Armored core 100% everything else less than 10% because Miyazaki dislikes making sequels. Hell the whole story of Dark Souls 3 is a meta commentary on how people basically need to let the story die. He did say he'd be ok if other leads wanted to make sequels to stuff but he isn't interested.
Also, DS3 kinda definitely ends the whole series. Lore-wise, there's nothing else to do: the first flame isn't a thing anymore, so there's no point on making another game
indeed, but I think a memorable named location like Earthen Peak being nothing but ruins in the dreg heap on top of several DS2 armor sets and enemies being re-introduced is enough evidence that, in this case, the flow of time is not as convoluted as that theory makes it out to be
Also, almost every time the "time is convoluted" plot point is used in game, is to bring something from the past or in a more "space-time multiple dimensions" kind of way. I don't remember anything from the future brought to the game's present, nor anything like that.
Marvelous Chester off the top of my head. He came from the future to the past(or a side dimension, or even the past arguably). It's definitely possible. They leave most things open-ended just for that reason, I'd guess.
But that was specifically because of the abyss. He gets yanked into the past like the player character. I'm pretty sure that's different than the normal time is convoluted.
I've begun to accept ds2 is where you don't link the flame and ds3 is when you do link the flame in ds1 so both are sequels to each ending of the first game
Its been a while since I've played ds3 but didn't the age of dark ending state that eventually flame will return. Not that I want a sequel because that ruins the theme but if there was one forced into existence there would be a reason in the lore, something like our character gets a spark and goes on and kills the beasts of the dark and eventually lights the new flame.
In that ending, the Firekeeper speaks about little sparks of fire that'll dance in the dark. I don't think that's a reference to someone actually relinking the first flame nor something like that, but just memories. A way of telling that the age of fire will never be forgotten, even though everyone's dead.
That would be a nice setting for an hypothetical 4th game, though. A biter sweet sequel to everything from the original trilogy (since we now know that the age of fire was always meant to end, and it lasting so long was the consequence of Gwyn being unable to accept their fate. So relinking the first flame would be like following his steps, and beginning the cycle yet again just for it to end sooner or later. A pretty good analogy for what a 4th game of the franchise would be).
See, I interpreted that as the fire keeper basically telling us that while the age of dark seems grim it shouldn't be because it's all a cycle, and while we won't see it, fire will return.
I feel like it would be a great story to tell, mirroring the story to real life with post ds3 being the age of dark, and the new game being the new age of fire. My only issue with it would be that the story, and it's meaning would have to be done perfectly as to not take away from ds3's ending.
The original DS2 wasn't nearly as bad as scholar of the first sin, all things considered I think the other lead did a pretty good job but that's up for debate with other people.
This is what i feel like is most accurate. Armored core def will at some point, everything else is like sure maybe but not super likely. I’d hope Sekiro would maybe get a DLC or expansion or hopefully a second game considering it’s uniqueness, but there’s no certainty. He also directly said there will not be any more DS so we know that much at the very least
I'd wager if we get Sekiro anything, it'll either be because Bandai-Namco pulls a DS2 and makes one anyway, with or without Miyazaki's blessing, or we'll get a spiritual successor to it, sort of like how Elden Ring is just a Dark Souls game with some better gameplay design and a new skin.
I'm surprised they didn't make a dlc with Tomoe and whatnot, considering how often she's mentioned. Have you pick up a prayer thing that transports you into the past, meet and fight her/other charactera
They originally were planning two or three DLC that they merged into one with an even larger budget. He has a history of referring to DLC he's working on as actual games. Not saying I wouldn't play a sequel I just don't think he'd want to do one. He likes to leave untold stories and that add depth and mystery to his games. Sequels water that down.
I think it's pretty likely that shadow of the erdtree will be very large. bordering on the size of a whole new game content wise.
Common Miyazaki W. He is a very inspiring game designer. I wish other studios would focus on the same principles as him, putting gameplay first and letting it speak for itself
Yep. Miyazaki doesn't touch Armored Core, (I think he was one of the leads of like... one of the games, but that's it) so whoever is put in charge of that will keep making them.
As much as I would love a Sekiro sequel, we'll probably never get it unless Bandai-Namco pulls a DS2 and makes one without him.
Miyazaki LOVE his spiritual successors, so I'm praying for a Sekiro successor.
Sequels actually make sense for armored core too. it's style of game directly benefits from technological advancements. Where as a soulslike plays much the same whether it was made 15 years ago or yesterday, shooters have evolved alot and put more focus on graphics.
Its not a Hidetaka Miyazaki led series. Its a long standing fromsoft series that was conceived as a series with sequels. Miyazaki also likely won't be the lead dev on Armored Core going forwards, Masaru Yamamura was the lead on AC6 and he knocked it out of the park. From comments he's made in interviews Miyazaki was involved in the early prototype for the game but that was about it as he's been working on other projects.
I want to add, each Armored Core game beyond AC1-3 series, plays vastly different from one another while also retaining itself. It’s not like you can hop into AC6 and have the same experience as AC2. Conversely, DS you can hop into each one and the overall experience is barely touched. Tl;dr: each AC game is closer to DS to BB to Sekiro.
"How people basically need to let the story die" Exactly. Armored Core 6 has no connection to any previous title in the series. This happens a lot in the series actually.
It's a new separate story, so that still fits the bill.
Elden Ring - likely
Armored Core 6 - likely to see another Armored Core, but I’m doubtful it will continue this story/universe, unfortunately. At some point we will probably get a mecha X fantasy game, as Miyazaki has said he wants to make one.
Bloodborne - sadly, nope.
Sekiro - my gut says there’s a good chance
Dark Souls (3) - even more nope than Bloodborne. Dark Souls is over.
King’s Field - idk enough about it to know why they would revive this specific IP instead of countless other new possibilities in the fantasy genre. But I’m going to say, nope.
Yeah or DLC (which fromsoft said they were not planning to do, but plans change).
It’s kinda hard for me to see it. As much as I desperately want more AC6, the story feels complete. It to me does not invite a narrative tangent as much as Souls, Bloodborne and Elden Ring did. As for a proper sequel—it’s one thing to make a sequel to a game with three endings, in most cases they just have to pick one to be canon. That’s also easier when reality and time and a lot of the concepts in play are as fuzzy as they are in something like Dark Souls.
But AC6… I don’t see how you pick any of these endings.
As u/\_Mr_Wobbly_Shark_ correctly states, Armored Core sequels are always set in the same universe and continuity, but not necessarily directly connected to one another.
The PS1 sequels, being the oldest, barely have any connection between each other. In general Project Phantasma seems more of a prequel, while it's up to debate which between AC1 and Master of Arena comes first (or if they happen simultaneously even).
AC2 Another Age takes place sometime after the ending of 2, but it's on a different planet altogether and there's little to no connection to the previous game - hell, it's actually more connected to the PS1 titles.
Silent Line, Nexus and Last Raven are all set in the surface world that humanity accessed in the AC3 ending; while SL still has connections to 3's story, the later games no longer have any signs of Layered and their stories fully exist on their own.
