GOTYe Awards 2015

GOTYe_001

As 2015 winds down and we begin our reflection of the past 12 months, critics and gamers alike are starting their lists of the best games of the year. While I could take the easy route and explain some of my favorite titles, I wanted to put a bit more thought into such a blog.

I decided to take a different approach; comparing games to Gotye song titles. Why would I do that, you ask? Well, apart from comedic value, this is my blog and you can fuck yourself. So, with that said, let’s kick of the GOTYe Awards 2015!!

GOTYe_002

Somebody That I Used to Know Award – Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 5

It’s always sad when a cherished franchise becomes a former shell of itself. Activision had thoroughly milked the Tony Hawk license after the 5th game, but we kept getting sequels. I guess implementing things like dune buggies and tennis wasn’t enough, so Activision and Neversoft were content with throwing literally everything into a game.

This led the series to open-world territory, “realism” based trick systems and eventually a plastic skateboard controller. The series has been in flames for longer than my young cousin has been alive.

When Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 5 was announced, gamers let out a sigh of relief. We were finally going to get a game that properly continued the legacy of the original titles on a next-gen system. Except, that isn’t what happened.

The game we ended up receiving was a broken mess of an overpriced coaster that barely functional properly and had very little content. I mean, I’ll all for having Tony Hawk roll around on the ground like he’s having an epileptic seizure, but I’m not willing to shell out $50 to do so.

It just takes me back to being a teenager and playing the hell out of Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 3. It was the first game I bought with my own cash. It was the game that inspired me to listen to hard rock. It was also the catalyst to me becoming a completionist. THPS5 is basically a reminder that nostalgia is a lie.

GOTYe_003

Board With This Game Award – Yoshi’s Woolly World

At this point in time, I’m going to assume that Yoshi’s Island was a complete fluke. I was utterly captivated with the game upon it’s release. It was all my 7 year old self could think about. I was a big fan of Mario, but playing this new Yoshi title was so different. It was colorful, inventive, laid-back and beautiful.

All of it’s mechanics made sense, were implemented in creative ways and never got old. Even the music was timeless, with tunes stuck in my head 20 years later. When I had originally played it, I thought Nintendo would be able to make an ever better game with more powerful hardware. The SNES was old by the time Yoshi’s Island rolled around, after all.

That game has never been given to us. Yoshi’s Woolly World was the best attempt at recreating some of the old-school magic, but Nintendo appears to be more focused on targeting nostalgia then anything else. I miss the Nintendo that took risks with their IPs.

Mostly, I just found the game utterly boring. It’s devoid of challenge and plays things so safely that I often had to stop after beating a few levels to prevent myself from falling asleep. I love those amiibo that were made to commemorate the game, but they don’t make me forget Yoshi’s Island.

GOTYe_004

Here In This Place Award – Grow Home

When I saw Jim Sterling talking about an actual good Ubisoft game, I immediately got intrigued. I’ve been a fan of some of their franchises, but their more recent output has been plagued with bugs and issues that often cripple the entire experience. Even “classics” like Assassin’s Creed 2 had major game breaking bugs.

Still, Grow Home looked right up my alley. It was a free form game with a simple goal and endless opportunities to explore. I love exploring, I’m a fan of highly stylized art and I can never say no to original ideas. Grow Home may not be a classic, but it’s very charming.

It’s sense of scale is without equal. Climbing ever higher and peering down to the islands below is enough to take your breath away. It also makes your gut sink if you’re playing on a big enough television. The visuals may not be realistic (in any sense), but god damn if they don’t encapsulate exactly what developer Reflections was aiming for.

The sandy beaches, vibrant colors, endless sky and oddly shaped enemies make you believe you’re in a different world. It’s truly a great concept with awesome execution. It also reignited my love of rock climbing with some mechanics that correctly mimic the motions one makes while scaling a mountain.

GOTYe_005

Thanks For Your Time Award – Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain

MGSV may not have been the send off for the beloved Metal Gear franchise we all hoped for, but it was a very well built game. It’s unique approach to stealth with an open world that felt like a real land mass made for some of the most intense and endlessly replayable scenarios in recent memory.

MGSV also did something that no other game really nailed quite as well; it acknowledged the player’s role in the legacy of Metal Gear. Sure, the ending twist is revealed in a sloppy manner and kind of muddles the already convoluted plotline ofMetal Gear, but the true message was that we are Big Boss.

