the best support is a strong foundation. I did a co-op playthrough of Ds3 with my brother this year and the multiplayer was super active and fun as hell. Even with a few twinks at low level and a cheater or two it's still a blast getting invaded by a swarm of aldritch faithfuls or watchdogs as we fought our way through pontiff and faron. 3v3 is just unlimited fun in that game...but in ER colosseum 3v3 feels kinda lame due to overtuned projectiles like wave of gold or magic spam. also: - *PC has horrible net* compared to Ds3 (during my run with my bro it felt like butter compared to ER). - *input issues* in ER make the moment to moment gameplay feel cheap and frustrating. - the *Ember system* is just way healthier for invading/dueling/co-op compared to ER's furlcalling finger remedy garbage that castrates activity.
I basically expect the souls like pvp experience we've been seeking is as likely to come from outside fromsoft as it is to come from fromsoft itself, by this point.
Elden ring does not need "longevity", as it is not a live service game. If you bought their game, they won, doesn't matter if you play it for five days, or five years. The won't profit because you keep playing it, just as they didn't profit from six years of existing ds3 players. Edit: what you want from Fromsoft is exactly what bad companies like ubisoft or ea or even atctivision blizzard do: release and unfinished game and then add "features" that they already had planned out, and could charge you more money for various items, lootboxes and what not. Fromsoft games do not need longevity, they have a full experience, with minor changes here and there, that you can enjoy on day one. If the game is good enough, the player base will always be there. Look at ds2, a lot of people shit on it, but I could log in, go to the iron keep bridge and fight a duel or even a fight club pretty quickly.
Jon.. I run a group that facilitates covenants, invasion zones, and consistent invasions. It’s not as polished as an ingame system but this is how it works: Host + 1 Ally + Taunters Tongue = 2 Invaders (they can still hit each other 😢) All activity happens at level 125 - 150 for constant invading I created lore friendly covens and we have a small rather active group. I have been trying to build this community, especially the quickly dying Xbox side. I don’t know if this is the right way to go about it, but please check us out.
@@emotionaljonxvxI eagerly await Thursday because you are the only content creator I know actively fighting for a better experience. I think our only hope now is that FS at the very least gives us no more friendly fire to invaders.
Bounty hunts, randomizers, boss rushes, etc are all great for adding value and replayability to these type of games. For multiplayer obviously covenants and more incentives to invade would be ideal.
invading is the best part of the game. Fighting 1v3s is hard but killing them makes you a better player. I would like to see invaders join before a blue joins as the 3rd or 4th. 1v4s
@@s-noozeit’s really all head cannon tbh, you pick a couple of locations, choose a coven to represent them. To “attack” a coven you are present in their zone and have the TT active. Having one ally gets you two invaders. As long as everyone is at levels 125-150 the activity is constant. The invaders “defend” their coven invasion zone by… invading
I think Fromsoft has this weird fetish for having everything couched in the game’s setting and lore. We can have colosseums because it fits with the aesthetic, but we can’t have capture the flag because that breaks kayfabe. Which is absolutely tragic because the sandbox is as big as it’s ever been! Picking up the commanders standard and running it back for the big FLAG CAPTURED text to flash’s cross the screen would be so awesome. All the mechanics for prop hunt are right there! There’s so much potential and they just don’t want to do it, and any kind of community made mods that could create these silly and serious competitive game modes would exclude the entire console player base.
I miss the DS2 invasions. Everyone could get invaded at anytime regardless if all area bosses have been beaten or not and regardless if you were in human form or not. I'd love to have this system back together with solo host invasions as it would tremendously increase the pool of invadable players. Next I hope they never try to make a game like Elden Ring. Either a much smaller open world with high quality "side" content or straight back to the old formula without open world. Elden Ring has such a low replayability value compared to previous titles as on NG+ you just run on Torrent from Legacy Dungeon to Legacy Dungeon to get to the fun content. In NG playthrough you need to fight the lackluster side content or do some other farming as the difficulty scaling is a bit off after the capital. No wonder, why people don't do multiple playthroughs of Elden Ring
it's still baffling to me how amazing yet frustrating fromsoft is. how can a company put so much effort into environmental storytelling and historical accuracy (look at tarnished archeologist's videos) and yet "simplify" the mutliplayer by taking out core aspects of it? Yeah im thankful to not have to farm silver knights in anor londo to get all achievements, but really fromsoft? not even a 6 player limit?