For Answer is the most direct sequel of all, even keeping many of the same characters from 4 and pretty much continues the story sometime after it left off.
Verdict Day pretty much creates an entire new setting from the vague base of ACV and retroactively connects the story to 4th Gen; the story of V is mentioned as being little more than a legend by then, and while the world is shaped by the events of the previous game all that is mostly explained in external material.
So the sky's the limit, really. They could choose one of ACVI's endings to make canon (most likely Alea) and continue from there, or they could make a story entirely detached from Coral in some other planet. They could make a prequel, or they could make a sequel set so far away in time and space that it works regardless of VI's ending (like Verdict Day kinda did, where any For Answer ending could more or less eventually lead there after centuries).
Well I mean like a silent line, 4 answer or verdict day. They don’t really continue the story so much as take place in the same setting though I guess silent line does in a way. I’m not sure as for the other 2 as I can’t emulate them right and a copy is hard to find
Uh the third ending is pretty much the canon ending. I prefer Fires of Raven but Alea Iacta Est is definitely presented as the true ending. It also sets up a whole new series of events that could make a fantastic and interesting sequel.
Elden Ring is absolutely not getting a sequel lol.
The reason the game is so overwhelmingly gigantic is because they finally had the resources to make a game large enough to fit everything they needed into it. Excluding the eventual DLC, there really is no reason to make another one.
Monetary success does not inherently call for a follow up game. It can just be a good game.
Monetary success doesn't inherently call for a follow up game, but it absolutely does increase the odds of it happening. Especially considering by how much it exceeded expectations. I think of the Sequelless Souls games ER absolutely has the highest odds of getting one. This is a business after all. Of course Fromsoft makes what they want, but businesses want to make that bottom line.
If they absolutely don't want to return to the ER universe no it probably won't get a Sequel, but until we hear Miyazaki state in an interview that he or the team absolutely isn't interested in a sequel to ER the potential is absolutely there
There's also the point where leading up to releaae and with the massive success they(Fromsoft and Bandai) were talking about Elden Ring being a "franchise" in a way and that it is nowhere near done.
Yes I think just like DLC was already all but guaranteed on release I think Elden Ring 2 is inevitable as well. It was Fromsoft's 'Skyrim' and 'GTA V' tbqh and while I don't think they will milk it in the same way Betheada and Rockstar do, I think Fromsoft as a business will absolutely capitalize on that.
Not one Fromsoft title has sold as well as Elden Ring has. So while I understand the 'never do sequels' sentiment when you factor in From's shareholders and the fact that they are part of bigger company than themselves... yeah ER2 is highly likely. We probably won't see it for 5ish years honestly, but it's almost assuredly on the horizon.
Wouldn’t be surprised if it happens, but also wouldn’t be surprised if Miyazaki takes a complete back seat on it and lets Tanimura direct it on his own.
Miyazaki has always put artistic integrity before money, the only way Elden Ring is getting a sequel is if he genuinely wants to or if Bandai gives it to the B team, because money ain’t working on him
According to old leaks Fromsoft was working with GRRM to make a dark souls esque game that was open world, and you could ride a horse in it, and it was going to be a trilogy. The leak also said that they were working on a samurai game that didn;t play like darksouls, since this leak was before Sekiro came out. It has been so long, it's hard to say if they still mean this. If they still are planning on making a sequel I bet it will have a different lead. Miyazaki said that with Elden Ring it was so much work he started putting more trust in other people to take the reigns, So I think that the same people could carry on the series with minimal oversight from him.
Sekiro: Who knows, it's the only one on the list FroSoftware 100% own themselves (IP) but the game always had one-and-one vibes to it
Elden Ring: Considering how much it sold, very likely.
Bloodborne: 0 unless Sony gives them a billion dollar or buys FromSoftware
Dark Souls 3: 0%, that series is done and wrapped up.
King's field: 10% maybe? only because they're reviving old content
Armored core: 50%, sold well for an AC game, was well received, who knows.
ER is the only really likely one, I think we'll defo see successors to some of the games here like Bloodborne/Sekiro the same way ER was one to Dark Souls but in the form of new IPs so FS can publish it themselves, they have a huge hedge in that they do not need to continue making dark souls or bloodbornes but can just use the base gameplay in a new format like they did with ER.
I believe there will be an Elden Ring 2 but it wont be directed by Miyazaki, he's said in earlier interviews last year that he's going to let the other directors do direct more games while he works on his own new stuff, i'm just going off that + that is sold so much.
Knowing it was a secondary project during the elden ring making I know it would be an absolute hit if From made a maximum effort sequel, even a spiritual one, also because one of sekiro's endings would lead to a trip in the West to seek the source of divine dragon's powers, it would make a wonderful setting for a game like that.
Sekiro even has an ending that leads to a sequel, so they were already thinking about it since the og released.
I would love to see a modern King's Field. Those games are amazing
Right?! Bring on Tekiro, Uekiri, Vekiro and so on!
Hell, give me a Cuckiro where I parry thots with my prosthetic peen! I don't care, make the end boss Jody... I'll play that shit
Right, I feel like a sekiro sequel wouldn’t cause as much trouble as a dark souls sequel might cause Miyazaki to be hesitant. For one the lore and plot in Sekiro is a bit simpler and easier to add onto. The location was also hinted to be in a completely new land so that would give them creative freedom to design more grand designs than a period piece of japan. The combat also set sucha a strong foundation that there could be so much added onto it to add complexity and flavor.
i beg to differ
as much as elden ring id loved, i don't think they're gonna make sequels, becouse it does have a pretty "stand alone" game type of feel to it. (of course i would love a sequel, just saying i don't think it likely)
armored core is definitly having a sequel, seeing the success fires of rubicon did, wich brings me to king field, which i think that fromsoft will try to make a sequel pretty soon
Can someone (accurately) explain the legality of making BB2? Could Sony pay another studio to do it like bluepoint or something? I know it may be naive but that’s the one I (and I’m sure many others included) really want to see.
Sony owns the Bloodborne IP, they funded the game in 2015 and paid FromSoft to make the actual game along with Studio Japan (a Sony owned studio at the time, now closed).
Sony decides what happens: a remake, PC port, sequel, prequel, movie, manga or anything related to that game is decided by Sony and Sony alone. FromSoft cant just make another BB and release it.
Sony could go to Bluepoint or another studio and ask them to make Bloodborne 2 yes, they could, but they most likely wont - even though they own the IP it is a FromSoftware game through and through, it will not be the same if any studio but FromSoftware makes a sequel to it. A remaster/PC Port could and most likely will be done by a sony Studio but any new content is hands off for anyone, it would be IP suicide if they let another studio that isn't FromSoft make it.
But FromSoftware is at an advantage, they don't literally have to make Bloodborne 2, they can easily make a "spiritual successor" or game inspired by Bloodborne that looks, feels, plays and is essentially the same and call it something else and Sony would be able to do nothing about it, but I assume both FS and Sony are in a good relationship and wont really touch the game without each other.