We are the ones who have gone through all of the trials of tribulations of Snake. We have seen his best and worst times. We rose to the challenge to save this virtual world on multiple occasions. We started our own private army to combat digital mercenaries and prevent a nuclear apocalypse. Without us, Kojima would have never been able to create such an engrossing experience.

It’s sad to know that the future of Metal Gear is basically dead. Konami is a tired excuse of a once golden company. We can be grateful that Kojima won’t have to spend the rest of his days wasting away at a worthless sinkhole.

GOTYe_006

Like Drawing Blood Award – Mortal Kombat X

I was pleasantly surprised with Mortal Kombat (2009). While the game was maybe a bit too similar to Street Fighter IV, it took a dying franchise that once captured the attention of the United States and brought it back to life.

The older games were focused on making the most gory and explosive experience possible. The first two haven’t aged particularly well, but Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3remains a classic. It’s combo system, innovative block button mechanic and aggression meter all make the game feel unique and brutal.

The 2009 reboot captured that same essence. It has the gore factor in check (and jacked up to 11), it has lots of combos strings and move cancels and it’s got plenty of diversity with it’s cast selection. Mortal Kombat X is basically a lesser version of the 2009 game.

While it’s graphics are insane and the gore is even more stomach turning, the game just feels off. From it’s garbage PC port to the milking of DLC with almost literal cheat codes bearing a $1 price tag, the game just feels gutted.

The story mode that was so fun to play in it’s predecessor has been cut down to a measly few hours with no real purpose. The online functionality has somehow gotten worse, despite being on more powerful hardware. Even the DLC fighters feel like a wasted opportunity, going with film nostalgia over any real innovation on or celebration of the MK legacy.

For a game that looked so promising to basically fizzle out after being launched is just sad. Playing it is like visiting the doctor’s office. You don’t want to be there and watching the needle draw blood is enough to make you pass out. It really sucks, as I thought Mortal Kombat was going to be here to stay.

GOTYe_007

Easy Way Out Award – Call of Duty: Black Ops III

Another year, another Call of Duty game. A series that I once looked forward to is now a running joke with most gamers. It’s also a good case study for how to save on production costs between sequels.

Ever since Call of Duty 2, there has been a new game in this series every year. We are on the 12th entry in almost as many years. Having two developers working on a series should make for a fresh approach with every passing game, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.

Treyarch was, for a small while, attempting to do different things with the tired COD recipe. Black Ops brought things to the Vietnam War Era and Black Ops II attempted to inject some different gameplay elements into the mix, but Black Ops III just falls on the same bullshit as before.

I guess Advanced Warfare was a roaring success, because¬†trying to actually distinguishBlack Ops III from the last title is a nigh on impossible task for anyone but diehard COD fans. The game doesn’t even make sense with the Black Ops name, having little connection to the previous games in it’s own trilogy arc.

Activision doesn’t care about that. Why try putting effort into your titles when you can take the easy way out and produce the same garbage year in, year out? For as much unfounded flak as the Call of Duty series gets, Black Ops III is an example of when the internet is actually correct about something.

GOTYe_008

I Feel Better Award – Bloodborne

When Demon’s Souls came on the scene, many people took notice. Here was a game that was going against the norm and actually challenging gamers to think on their feet. There was no floating arrow to point you in the direction of the objective. There were no easy ways out of difficult situations. If you sucked, you weren’t finishing the game.

While Dark Souls seems to have stolen everyone’s heart, I’ve always had a fondness for the smaller ambitions of it’s predecessor. I loved the level structure, darker tone and more challenging combat of Demon’s Souls. I wanted a game with more brutality and with a stronger sense of challenge.

Bloodborne delivered on that. It’s level design created a sense of tension and dread in the early stages that gave way to more expansive and mind-bending labyrinths in the late game. It’s enemies were fast and ferocious with stronger AI and a thirst for blood.

Beating any single area felt like a massive accomplishment, let alone surmounting the bosses. Coming to terms with the combat, getting a feel for the world and making forward progress all led to a really gratifying sense of fun. The DLC was just icing on top of the cake.

GOTYe_009

I’m not sure if this list ended up being as funny as I originally planned it to be. The whole Gotye craze that happened a few years ago seems to have disappeared. The guy clearly wasn’t trying to be a pop sensation, but the masses wised up to some decent music for once. It was frightening.

