne 2 should be more traditional. Keep the styles separated pls

 

[Nola]

I would like to see them iterate on this formula.

We got 6 linear SoulsBorne style games, let's see what they can do with at least a second shot at open world before calling it quits and demanding we go back to the same thing that's already been done.

 

[arglebargle]

this isnt even a close call for me. definitely the souls style. i enjoyed elden ring and think it is very well designed for an open world game, but its still not nearly as tight as the best levels from the previous games. the best parts of elden ring were the "legacy dungeons" which were basically the old games. more bloodborne please.

 

[jaymzi]

Linear is so much more replayable to me.

 

[bushmonkey]

They need to fork into 2: linear souls games and open world Elden ring sequels. I loved Elden Ring way more than any souls games before it but I do know I'm in the hardcore minority. I think more casual gamers got more out of Elden Ring though but that's just my impression and not based on any actual facts.

 

[DorkLord54]

I honestly think it would work better if the open world was dead, a la Shadow of the Colossus. Would fit more with the spiritual series' bleak atmosphere (sans Sekiro) and make the legacy dungeons more eventful imo since they would be more unique.

 

[Robes]

He already said that given the reaction to Elden Ring their games will continue to develop that path. Personally I think DS3 and Elden Ring are both 10/10 games so I don't mind either way, just no more sekiro please.

 

[TheExtra]

Wide Linear. Kinda like Sekiro but with even bigger open spaces.

 

[Heysoos]

Elden Ring is by far probably the best open world game I've ever played, up there with BOTW for me. I can only see them getting even better at them so open world please. Probably my favorite experience in Souls games.

 

[Igniz12]

If we continue to get different kind of games like Armored Core and Sekiro, which it looks like they will be doing, then they can do w/e they feel like with their main Souls game. I did not like the direction they took with Elden Ring but with how massive the game turned out I dont see them not continue to follow down that path.

Besides just cause I did not like Elden RIng does not mean an Elden Ring 2 wont be better. Its a good game but just did not feel like a tighter experience than their older titles.

 

[Cats]

Branching linear with interconnected paths that converge in interesting ways allowing for sequence skipping and seeing the cohesive structure of the world physically (Aka, Dark Souls 1 style) is absolutely the way to go. Make sure to include lots of verticality in the journey. That game has the most wonder to it, seeing literally almost all the stages from the starting point is awesome. Everything has a purpose. You can skip (annoying) parts of the game if you do things a certain way. It's dated mechanically but it's still unmatched in the design and pacing in the world for the series.

Go back to that. Demon Souls is neat but I don't like level select. DS2 with volcano in the sky is a bummer. DS3 just doesn't feel connected really at all, but it's got good level design at least.

I hope Dark Souls 4 really brings us back to those sorely missed awesome aspects of DS1.

 

[Red Liquorice]

Open world isn't a bad thing per se, but ER is just too big for the amount of unique content there is. Having everything on repeat in each biom was just way too much for me. Another deathbird, another ulcerated tree thing (and another, and another!), another identical church ruin with a triple pumpkin head boss under the illusory floor, another cave with triple crystalian boss, endless chalice dungeons with little to no reward (not just in terms of loot but also exploration), yadda, yadda....

Halve the size of the world at least and it wouldn't be so, so bad (but still probably too much). I replay the heck out of the Souls games, but with ER it's just too daunting a task to do other builds or challenge runs, it turned in to an Elder Scrolls type thing for me; one and done. I've tried starting new runs a few times and dropped them after half an hour or so because it's such a turn off.

Thing is after ER's success, are they likely to go back to old-style Souls world design? Perhaps for something more focused like a Sekiro.

 

[Sanctuary]

Either of the latter two options. The open-world aspect just did not do the series (*Souls type games) justice. The previous games had recycling going on, but it was pretty extreme in the case of Elden Ring, and the "open" aspect suffered the same problem basically every open-world game does in that you're mainly running through filler to get to the actual content.

The legacy dungeon aspect just felt entirely disconnected, and just emphasized how good their level designs typically were in the other games, especially when they were interconnected.

 

[The Nightsky]

An Elden Ring with more fun traversal would be great. Really the biggest issue with open world DS is that the traversal kind of sucks. You can't climb, you can't fly or glide, you can't swim, you can barely jump, you can't trust fall damage. Even the horse they introduced is terrible. If they can improve that, go open world.

 

[Mukrab]

Linear by a mile

 

[apocat]

I like both variants, and also think that it's necessary for From to keep experimenting with the formula. I don't want their games to turn stale.

 

[Lost Heaven]

I think they will do both, but if i had to choose, linear. I loved Elden Ring but the OW killed the replayability for me. Still got a lot of content out of a single run, but the game has awesome build variety and its a shame to play it only once.

 

[Aztechnology]

I have no problem with either, I have problems with open world games that have no benefit in doing so. Which is most open world games.