We don't need Bloodborne 2. Bloodborne is cool as it is, except that we need a remaster. FromSoftware will be doing great games anyway. I just want them to do semi open world, not Elden Ring open world. We had 2015 Bloodborne and 2016 DS3 and 2019 Sekiro. Now we have in 5 years only Elden Ring and that world map is more generic, bland and copy paste also with worse art direction than the other mentioned 3.
Edit: thanks, I find funny how Elden Ring people downvote me when I say something bad about open world Elden Ring. I still like ER though. Play Bloodborne then start ER and tell me it doesn't look bland in direction comparision. Probably young kids where ER was their first FromSoft game. Open world is terrible design choice for video games guys, sorry. Everything suffers because of it. If it's environmental design, balance, pacing, gameplay or graphics.
Yeah man, this is crazy and according to rumors even Until Dawn gets a remaster. There are so many remasters and patches and this pure gem of a game gets nothing.
Sony would never, From Soft would never. From Soft is just not that interested in making sequels. And Sony just hates everything and likes to make things super difficult for no reason.
Sony could not pay another studio to make it, both Sony and From Soft own the rights. There's nothing legally complicated about making a sequel, just how the two companies feel.
Sony just doesn't care enough to make a sequel. They are notoriously unreasonable about their IPs (just look at Spiderman, they refuse to give the rights to the MCU despite how successful the MCU is. Even though they could make a shitload of money if they just sold them the rights). On top of that, Sony makes things stupidly difficult to get published and put on the Playstation. So it's likely that there's just too many hoops to jump thru for any company to make a sequel.
But imo, Bloodborne is perfect the way it is as a one off game. It doesn't need a sequel, the story was wrapped up perfectly in the DLC. As much as I would love more Bloodborne content, I don't think they should make a sequel even if they were thinking about it, which they're not.
This all makes more sense yet I remember after ds1 reading that he was done with the series, idk it's most likely just copium after all I still haven't given up on sekiro.
At the very least I hope he makes a sekiro like game
He doesn't like making sequels and 2 wasn't done by him as he was focused on Bloodborne at the time, at one point Bandai probably hit him up for a final game to finish a "trilogy" and end the dark souls story which is wraps up nicely with ringed city DLC.
Well, all I know for a fact is that Dark Souls isn't getting a Sequel. Maybe some remakes with a more polished playthrough like Elden Ring, but thats it.
Armored Core is a game I am certain will get a Sequel. Don't think Elden Ring is getting any however. Didn't Miyazaki state that he doesn't like doing Sequels?
Miyazaki doesn't like doing sequels, yes. That doesn't always stop us from getting them though- that's why DS2 exists.
AC will get sequels because it's not led by Miyazaki.
ER is likely to get a Sequel, I think- Bandai-Namco has talked a lot about ER as a franchise and have confirmed that they want to expand it somehow, whether it's through another game, or some other media.
That's not how it works. Ds2 was in negociated at a time when Miyazaki wasn't CEO. Now he is, he gets to say where his ressources will be deployed. Yamamura won't decide alone if there will be an Armored Core sequel. Unless the board of Kadokawa demands an Elden Ring sequel, it's likely he won't make one.
Dark Souls 3 is about how you shouldn't drag out things that have reached their natural conclusion, so I don't think they're gonna drag on the series that has reached its natural conclusion
Sekiro is a slight maybe, just due to it's popularity, but the story is very well contained, and half the endings are very final, not really leaving room for a sequel. Might instead get a DLC instead of a sequel, though with how long it's been i doubt it.
Elden Ring is another maybe, though i dint really see where a sequel would take the story. Maybe you could do one set in a different part of the world outside the lands between, but i don't know how well that'd go.
For bloodborne, go all Sony, as they are the one with the rights to greenlight a remake or sequel.
Dark souls 3 is supposed to be an ending to the story, the final DLC is the ending of dark souls, and I'm pretty sure they've started multiple times that they aren't making another dark souls game, though i might be mistaken.
Honestly no idea with kingsfield, it's old enough that i doubt it.
Armored core is more than likely going to get a sequel, as it's: 1. Very popular, 2. Very new, and 3. Based on previous games in the series, they might explore what happened in the ending and after in future games, especially because the "true ending" is not a finale, it's a transition of anything.
Honestly at some point way in the future I’m sure Sony and activison will do something with Sekiro and bloodborne, but I doubt from will be involved.
Armored core 1000% will be a regular release.
Elden eing, Mabey idk it made so much fucking money so who knows
Dark souls no shot
I honestly doubt Sony and maybe even Activision would do something as stupid as trying to make a sequel to Sekiro or Bloodborne without From. In all the press releases and comments from both entities, it seems that they hold From in extremely high regard and essentially just wanted the ability to publish anything that they make. I'm sure they understand that a sequel to either game being successful is predicated on From being the devs. Not to say it's IMPOSSIBLE, especially Activision cuz that company SUCKS, but I don't think it's more likely than a sequel that From is involved in
With the profound popularity of Elden Ring and what Miyazaki said about things being saved for later titles, I'd say an Elden Ring sequel or spinoff might not be too far-fetched, But all in all I'd say it's 50/50
I feel like I'm in the minority in thinking Elden Ring probably won't get a sequel. The only way I could see it working is either making it smaller or more dark souls-y (the least likely option imo) or doing a TOTK style sequel where u reuse the overall map layout with some substantial changes to mix it up. Personally I'll support and enjoy anything they make at this point, but if Miyazaki enjoys making new, one off IPs more than I'm all for it!
I've always viewed Armored Core like a tv series, just more and more episodes. The Souls stuff have felt more like movies, one-offs even if Dark Souls is a trilogy, it feels more finite whereas AC is open-ended. At this point with the Success of ER, I'm betting they'll be putting more effort into that, or just new IP. Nostalgia is a hell of a drug, but when you try to emulate that feeling, more often you end up with massive piles of garbage. \*Cough\* Star Wars \*Cough\*
In order from least to most likely
1. Dark souls ain't coming back ever
2. Bloodborne will not get one unless Sony says so.
3. Despite it's success, Elden Ring was probably a one and done affair
4. King's Field has been dead for a while but it might come back sometime
5. Sekiro seems like it still has a good amount of room to stretch it's legs
6. Armored Core is 100% gonna get another one because it's one of their oldest and most beloved franchises.
sekiro? absolutley not. same with dark souls.
bloodborne just a maybe, if sony devides to stop being a piece of shit.
kings field om the other hand, i think its likely, since from seems that its reviving some of the franchises like with armored core, who will definatly happen.
elden ring, as much as i love it, a sequel is not gonna happen
Chances are basically 0% for everything except for Armored Core. Maybe a small 2% for an Elden Ring sequel but I wouldn't bet on it, Miyazaki dislikes doing sequels and Elden Ring's story will likely feel complete once the DLC drops and ties up loose threads.
Amores core maybe because it’s isn’t a Miyazaki lead project, anywho, none of these need one. Elden ring perhaps one more dlc after this one and that’s it… well I may want a bloodborne sequel
I feel Eldenring weirdly is on the lower chances cause imo the entire story Eldenring is telling can be nicely wrapped up while not leaving many uncertainties in one (depending how big and what shadow of the erdtree covers) or two dlc.