Regardless, I feel that “Somebody That I Used to Know” is still a part of the internet’s collective conscious. If you don’t get the reference, then too bad. Gotye certainly doesn’t care.

Anyway, happy 2015 everyone. Hopefully next year, I can think of some more Gotye related song titles to go with some awards. Or maybe it will just be “Smoke and Mirrors”.

Advertisements

Meaningful Content

In the last generation, we saw games getting bigger and bigger and budgets ballooning out of control. As publishers were looking to get as much return as possible, games became bloated with side-quests that had little to no relevance to the main story mode.

Just this year, we have been given three games that do away with such fluff. Bloodborne, The Witcher 3 and Metal Gear Solid V. In each game, every bit of content feels just. You never waste your time in areas that plaster up invisible walls or grant absolutely no benefit; if you undertake a side-quest, the reward is readily apparent.

Take MGS V for example. At the very beginning of the game, you are unable to understand the soldiers in Afghanistan. This pretty much makes getting information a pointless endeavor. After finishing the first mission, you are informed of translators in the area that can be rescued. Doing so grants you the ability to understand the language in that area.

It’s an immediate payoff that gives the player a sense of accomplishment. Instead of including an activity because it’s cool, the developers thought to award some palpable sense of achievement within the game itself.

The Witcher basically has stronger plot points in the side missions then the main quest itself. One very early side quest has you tackling the mystery of a man’s wife who has gone disappearing. You get to be a detective and figure out what occurred and the impact this has had on the man’s life.

Did you take her?

It is supremely rewarding to dig into such a rich story. Most side quests can be boiled down to a few simple points; the game needs to be longer and the player can skip these. Since developers don’t want the player to “miss” any important content, one can reasonably skip the side stuff and still get the entire story.

Even before Wild Hunt, The Witcher 2 had an entirely different second act based on some decisions you made at the end of the first. It was a radical departure from what mainstream, triple A gaming was doing. That is getting a bit side tracked from my point, though.

With Bloodborne, while the world may not be entirely open as in Witcher and MGS, you can tackle most of the boss creatures in an order of your choosing. There are even a great few that you can entirely skip. A lot of the work in getting to them is shrouded in obscurity and requires one to think outside the box.

This leads to optional areas that are just as thrilling, frightening and meticulously detailed as the main game. More so, with the narrative being ambiguous and vague, the game encourages you to seek out as much information as possible. Without being told to, you are actively pushed to see the full picture.

This subtlety to approaching story in a game makes Bloodborne utterly captivating. Coupled with the brutal combat mechanics and steep difficulty and Bloodborne becomes a game that can consume your life for a good month or two.

Ah, yes, a good month or two….where is my cranberry juice?

I do remember games being like this in my heyday. Games on the NES, SNES and even PS1 were more about creating experiences that rewarded player skill and investment. Not every game was supremely long, but every bit of content was worthwhile.

I can’t think of a Mario game where I would want to skip levels (other then 8-3 in the original being a bitch). Shooters like Quake were so morbid, dark and terrifying that I was compelled to press on to see the corridors that lie ahead.

Then you look back at the last few years of gaming and you see pointless padding. Watch_Dogs, Assassin’s Creed, Grand Theft Auto, Tomb Raider; newer entries in these series had so much pointless content that gamers gave up caring. Why do I want to climb towers in every city just to spot “important” locations? What benefit does collecting feathers or journals or hidden packages have for me?

I was amazed when playing Sleeping Dogs and found out that a lot of the side quests have a tangible benefit to the player. Finding the hidden shrines would increase your maximum health. Getting all of the statues in the story missions unlocked extra finishing moves for your combos. It was wild to think that side content could actually mean something in the modern era.

Then you look at inFamous: Second Son and all of the side stuff does basically nothing. Sure, you can level up your skills, but the game is so easy that nothing else over your starting arsenal is really required.

It seems that for as big as we can make game worlds, there is some nagging need to include as much stuff as possible. It’s as if the game isn’t engaging enough, so developers have a desire to distract you from how mediocre it is.

“You’re right! I don’t even care!”

There are some complaints that MGS V is devoid of life (something lobbied at Ocarina of Time as well), but that doesn’t even hold water. When I actively want to explore the game world, I don’t care if hundreds of things are crawling around. I like exploring landscapes and seeing nature in a natural state.

