Let the Flame Die: Elden Ring Can't Resurrect the Souls Franchise

[droqen]

Regarding Pixel a Day's
"Let the Flame Die
Elden Ring Can't Resurrect the Souls Franchise"

[droqen]

I love this title. I'm very happy that there is an article I feel more comfortable about sharing than her previous video, because that video was just too Starseed Pilgrim-centric for me to feel unselfcongratulatory about sharing it. But this one, oof, fuck, yes, give me more of this "What makes an actually good adventure?" content.

[droqen]

I need to start with the title. Letting the flame die is something that you can do in Dark Souls. It's something that exists in the lore. Let the flame die. To let the flame die in the game is to consciously reject the revival of a cycle that has long since lost its purpose. The usage of this term in Pixel a Day's last video, and here in the blog post's very title, is knowingly poetic and deeply appropriate:

From Software has chosen the bad ending of their own game. They have revived the flame, many times over.

[droqen]

Of course, Elden Ring has been praised and beloved. This is only from one perspective -- one that Pixel a Day and I happen to share. I don't know what that means yet.

[droqen]

. . . something has been missing from the Souls games for some time now. Elden Ring is just the latest disappointment. . . . The Souls games have been trying and failing to captivate me since Dark Souls 2 began the cycle of diminishing returns. Even then, nearly ten years ago, I sensed a flatness, a repetition, a tendency for quantity over quality . . .

I remember watching a video so long ago about how Dark Souls 2's own story was about failing to recapture greatness. It would be beautiful if it wasn't so obviously a self-awareness of something to fix without fixing it.

[droqen]

. . . it was disappointing to find yet another set of mechanics that I immediately recognised and understood.

[droqen]

. . . [in] the Souls games, . . . almost every area confronts you with paths full of enemies that you have no choice but to go through. Face me, the games seemed to be saying. Show me you're a worthy opponent. The world design . . . forced you to square off against adversaries head-on -- . . . There was a nobility in that, a dignity. Look me in the eyes, warrior; you will not pass through here.

[droqen]

No adventure ahead, only flatness

This header is poetry

[droqen]

. . . an adventure game is not about admiring a world from far away. It's about how that world feels when you get right up to it and push.

This is the line that made me go, oh, I should be writing about this in Close Reading. This is the quote I want to remember.

[droqen]

I didn't play much of Elden Ring but I completely relate to what Kat's describing. I remember trying to, like, look around, and some stupid mosquito enemies would just not leave me alone.

But this is a Souls-y game, you see, so it needs to be crawling with extremely hostile enemies . . . But every close encounter with this mystical land requires that you first tediously clear out packs of boring enemies first. . .

The alternative I felt pushed towards was this: propel my steed toward a glowing object as I dodge swinging  clubs, and spam triangle as I go past, too distracted by avoiding danger to even notice what it was I just picked up. . . . Elden Ring's world has a faraway charm, but for the most part it doesn't translate to the tense intimacy of a great Souls game, nor the tactile delight of a great adventure game.

[droqen]

Here's something I can sort of answer, or attempt to.

The Roundtable Hold is the one place of safety and community in the game, and it's . . . only accessible via fast travel. Why couldn't this location be integrated into the actual world? Is the devotion to the Souls brand that overwhelming that even one friendly location wasn't permitted in this huge of a place? I would have much preferred . . . a more vibrant and varied world, one containing areas of every kind -- danger, refuge, threat, resistance, loyalty, community, betrayal, kindness. I think many of my issues with Elden Ring could be solved if it limited its Souls influence to a few of those classic castle levels, and let its open world be something else entirely. [emphases mine]

With a game this huge, you have to know that it was probably a gigantic undertaking, a struggle, a thing that strained under its own weight. It's possible that it was out of "devotion to the Souls brand" but it was probably just a lack of knowing what could possibly fill all that space instead. It is not easy leaving empty space. That sounds really silly. Maybe I should say, rather, it is not easy confidently leaving empty space in a game. Much easier are spaces that have 'correct' ways to play them. Then all the peripheral uses of the space (tourism, pvp, metagaming) are secondary, allowed to exist, but the primary purpose remains the strong solid central reason that everyone can rally under.

I don't disagree with what Kat's saying but it's sort of a huge problem that I suspect stems from having an open world at all.

More on conditions of open world games: https://cohost.org/infamous-gastropod/post/180834-pokemon-stagnation

[droqen]

Adventure lives in uncertainty and discovery -- the feeling of approaching a new place, not knowing whether it will contain comfort of violence. [danger, refuge, threat, resistance, loyalty, community, betrayal, kindness.]

[droqen]

[Adventure] lives in the diversity of what you can do in that world -- climb, ride, dive, glide, chase, carry, scan, converse, cook, collect, document, grow, build, craft, kill. But Elden Ring reduces its entire world to the tip of your sword. . . . to many gamers, 'killing things in different ways' counts as gameplay variety, but that speaks more to how limited our gamer brains are when it comes to imagination. . .

[droqen]

Wonder requires wondering. In Elden Ring, when I see something moving towards me in the middle distance, I don't have to wonder -- I just draw my weapon.

[droqen]

(I've been waiting for five Souls games now for something as ludicrous as world tendency to come back, something enormous and unexplained hidden in the heart of the game.) What if Elden Ring had done something, anything, to boldly forge a new and exciting identity in the FromSoftware canon, rather than being "basically Souls again, but bigger"?

Yeah. I mean, it's not easy boldly forging a new and exciting identity! It's hard, it's scary. 'Basically successful thing again, but bigger', is a profitable reality, however irritating. While reading I keep thinking about the material reality of making a game -- a big game, in a team full of people. My brain keeps going "well, it's not that easy.." while my heart leaps and bounds towards "Yes! Obviously!"

I welcome more experimental games, and while I don't decry less experimental ones, I also don't have much love in my heart for them.