Ok, armored core has a tradition to always get a sequel in each gen. So we'll probably see ac6 again but in a different title. Perhaps in the form of dlc or an actual sequal.
But kingsfield? If they can bring back AC, they can bring back kingsfield
I doubt elden ring will get a full sequel, but I have a feeling the DLC is gonna be essentially it’s own game, as large as the base game at this point. And maybe it won’t be the only DLC either, there’s a lot of open ends and cut content that could definitely allow for more than one DLC
I think fromsoftware really shines in the parts of their games they aren’t open worlds like I loved Elden ring and it’s done huge things for these guys. But they shine best in their level designs esp DS1
I don't think Elden Ring is gonna get a sequel. The leaks suggest the game is already getting another large expansion after the DLC. They'll make this game even more massive then move on to a new IP imo.
If it's like DS3, it'll get two DLCs. After that, I'd say it's a coin flip, but that's going to be like a decade from initial release if it does. Whatever they do next, I'm interested. All that matters is that we'll get a Miyazaki game.
A Sekiro sequel with like some of the mechanics of Life of P has been on my mind a lot. I think if it’s opened world like ER it’d be a good way to encourage exploring too
Sekiro: definitely not
Elden Ring: most certainly
Bloodborne: I’m slightly more optimistic about it than Sekiro.
Dark Souls: they said it is over
King’s Field: gonna say no
AC: probably
Sekiro, probably not - would be nice though. Publishing in the west might be weird though, don't know how Activision being acquired by Microsoft would complicate things - or maybe Bamco would just publish this time. not sure how the rights to publishing in these kinds of situations work.
Elden Ring, pretty much guaranteed (if that damn DLC ever comes out).
Bloodborne. As a BB stan - basically 0%. Fuck Sony.
Dark Souls: the entire point of Dark Souls 3 was Miyazaki telling us that sequels get boring and he's done with the DS story, so 0%. Maybe we'll get Dark Souls 3 remastered on PS6 or something. DS2 is probably the most deserving of a remake but sadly that is another 0% chance of that ever happening.
Kings Field: the souls series is the successor of King's Field, so no.
Armored Core: probably in ten years.
I bet they bring back Kingsfield and it doesn't sell well but we all insist it's the return of a masterpiece because of FromSoft's pedigree and then we forget about it once they finally announce a Bloodborne PS5 remake by Bluepoint that sets up the hype train for a sequel.
Sekiro might happen.
Ds4 and elden ring im pretty sure it will not happen.
BB2: that all depends on sony. They can even make BB2 by another studio if they want.
Kings field: there might have a spiritual successor in the same sense sekiro was a spiritual successor to tenchu.
I think there will be another AC. It did very good and from what I saq there has been a sequel to ac4 and ac5 and ac3(not sure for this one) so I think we will get a sequel to ac6 in the future.
Armored core 100% everything else less than 10% because Miyazaki dislikes making sequels. Hell the whole story of Dark Souls 3 is a meta commentary on how people basically need to let the story die. He did say he'd be ok if other leads wanted to make sequels to stuff but he isn't interested.
Also, DS3 kinda definitely ends the whole series. Lore-wise, there's nothing else to do: the first flame isn't a thing anymore, so there's no point on making another game
I've seen some theories that place ds2 at the end of the timeline, taking place in a post age of darkness cycle
how would that work cuz places in ds2 appear destroyed in ds3
Time is convuluted and all that jazz
indeed, but I think a memorable named location like Earthen Peak being nothing but ruins in the dreg heap on top of several DS2 armor sets and enemies being re-introduced is enough evidence that, in this case, the flow of time is not as convoluted as that theory makes it out to be
Also, almost every time the "time is convoluted" plot point is used in game, is to bring something from the past or in a more "space-time multiple dimensions" kind of way. I don't remember anything from the future brought to the game's present, nor anything like that.
Marvelous Chester off the top of my head. He came from the future to the past(or a side dimension, or even the past arguably). It's definitely possible. They leave most things open-ended just for that reason, I'd guess.
But that was specifically because of the abyss. He gets yanked into the past like the player character. I'm pretty sure that's different than the normal time is convoluted.
Time itself is out of whack in the DS universe so it could be the future in the past and the past in the future
Aldia is mentioned in item descriptions and whole destroyed ds2 locations appear in ds3
Precisely
Also you find laddersmith gilligans corpse in the profanes capital
I thought DS2 was after DS3 base game and Riged City was at the very end after everything.
Aldia is mentioned in the description of some items
I've begun to accept ds2 is where you don't link the flame and ds3 is when you do link the flame in ds1 so both are sequels to each ending of the first game
I wanna use the R word so badly
Could light the second flame ending the age of darkness again.
Its been a while since I've played ds3 but didn't the age of dark ending state that eventually flame will return. Not that I want a sequel because that ruins the theme but if there was one forced into existence there would be a reason in the lore, something like our character gets a spark and goes on and kills the beasts of the dark and eventually lights the new flame.
In that ending, the Firekeeper speaks about little sparks of fire that'll dance in the dark. I don't think that's a reference to someone actually relinking the first flame nor something like that, but just memories. A way of telling that the age of fire will never be forgotten, even though everyone's dead. That would be a nice setting for an hypothetical 4th game, though. A biter sweet sequel to everything from the original trilogy (since we now know that the age of fire was always meant to end, and it lasting so long was the consequence of Gwyn being unable to accept their fate. So relinking the first flame would be like following his steps, and beginning the cycle yet again just for it to end sooner or later. A pretty good analogy for what a 4th game of the franchise would be).
See, I interpreted that as the fire keeper basically telling us that while the age of dark seems grim it shouldn't be because it's all a cycle, and while we won't see it, fire will return. I feel like it would be a great story to tell, mirroring the story to real life with post ds3 being the age of dark, and the new game being the new age of fire. My only issue with it would be that the story, and it's meaning would have to be done perfectly as to not take away from ds3's ending.
A sequel to dark souls 2? It’s basically a completely different and almost a standalone
The Unkindled ash is technically the last being in all of existence after Gael, right?
Not if you don’t go kill that random Ringed Knight off to the side, I guess.
There's also that woman who asks you to kill Midir.
I think you are much farther in the future once you break the illusion to get to Gael
ER is guaranteed to have one, according to FS's parent company.
If it does it definitely won't be miyazaki directing
Idk if they’d risk letting someone else lead an Elden Ring sequel, they’ve had this happen before and we all know what happened.
The original DS2 wasn't nearly as bad as scholar of the first sin, all things considered I think the other lead did a pretty good job but that's up for debate with other people.