Taking a hike through a forest doesn’t bring you to a lost tribe or hidden tomb (unless you happen to be lucky); one takes a walk through nature to escape the fast paced nature of their lives. It’s a form of escapism that brings you back to reality and the purity of nature.

It’s also not a waste of time. Even though you aren’t technically accomplishing anything, you are freeing your mind of the bullshit from your daily life. Your problems disappear for a few hours in a safe, fun and refreshing manner.

Where are all the damn side quests?

When a video game so perfectly encapsulates that (such as MGS V), why am I going to complain about a lack of visible life? I don’t want more stuff in my games, I want my games to feel more complete.

I just wonder why it took so long for developers to finally get around to making completely worthwhile experiences. I think that, in the years coming up, we’ll see more and more games that cut out all of the trappings and stick to gameplay and extra missions that actually matter.

That, or we can just look at Super Mario Maker and make our own stuff. I wish Project Spark were as open-ended as Mario Maker, because I would love to get in on manipulating my childhood memories.

Comparison – Demon’s Souls Vs Bloodborne

With the release of Bloodborne, I finally believe that the true “next-generation” is here. While the game may not be dramatically different from it’s predecessors, the attention to detail and general streamlining of game mechanics makes it an extraordinarily engaging game.

Everything about the limited story, combat system, upgrades and level design is polished beyond what I could have expected. I’ve always been a big fan of the Souls games, but Bloodborne really does take it to an entirely different level.

Is it really that insanely good, though? How does Bloodborne compare to the grandfather of souls, Demon’s Souls? Both were made under the direction of Hidetaka Miyazaki and they share a lot of aesthetic choices. They also both have similar structure in world design.

Now, to point out something like graphics would be asinine. Since Bloodborne is a PS4 game and Demon’s Souls is a fairly early PS3 game, there is already a clear winner in terms of graphical fidelity. You can look at other aspects, like art design or graphical density.

Bloodborne has so much going on in various levels that the game cannot push more than 30 frames-per-second. While this is a bit disappointing, the game runs mostly smooth throughout. Certain actions can trigger slowdown and co-op often hinders the refresh rate, but the game works damn fine by itself.

Demon’s Souls was not so lucky. While there are a bunch of areas that are flawless, when you run into any densely packed area, the game shutters. I’ve seen framerates as low as 15 frames-per-second a couple of times. They never seem to crop up in the middle of a boss fight, but they do occur randomly in levels.

Fluidity is what makes Bloodborne so damn addicting. The combat is kicked up to a different gear and is hard to grasp, at first. Everything goes so fast that you need lightning quick reflexes and proper knowledge of your character’s limitations and advantages.

Demon’s Souls was the first in this series, so it obviously doesn’t have as many options. What it does have is purity. Enemies are not given crazy attacks that you will never block and all of your moves are limited enough to give you clear control. You will precisely know what to do and will rarely hit the wrong button.

Having said that, the options afforded to you are vastly different between the two games. Bloodborne is absolutely a melee game. While there are some ranged options, they will not be the linchpin of your arsenal. Your assassination of targets will require you to get up close and personal.

This is facilitated by the silver bullet system and firearms. While that sounds like it would be a tremendous boon, your firearm is only able to carry 20 bullets (disregarding upgrades). This gives you extremely limited amounts of ranged capability.

You can find other items, but they also require bullets. One item even utilizes 12 bullets, only being able to fire a single shot before going away. This change from diverse ranged options coerces  players into fighting the beasts hand-to-hand.

It also eliminates any “cheese” tactics or glitches. You cannot rely on developmental oversights to see you through a rough challenge. It makes every victory solely yours. Even with co-op, you still need to pull your own weight.

Demon’s Souls is not so lucky. Being the first of it’s kind, obviously something was going to go unnoticed. Bow and arrows allow you to tackle enemies from a distance, but with their cost being so low, you end up being able to carry 500+ arrows very shortly into the game.

There are also some problems with level geometry that will allow you to shoot arrows through walls. This nearly eliminates the challenge associated with certain encounters. While you could make a point of saying this is similar to old-school game design, the legacy behind the Souls games looks a bit fabricated with these glitches.

There are also a host of magic attacks in Demon’s Souls that nearly become dominate over other weapons. Since the AI of the enemies is fairly slow, you are able to shoot off a lot of magic attacks with ease. You can restore your MP, as well (via rings or items), so you don’t ever need to stop if you’ve prepared correctly.