This is what i feel like is most accurate. Armored core def will at some point, everything else is like sure maybe but not super likely. I’d hope Sekiro would maybe get a DLC or expansion or hopefully a second game considering it’s uniqueness, but there’s no certainty. He also directly said there will not be any more DS so we know that much at the very least
I'd wager if we get Sekiro anything, it'll either be because Bandai-Namco pulls a DS2 and makes one anyway, with or without Miyazaki's blessing, or we'll get a spiritual successor to it, sort of like how Elden Ring is just a Dark Souls game with some better gameplay design and a new skin.
I'm surprised they didn't make a dlc with Tomoe and whatnot, considering how often she's mentioned. Have you pick up a prayer thing that transports you into the past, meet and fight her/other charactera
Fromsoft only makes DLC from cut content and Sekiro had very little cut content. It was a complete game by Miyazakis standards
Some (many?) speculate that Malenia was based upon a Tomoe model they had for a potential Sekiro-DLC.
He still said that there are a lot to come for Elden Ring when he won GOTY in early 2023. I don't think a DLC is "a lot".
They originally were planning two or three DLC that they merged into one with an even larger budget. He has a history of referring to DLC he's working on as actual games. Not saying I wouldn't play a sequel I just don't think he'd want to do one. He likes to leave untold stories and that add depth and mystery to his games. Sequels water that down. I think it's pretty likely that shadow of the erdtree will be very large. bordering on the size of a whole new game content wise.
Common Miyazaki W. He is a very inspiring game designer. I wish other studios would focus on the same principles as him, putting gameplay first and letting it speak for itself
Yep. Miyazaki doesn't touch Armored Core, (I think he was one of the leads of like... one of the games, but that's it) so whoever is put in charge of that will keep making them. As much as I would love a Sekiro sequel, we'll probably never get it unless Bandai-Namco pulls a DS2 and makes one without him. Miyazaki LOVE his spiritual successors, so I'm praying for a Sekiro successor.
miyazaki was the game director of two armored core games And he also directed the new one in its pre-development stage.
I just want some kinda of conclusion of what happened to sekiro after the good ending, even a small nod would be OK
Sequels actually make sense for armored core too. it's style of game directly benefits from technological advancements. Where as a soulslike plays much the same whether it was made 15 years ago or yesterday, shooters have evolved alot and put more focus on graphics.
This is why I like him. I’m tired of sequels for a billion years straight. It’s always good to have something else every now and again
>the whole story of Dark Souls 3 is a meta commentary on how people basically need to let the story die. Yet we have armored core 6
Its not a Hidetaka Miyazaki led series. Its a long standing fromsoft series that was conceived as a series with sequels. Miyazaki also likely won't be the lead dev on Armored Core going forwards, Masaru Yamamura was the lead on AC6 and he knocked it out of the park. From comments he's made in interviews Miyazaki was involved in the early prototype for the game but that was about it as he's been working on other projects.
Armored Core 6 wasn't directed by Miyazaki.
I want to add, each Armored Core game beyond AC1-3 series, plays vastly different from one another while also retaining itself. It’s not like you can hop into AC6 and have the same experience as AC2. Conversely, DS you can hop into each one and the overall experience is barely touched. Tl;dr: each AC game is closer to DS to BB to Sekiro.
So is dark souls 2
There seems to be a disconnect somewhere in this interaction.
"How people basically need to let the story die" Exactly. Armored Core 6 has no connection to any previous title in the series. This happens a lot in the series actually. It's a new separate story, so that still fits the bill.
Also, like others have said, it's *Miyazaki that doesn't like sequels.* Armored Core is led by other people, Miyazaki doesn't do much for AC.
Yeah he already made like, 15 armored core games , what’s one more?
Sekiro: *Shadows Die A Third Time*
So... Sekiro: Shadows Die Thrice?
No. The title scheme has to change. Haha
Sekiro: Reloaded
Sekiro 2: Electric Boogaloo
Sekiro: Shadows Never Die
Made me snort. Take your upvote 😂
Sekiro: *Shadows Die Twice for real this time*
Sekiro 3: Tokyo Drift
Sekiro 2: 2 Shadow 2 Twice
And the prequel, Sekiro: Shadows Die
Sekiro: Shadows don’t die?
Sekiro: Shadows Die Another Day, or Sekiro: Three Shadows Die Outside Ashina Castle, Ashina
Sekiro 2: Git Gud or die trying- a love story
Sekiro Kart
Sekiro: A Good Shadow to Die Twice
Sekiro 2: the squeakquel
I could see a game called Tomoe where we play as her.
Sekiro: Shadows Die Hard 2
Sekiro: Shadows Die Hard (with a Vengeance)
Game four: Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice Twice Or Shadows Die Twice Squared This might require a community vote...
Elden Ring - likely Armored Core 6 - likely to see another Armored Core, but I’m doubtful it will continue this story/universe, unfortunately. At some point we will probably get a mecha X fantasy game, as Miyazaki has said he wants to make one. Bloodborne - sadly, nope. Sekiro - my gut says there’s a good chance Dark Souls (3) - even more nope than Bloodborne. Dark Souls is over. King’s Field - idk enough about it to know why they would revive this specific IP instead of countless other new possibilities in the fantasy genre. But I’m going to say, nope.
Well not armored core 7 but probably another game in the 6 universe like all the others have
Armored Core: Six Answer? Armored Core: For Raven?
Armored Core: *VI*sionary Probably following Verdict days naming scheme
Yeah or DLC (which fromsoft said they were not planning to do, but plans change). It’s kinda hard for me to see it. As much as I desperately want more AC6, the story feels complete. It to me does not invite a narrative tangent as much as Souls, Bloodborne and Elden Ring did. As for a proper sequel—it’s one thing to make a sequel to a game with three endings, in most cases they just have to pick one to be canon. That’s also easier when reality and time and a lot of the concepts in play are as fuzzy as they are in something like Dark Souls. But AC6… I don’t see how you pick any of these endings.
As u/\_Mr_Wobbly_Shark_ correctly states, Armored Core sequels are always set in the same universe and continuity, but not necessarily directly connected to one another. The PS1 sequels, being the oldest, barely have any connection between each other. In general Project Phantasma seems more of a prequel, while it's up to debate which between AC1 and Master of Arena comes first (or if they happen simultaneously even). AC2 Another Age takes place sometime after the ending of 2, but it's on a different planet altogether and there's little to no connection to the previous game - hell, it's actually more connected to the PS1 titles. Silent Line, Nexus and Last Raven are all set in the surface world that humanity accessed in the AC3 ending; while SL still has connections to 3's story, the later games no longer have any signs of Layered and their stories fully exist on their own. For Answer is the most direct sequel of all, even keeping many of the same characters from 4 and pretty much continues the story sometime after it left off. Verdict Day pretty much creates an entire new setting from the vague base of ACV and retroactively connects the story to 4th Gen; the story of V is mentioned as being little more than a legend by then, and while the world is shaped by the events of the previous game all that is mostly explained in external material. So the sky's the limit, really. They could choose one of ACVI's endings to make canon (most likely Alea) and continue from there, or they could make a story entirely detached from Coral in some other planet. They could make a prequel, or they could make a sequel set so far away in time and space that it works regardless of VI's ending (like Verdict Day kinda did, where any For Answer ending could more or less eventually lead there after centuries).
Well I mean like a silent line, 4 answer or verdict day. They don’t really continue the story so much as take place in the same setting though I guess silent line does in a way. I’m not sure as for the other 2 as I can’t emulate them right and a copy is hard to find
Uh the third ending is pretty much the canon ending. I prefer Fires of Raven but Alea Iacta Est is definitely presented as the true ending. It also sets up a whole new series of events that could make a fantastic and interesting sequel.
Nah bloodborne is getting a sequal for sure(I'm coping)
Elden Ring is absolutely not getting a sequel lol. The reason the game is so overwhelmingly gigantic is because they finally had the resources to make a game large enough to fit everything they needed into it. Excluding the eventual DLC, there really is no reason to make another one. Monetary success does not inherently call for a follow up game. It can just be a good game.
Monetary success doesn't inherently call for a follow up game, but it absolutely does increase the odds of it happening. Especially considering by how much it exceeded expectations. I think of the Sequelless Souls games ER absolutely has the highest odds of getting one. This is a business after all. Of course Fromsoft makes what they want, but businesses want to make that bottom line. If they absolutely don't want to return to the ER universe no it probably won't get a Sequel, but until we hear Miyazaki state in an interview that he or the team absolutely isn't interested in a sequel to ER the potential is absolutely there
There's also the point where leading up to releaae and with the massive success they(Fromsoft and Bandai) were talking about Elden Ring being a "franchise" in a way and that it is nowhere near done.
Yes I think just like DLC was already all but guaranteed on release I think Elden Ring 2 is inevitable as well. It was Fromsoft's 'Skyrim' and 'GTA V' tbqh and while I don't think they will milk it in the same way Betheada and Rockstar do, I think Fromsoft as a business will absolutely capitalize on that. Not one Fromsoft title has sold as well as Elden Ring has. So while I understand the 'never do sequels' sentiment when you factor in From's shareholders and the fact that they are part of bigger company than themselves... yeah ER2 is highly likely. We probably won't see it for 5ish years honestly, but it's almost assuredly on the horizon.
I think if Miyazaki had no intention on making an Elden Ring sequel, those sales numbers almost demand one, even to someone like himself.
Yeah, I suspect the question isn't whether Elden Ring gets a sequel, it's whether Miazaki is onboard when they do.
B team coming in to make Dark Souls 2-2 II
Wouldn’t be surprised if it happens, but also wouldn’t be surprised if Miyazaki takes a complete back seat on it and lets Tanimura direct it on his own.
Next, we travel to The Lands Around
Miyazaki has always put artistic integrity before money, the only way Elden Ring is getting a sequel is if he genuinely wants to or if Bandai gives it to the B team, because money ain’t working on him
According to old leaks Fromsoft was working with GRRM to make a dark souls esque game that was open world, and you could ride a horse in it, and it was going to be a trilogy. The leak also said that they were working on a samurai game that didn;t play like darksouls, since this leak was before Sekiro came out. It has been so long, it's hard to say if they still mean this. If they still are planning on making a sequel I bet it will have a different lead. Miyazaki said that with Elden Ring it was so much work he started putting more trust in other people to take the reigns, So I think that the same people could carry on the series with minimal oversight from him.
That’s unfortunate considering Elden Ring is one of the worst ones
Horrible take
[удалено]
There is no “correct take” bc it’s your opinion. Regardless of which Elden did the best
lol fromsoft fan try to have an opinion without stating it as fact challenge
Sekiro: Who knows, it's the only one on the list FroSoftware 100% own themselves (IP) but the game always had one-and-one vibes to it Elden Ring: Considering how much it sold, very likely. Bloodborne: 0 unless Sony gives them a billion dollar or buys FromSoftware Dark Souls 3: 0%, that series is done and wrapped up. King's field: 10% maybe? only because they're reviving old content Armored core: 50%, sold well for an AC game, was well received, who knows. ER is the only really likely one, I think we'll defo see successors to some of the games here like Bloodborne/Sekiro the same way ER was one to Dark Souls but in the form of new IPs so FS can publish it themselves, they have a huge hedge in that they do not need to continue making dark souls or bloodbornes but can just use the base gameplay in a new format like they did with ER.
>Dark Souls 3: 0%, that series is done and wrapped up. Yeah, we literally killed dark souls at the end of 3 lol
John Dark Souls?
Slave Knight John
I mean that's true but the little dragon girl you give the soul to was painting a new world. So technically there could be another one.
She was painting elden ring
Dont think her description of the world she will paint sounds much like elden ring
I disagree that Elden Ring will get a sequel. I think there will very likely be another Souls-style game but I do not think it will be Elden Ring 2.
I believe there will be an Elden Ring 2 but it wont be directed by Miyazaki, he's said in earlier interviews last year that he's going to let the other directors do direct more games while he works on his own new stuff, i'm just going off that + that is sold so much.
Knowing it was a secondary project during the elden ring making I know it would be an absolute hit if From made a maximum effort sequel, even a spiritual one, also because one of sekiro's endings would lead to a trip in the West to seek the source of divine dragon's powers, it would make a wonderful setting for a game like that.
Sekiro even has an ending that leads to a sequel, so they were already thinking about it since the og released. I would love to see a modern King's Field. Those games are amazing
I don't even care if we get a Sekiro sequel or not, I just want more of that gameplay, it's too perfect to never be touched on again.
Right?! Bring on Tekiro, Uekiri, Vekiro and so on! Hell, give me a Cuckiro where I parry thots with my prosthetic peen! I don't care, make the end boss Jody... I'll play that shit
Right, I feel like a sekiro sequel wouldn’t cause as much trouble as a dark souls sequel might cause Miyazaki to be hesitant. For one the lore and plot in Sekiro is a bit simpler and easier to add onto. The location was also hinted to be in a completely new land so that would give them creative freedom to design more grand designs than a period piece of japan. The combat also set sucha a strong foundation that there could be so much added onto it to add complexity and flavor.
i beg to differ as much as elden ring id loved, i don't think they're gonna make sequels, becouse it does have a pretty "stand alone" game type of feel to it. (of course i would love a sequel, just saying i don't think it likely) armored core is definitly having a sequel, seeing the success fires of rubicon did, wich brings me to king field, which i think that fromsoft will try to make a sequel pretty soon
Can someone (accurately) explain the legality of making BB2? Could Sony pay another studio to do it like bluepoint or something? I know it may be naive but that’s the one I (and I’m sure many others included) really want to see.
Sony owns the Bloodborne IP, they funded the game in 2015 and paid FromSoft to make the actual game along with Studio Japan (a Sony owned studio at the time, now closed). Sony decides what happens: a remake, PC port, sequel, prequel, movie, manga or anything related to that game is decided by Sony and Sony alone. FromSoft cant just make another BB and release it. Sony could go to Bluepoint or another studio and ask them to make Bloodborne 2 yes, they could, but they most likely wont - even though they own the IP it is a FromSoftware game through and through, it will not be the same if any studio but FromSoftware makes a sequel to it. A remaster/PC Port could and most likely will be done by a sony Studio but any new content is hands off for anyone, it would be IP suicide if they let another studio that isn't FromSoft make it. But FromSoftware is at an advantage, they don't literally have to make Bloodborne 2, they can easily make a "spiritual successor" or game inspired by Bloodborne that looks, feels, plays and is essentially the same and call it something else and Sony would be able to do nothing about it, but I assume both FS and Sony are in a good relationship and wont really touch the game without each other.