On my first playthrough years ago, I never even saw a few of the bosses. While I was a coward, I was still able to “cheese” them out with fireballs and arrows. It trivializes some levels. Practicing self-caution does make the game more enjoyable, but one of the basic tenets of game design is lacking.

Bloodborne has seemingly fixed that by not including magic or ranged weapons. It also fixes the AI by making them far more aggressive. Instead of passively waiting for attacks or walking off of cliffs, the AI will rush down the player and keep them on edge.

This allows little time for healing or flicking through inventory. Your strikes need to be quick and your recovery planned. The infamous running away tactic from the souls game is mostly fixed, too. Once you aggro an enemy, you (9 times out of 10) will have to kill them to stop their pursuit.

As for healing, Bloodborne follows in the vein of Dark Souls by making healing a dedicated button. Instead of putting it to an item and allowing different levels of healing, this ensures that you will always have a way to get some kind of health boost.

What it does away with is the unlimited refills. You need to keep killing enemies and collecting blood echoes to get more vials (or you find a bunch in the world). Dark Souls and it’s sequel would always refill your supply of healing flasks upon dying.

Demon’s Souls relies on consumables. This bloats the inventory by having various types of grass that do differing amounts of healing. It also arbitrarily inflates the difficulty level. If you happen to run out of grass and have no souls, you won’t be healing.

That might seem like a personal opinion, but Demon’s Souls is a bit difficult. Many players have vanquished the steep learning curve, but the game can often times be frustrating. Instead of dying of your own ineptitude, you end up failing because you cannot get ahead.

Bloodborne does go back to that a bit, but your foes drop a lot more blood echoes then any enemy ever dropped souls. Level ups also require more, but most items are fairly cheap while the enemies have plentiful blood echoes.

Speaking of leveling up, Demon’s Souls employs 8 different stats to give to your character. Bloodborne cuts out the fat and only asks you to deal with 6 of them. It may be more fulfilling to govern magic with 2 additional attributes, but the gains start becoming obscured and the process feels more daunting then it should.

Bloodborne clearly explains it’s skill points and allows you to power up faster. This doesn’t inherently make the game easier, but it does allow one to have a more gradual difficulty curve instead of hitting spikes along the way. Bloodborne does seem more well-rounded in that regard.

Demon’s Souls is uneven in difficulty. The first area is overwhelming and even the next level you choose will be threatening, but you tend to get the hang of it after a few times. Then the middle sections of each world become a bit easy before ramping up with the final boss.

The only problem is that the final boss of the first world is hard even at extremely high levels. You never get the feeling that your stat distribution was worth the investment. The False King can still one shot you, so it comes more down to raw skill.

Skill is what makes the Souls games work. While it would be nice to actually feel your character power up in Demon’s Souls, the unbridled sense of success has never been topped. Even if Bloodborne ends up feeling fairer, Demon’s Souls has a better sense of accomplishment.

Co-op can make things dramatically easier. Bloodborne suffers a little in that you can summon more players to your world, but it also allows you to directly summon friends. Demon’s Souls is very specific in it’s execution of multiplayer.

The invasion mechanic is frustrating, but it does also keep you on your toes. To eliminate those invasions, you have to play in soul form, but that reduces your total health. It makes for a strategic element that is absent in Bloodborne.

Bloodborne changes that by actually giving you a way to stay connected, but forego invasions. You won’t actually be able to get invaded in early levels; as you progress, a bell maiden will appear that summons invading players.

Co-op also makes that maiden appear, which then gives you and your cooperator a reason to explore the world. She is often hidden quite well, so finding her is a small reward unto itself.

It still is revolutionary in that it makes single-player minded people actually want to participate in multiplayer, but the lack of an ability to get together with friends is a big fault to me.

I get that the point was anonymity, but Bloodborne becomes a lot more enjoyable when you grab a friend to suffer with. You both can directly talk and feel like you’re bonding with each other over such a dark world.

Speaking of worlds, the design of both games is truly remarkable. While I personally prefer the way in which Bloodborne‘s paths weaver together, Demon’s Souls truly feels labyrinthine at times.

That sense of being lost makes the exploration very palpable. You aren’t always finding anything, but you feel compelled to look. Some of the dead ends can be frustrating, but the game remains fun despite it’s shortcomings in structure.