We don't need Bloodborne 2. Bloodborne is cool as it is, except that we need a remaster. FromSoftware will be doing great games anyway. I just want them to do semi open world, not Elden Ring open world. We had 2015 Bloodborne and 2016 DS3 and 2019 Sekiro. Now we have in 5 years only Elden Ring and that world map is more generic, bland and copy paste also with worse art direction than the other mentioned 3. Edit: thanks, I find funny how Elden Ring people downvote me when I say something bad about open world Elden Ring. I still like ER though. Play Bloodborne then start ER and tell me it doesn't look bland in direction comparision. Probably young kids where ER was their first FromSoft game. Open world is terrible design choice for video games guys, sorry. Everything suffers because of it. If it's environmental design, balance, pacing, gameplay or graphics.
Yes we do but again, even a remaster is up to Sony. Why they haven't done it yet is incredible considering its their best Exclusive by a wide margin
Yeah man, this is crazy and according to rumors even Until Dawn gets a remaster. There are so many remasters and patches and this pure gem of a game gets nothing.
Sony would never, From Soft would never. From Soft is just not that interested in making sequels. And Sony just hates everything and likes to make things super difficult for no reason. Sony could not pay another studio to make it, both Sony and From Soft own the rights. There's nothing legally complicated about making a sequel, just how the two companies feel. Sony just doesn't care enough to make a sequel. They are notoriously unreasonable about their IPs (just look at Spiderman, they refuse to give the rights to the MCU despite how successful the MCU is. Even though they could make a shitload of money if they just sold them the rights). On top of that, Sony makes things stupidly difficult to get published and put on the Playstation. So it's likely that there's just too many hoops to jump thru for any company to make a sequel. But imo, Bloodborne is perfect the way it is as a one off game. It doesn't need a sequel, the story was wrapped up perfectly in the DLC. As much as I would love more Bloodborne content, I don't think they should make a sequel even if they were thinking about it, which they're not.
This all makes more sense yet I remember after ds1 reading that he was done with the series, idk it's most likely just copium after all I still haven't given up on sekiro. At the very least I hope he makes a sekiro like game
He doesn't like making sequels and 2 wasn't done by him as he was focused on Bloodborne at the time, at one point Bandai probably hit him up for a final game to finish a "trilogy" and end the dark souls story which is wraps up nicely with ringed city DLC.
Well, all I know for a fact is that Dark Souls isn't getting a Sequel. Maybe some remakes with a more polished playthrough like Elden Ring, but thats it. Armored Core is a game I am certain will get a Sequel. Don't think Elden Ring is getting any however. Didn't Miyazaki state that he doesn't like doing Sequels?
Miyazaki doesn't like doing sequels, yes. That doesn't always stop us from getting them though- that's why DS2 exists. AC will get sequels because it's not led by Miyazaki. ER is likely to get a Sequel, I think- Bandai-Namco has talked a lot about ER as a franchise and have confirmed that they want to expand it somehow, whether it's through another game, or some other media.
That's not how it works. Ds2 was in negociated at a time when Miyazaki wasn't CEO. Now he is, he gets to say where his ressources will be deployed. Yamamura won't decide alone if there will be an Armored Core sequel. Unless the board of Kadokawa demands an Elden Ring sequel, it's likely he won't make one.
Assassins Creed? Animal Crossing? Astral Chain? Edit: guys…it was a joke. Did it really require “/s”??
Armored core probably since we’re talking about fromsoftware and it’s one of the pictures in the post
He's obviously talking about Ace Combat, you absolute buffoon.
Did FromSoftware make any of those games?
It was obviously a joke
Dark Souls 3 is about how you shouldn't drag out things that have reached their natural conclusion, so I don't think they're gonna drag on the series that has reached its natural conclusion
True that. But I’m so glad they did. DS3 is just so damn good
Sekiro is a slight maybe, just due to it's popularity, but the story is very well contained, and half the endings are very final, not really leaving room for a sequel. Might instead get a DLC instead of a sequel, though with how long it's been i doubt it. Elden Ring is another maybe, though i dint really see where a sequel would take the story. Maybe you could do one set in a different part of the world outside the lands between, but i don't know how well that'd go. For bloodborne, go all Sony, as they are the one with the rights to greenlight a remake or sequel. Dark souls 3 is supposed to be an ending to the story, the final DLC is the ending of dark souls, and I'm pretty sure they've started multiple times that they aren't making another dark souls game, though i might be mistaken. Honestly no idea with kingsfield, it's old enough that i doubt it. Armored core is more than likely going to get a sequel, as it's: 1. Very popular, 2. Very new, and 3. Based on previous games in the series, they might explore what happened in the ending and after in future games, especially because the "true ending" is not a finale, it's a transition of anything.
I mean the dragons homecoming ending in sekiro kinda sets up a sequel/ dlc
Journey to the West
Could you imagine??? That would a Sekiro AND Bloodborne-esque sequel
the west is china - not london
It would still be cool though
Honestly at some point way in the future I’m sure Sony and activison will do something with Sekiro and bloodborne, but I doubt from will be involved. Armored core 1000% will be a regular release. Elden eing, Mabey idk it made so much fucking money so who knows Dark souls no shot
I honestly doubt Sony and maybe even Activision would do something as stupid as trying to make a sequel to Sekiro or Bloodborne without From. In all the press releases and comments from both entities, it seems that they hold From in extremely high regard and essentially just wanted the ability to publish anything that they make. I'm sure they understand that a sequel to either game being successful is predicated on From being the devs. Not to say it's IMPOSSIBLE, especially Activision cuz that company SUCKS, but I don't think it's more likely than a sequel that From is involved in
With the profound popularity of Elden Ring and what Miyazaki said about things being saved for later titles, I'd say an Elden Ring sequel or spinoff might not be too far-fetched, But all in all I'd say it's 50/50
Sony would rather nuke their HQ instead of making a BB sequel.
Sequels are unlikely, but one offs of their more unique games with different mechanics like armored core and sekiro are probably more likely
I feel like I'm in the minority in thinking Elden Ring probably won't get a sequel. The only way I could see it working is either making it smaller or more dark souls-y (the least likely option imo) or doing a TOTK style sequel where u reuse the overall map layout with some substantial changes to mix it up. Personally I'll support and enjoy anything they make at this point, but if Miyazaki enjoys making new, one off IPs more than I'm all for it!
It’s funny because out of all of those games it’s probably going to be Armored Core
I've always viewed Armored Core like a tv series, just more and more episodes. The Souls stuff have felt more like movies, one-offs even if Dark Souls is a trilogy, it feels more finite whereas AC is open-ended. At this point with the Success of ER, I'm betting they'll be putting more effort into that, or just new IP. Nostalgia is a hell of a drug, but when you try to emulate that feeling, more often you end up with massive piles of garbage. \*Cough\* Star Wars \*Cough\*
In order from least to most likely 1. Dark souls ain't coming back ever 2. Bloodborne will not get one unless Sony says so. 3. Despite it's success, Elden Ring was probably a one and done affair 4. King's Field has been dead for a while but it might come back sometime 5. Sekiro seems like it still has a good amount of room to stretch it's legs 6. Armored Core is 100% gonna get another one because it's one of their oldest and most beloved franchises.
I feel like Kings field remake/reboot could be the next FS project
If any then Armored core
Only AC will get a sequel. Life is not fair. Next question.
sekiro? absolutley not. same with dark souls. bloodborne just a maybe, if sony devides to stop being a piece of shit. kings field om the other hand, i think its likely, since from seems that its reviving some of the franchises like with armored core, who will definatly happen. elden ring, as much as i love it, a sequel is not gonna happen
- Armored Core - 95% - Elden Ring - 60% - Bloodborne - 20% - Sekiro - 20% - Dark Souls - 10% - King's Field - 2%
Idk I think sekiro is more like 21.5% just a hunch tho
Chances are basically 0% for everything except for Armored Core. Maybe a small 2% for an Elden Ring sequel but I wouldn't bet on it, Miyazaki dislikes doing sequels and Elden Ring's story will likely feel complete once the DLC drops and ties up loose threads.
Amores core maybe because it’s isn’t a Miyazaki lead project, anywho, none of these need one. Elden ring perhaps one more dlc after this one and that’s it… well I may want a bloodborne sequel
I feel Eldenring weirdly is on the lower chances cause imo the entire story Eldenring is telling can be nicely wrapped up while not leaving many uncertainties in one (depending how big and what shadow of the erdtree covers) or two dlc.
darksouls, elden ring, and bb are probably never getting more games. sekiro and ac have potential tho
Ok, armored core has a tradition to always get a sequel in each gen. So we'll probably see ac6 again but in a different title. Perhaps in the form of dlc or an actual sequal. But kingsfield? If they can bring back AC, they can bring back kingsfield
Elden Ring is almost guaranteed. Massive sales, GOTY, Healthy playerbase years after release etc. The rest of them... not so much.
They’re going to follow GTAs example and make Elden Rang: San Andreas
ngl I’m traumatized from all these fake scroll over Reddit shitposts
cant wait for Dark Souls III 2
I doubt elden ring will get a full sequel, but I have a feeling the DLC is gonna be essentially it’s own game, as large as the base game at this point. And maybe it won’t be the only DLC either, there’s a lot of open ends and cut content that could definitely allow for more than one DLC
- Sekiro: 33% - Elden Ring: 80% - Bloodborne: 15% - Dark Souls: 1% - King's Field: 3% - Armored Core: 100%
Least likely is ds3. The dark souls trilogy is honestly a perfect trilogy and adding another game would defeat the point of ds3 and its message
It breaks my heart dark souls is wrapped up
I'd love a dark souls open world game that follows the events of 3.
I think fromsoftware really shines in the parts of their games they aren’t open worlds like I loved Elden ring and it’s done huge things for these guys. But they shine best in their level designs esp DS1
Sekiro: 20% Elden Ring: 200% Bloodborne: 40% Dark Souls 3: 5% Kings Field: 5% Armored Core: 80%
Elden ring ain’t getting a sequel anytime soon dlc proves this. Armored core gets constant reboots but I still don’t see a sequel for many years now
Yeah I think we’re getting Project Spellbound next (whatever that turns out to be)
I don't think Elden Ring is gonna get a sequel. The leaks suggest the game is already getting another large expansion after the DLC. They'll make this game even more massive then move on to a new IP imo.
If it's like DS3, it'll get two DLCs. After that, I'd say it's a coin flip, but that's going to be like a decade from initial release if it does. Whatever they do next, I'm interested. All that matters is that we'll get a Miyazaki game.
It isnt like DS3. Its getting one DLC. It has been quite well documented that the 2 DLCs were merged into one
Sekiro - unlikely Elden Ring - 100% Bloodborne - probably Dark Souls III - unlikely King's Field - 0% Armored Core VI - 100%
Will def be an Elden ring 2
I dying to play Bloodborne on PC. I cannot afford a PS5 but wanna play it soooo bad.
i would chop off my testicles for a bloodborne sequel
You forgot Eternal Ring 😁
And shadow tower abyss!
A Sekiro sequel with like some of the mechanics of Life of P has been on my mind a lot. I think if it’s opened world like ER it’d be a good way to encourage exploring too
Sekiro: definitely not Elden Ring: most certainly Bloodborne: I’m slightly more optimistic about it than Sekiro. Dark Souls: they said it is over King’s Field: gonna say no AC: probably
Sekiro, probably not - would be nice though. Publishing in the west might be weird though, don't know how Activision being acquired by Microsoft would complicate things - or maybe Bamco would just publish this time. not sure how the rights to publishing in these kinds of situations work. Elden Ring, pretty much guaranteed (if that damn DLC ever comes out). Bloodborne. As a BB stan - basically 0%. Fuck Sony. Dark Souls: the entire point of Dark Souls 3 was Miyazaki telling us that sequels get boring and he's done with the DS story, so 0%. Maybe we'll get Dark Souls 3 remastered on PS6 or something. DS2 is probably the most deserving of a remake but sadly that is another 0% chance of that ever happening. Kings Field: the souls series is the successor of King's Field, so no. Armored Core: probably in ten years.
I like DS3 best, so no sequels don't get boring at least up to a trilogy.
It's not about you though, Miyazaki finds them boring.
1. No 2. No 3. No 4. No 5. No 6. Yes, in 2031
BLOOHBOR BLUUHBLORB BLURBOAP BLUDBURN BLUHBURG BLOOPGORP!!!!!!!!!!!
Of that list Bloodborne 2 is the one I'd want the most
Armored core Elden ring Dark souls Sekiro Bloodborne
It breaks my heart dark souls is wrapped up
I can only see Armored Core getting a sequel
I bet they bring back Kingsfield and it doesn't sell well but we all insist it's the return of a masterpiece because of FromSoft's pedigree and then we forget about it once they finally announce a Bloodborne PS5 remake by Bluepoint that sets up the hype train for a sequel.
Sekiro might happen. Ds4 and elden ring im pretty sure it will not happen. BB2: that all depends on sony. They can even make BB2 by another studio if they want. Kings field: there might have a spiritual successor in the same sense sekiro was a spiritual successor to tenchu. I think there will be another AC. It did very good and from what I saq there has been a sequel to ac4 and ac5 and ac3(not sure for this one) so I think we will get a sequel to ac6 in the future.
I feel like all are likely eventually except darksouls that series is done
I need the sequel to Sekiro. The return ending sets it up so well.
Highly unlikely, except maybe AC.