There are far less realistic touches and more of a sense of game construction. Not every area is brimming with content to discover, but the roads all lead to a specific point. Figuring out which road will take you there is the hard part.

Bloodborne makes it’s central city feel real. There are better indications of where a path ends via large gates and there is limited use of bottomless pits. There are even tons of shortcuts for the player to discover and use. Trekking down an unknown walkway will usually lead to something worthwhile.

Demon’s Souls just doesn’t have that. It’s secrets are vague and limited in supply. Bloodborne has a secret in nearly every area. Backtracking even comes into play, but feels more organic then most games can muster.

This works in conjunction with how buildings are set up. The classrooms in the middle of the game have hallways that only lead to doors. There is no other purpose, but it is built to feel like an actual school.

The mountain peaks have caves that sometimes contain nothing. It looks enticing, but real life doesn’t always have a prize at the end of the rainbow. Sometimes, just the simple act of looking brings joy, which Bloodborne captures.

As for enemy design, both games are basically equal. After a few playthroughs, the general enemies may seem boring, but their first impressions are terrifying. Both games also start off with humanoid opponents and then expand into various creatures from some nightmarish vision.

The only reason I would say that Demon’s Souls falls short is because of it’s controls. The enemies in each title are menacing and not easily conquered (except for a few). Demon’s Souls is a slower game then Bloodborne, so it’s combat doesn’t pack the same punch. That doesn’t mean the enemy design is lacking.

If anything, the bosses have great build-up, better than Bloodborne in a lot of cases. Demon’s Souls also has a tremendous spark to introducing new enemies by clouding their appearance with environmental cues. Bloodborne doesn’t rely on that tactic.

For Bloodborne, you can basically see every foe before you kill them. Their design and size are what fill you with fear or confidence. Their movesets are all distinguishable, so you never leave wondering what happened. Bloodborne doesn’t rely on jump scares, either, something the Souls games have perfected.

Quite honestly, that area is a tie. The combatants fit each game world to a tee. You won’t leave either experience feeling like you disliked an aspect of it’s enemies. Some of them will piss you off, but you will learn to respect their attack patterns and strike with efficiency.

This all adds up to the end game. I understand that not every final boss has to be a ball buster, but Demon’s Souls lacks a true closing battle. The lore surrounding the final encounter is very detailed and interesting, but the battle is basically a gimmie. You walk in, slaughter the guy and leave. Game over.

Bloodborne also brings tremendous attention to detail in it’s lore, but the final encounter isn’t a push-over. If anything, it’s last boss is the hardest thing in the game. You square off against one of your kin and it becomes a battle of skill over style.

Facing off against a literal equal makes the last moments of Bloodborne truly memorable. After all these years, I remembered the difficulty of Demon’s Souls last boss, but I could barely muster an image of him in my mind. I don’t think I’ll ever get over how emotional I felt after Bloodborne.

But both games do offer truly compelling narratives. Their ambiguous approach to storytelling makes their moments seem unique. Each second of the game is your own. Even if the developers have a concrete story, you’ve carved your own path in their work.

That allows every player to fantasize about what piece goes where or how a particular NPC fits into the role of things. That nothing is spelled out also makes discovering any detail more rewarding.

At the end of it all, both games are worthy experiences that I would tell anyone to play. Demon’s Souls was more unique in it’s time, but it hasn’t aged poorly. Certain aspects are outdated, but the game doesn’t overstep it’s boundaries. Every mechanic and design choice is deliberate and counter-balanced (apart from Magic).

Bloodborne is the culmination of surprising success taken to it’s max level of polish. I do truly wish that the game ran at 60 frames-per-second, but the sense of speed and precision is unfounded in any of the Souls games.

It also has intricately laid paths that have no set order. It makes for an experience that truly will be solely yours. It may have taken 6 years to happen, but I finally believe that Demon’s Souls has gotten the sequel it deserved.

Also, you can make randomly generated dungeons in Bloodborne. You can literally play it forever and never see every combination. That is fantastic.

Side Note: I do love Dark Souls. I was just disappointed with it’s technical failings and more grandiose map design. It was an amazing world, but Demon’s Souls had unrivaled freedom of choice for it’s time.

Dark Souls seemed to limit that. Regardless, I would still say that Dark Souls was a worthy successor. I just always wanted a more true sequel to Demon’s Souls, something that I feel Bloodborne delivers handsomely.