It's more that they didn't have enough time. Miyazaki has said he wanted to do more with pvp and you can see that there was definiteyl gonig to be more with the Yura questline which was small but definitely could've been bigger and explored bloody finger hunters, etc.
@@CrysJaL yeah but they could have done more than just colosseums and "invade near and far" if the wanted to in patches. so something else is the problem
Hey Jon, We care. Lets put together a player covenant on PC. Morne castle TT runs at level 30, 60, 90, 150? We can change location and rules monthly ect. What do you say?
I've thought about doing some form of player assembly for a while. Really, I think I need to launch a discord to organize but I've just been so preoccupied.
An offline mode for the Colosseum (Including spirit ash modes) would be a very good way for both PvP and PVE players to enjoy, maybe a Chalice dungeon-esque system from the roundtable for specific zones or cleared out caves with a few randomized enemies to spice up any risk of repetition and give worthwhile loot such as upgrade materials or high amounts of runes, just a few off the top of my head. Saw some other ideas for a horde mode with other players working together in the Colosseum as waves of enemies rush in from the gates.
I think just taking out the "summons" requirement could go a long way to solving everything you've mentioned. Maybe limit invasions to players with their Great Runes active, instead of players with summons? That'd be a little closer to the Ember system from DS3. Also allows players to opt out if they just want a run with the boys.
Great video. I'm really wondering what the playerbase of their next souls-ish game will be like. I'm glad you mentioned the old content creators more or less disappearing after ER came out. It was the space left by their departure which you felt able to occupy. And there's no doubt that streamers, video makers, etc. drove the fascination with Souls for years after its natural shelf-life had ended. Compare DS3's quite active PVP in early 2022, almost 6 years after release, to almost any other game with multiplayer that isn't an MMORPG. The community made this happen. But ER alienated a lot of the older ones. It's astonishing how many streamers and channels for Souls stuff went dead in 2022.
I like this idea. It's exactly as you say, even the small additions would be significant in some way. It always bothered me that they do some minimalist updates and then abandon the game. No doubt that time crunch and cost both play a huge factor in all of this. But it's not like features like those suggested are anywhere near as much work as making an entire DLC again. And it's not like fromsoft faces that many financial challenges, they're mainstream these days, they've got the money. Sure there's probably tech debt, but I imagine they are able to turn a profit still with each release.
i still remember how depressing it was to be a ds3 player back in 2018... we didnt know anything about elden ring and had to wait 6 years for the new pvp game where we didnt even know for sure its gonna have pvp.. not cool times. i hoped for FS to work a bit differently with ER but oh well, time will tell
Yeah, elden ring was the title to bring new folks into the series, by far. These next years are going to leave a souring taste in all these new mouths.From’d be wise to beef up the longevity to keep all these new players happy and willing to try the next title.
the vision of invasions was to pose as tough in story fights on your journey to become toe elden ring. i dont think that they will make any gamemodes for pvp any time soon. while the covenants were very fun and its sad to see them go, the games are not tuned well for pvp, the latency is too much for me as i live in india and not many people here play elden ring so most of my battles have a lot of latency.
I think part of Elden Ring's problem too was there were just so many weapons, so many spells, and lots of ways to just spam. DS3 pvp I think was more solid because there was just... less. Making it easier to balance and pvp not be a clusterfuck. Seamless co-op like Remnant 2, facilitating fight clubs like DS3, adding more rewards every month or so for participating like a new weapon
a new layton game will come out next year and im still waiting for another silk song trailer.. playing some ds2 when i have the time but currently focused on other things haha edit. i hope youre doing well, your videos are always a treat each week though it must be insane to still find things to talk about in this game
I have a hypothesis. I think maybe Fromsoft was worried about what could happen in PvP in this new world design. The open world with largish dungeons may have made them skiddish to implement PvP like Dark Souls. I hope they are performing an experiment in Elden Ring, and will give some more thought to PvP in their next game based on what they learned in Elden Ring. There is a chance they limited PvP because they never made a game like Elden Ring before. Though they had never made a game quite like Demon's Souls before they made it. I think they were much more risky back then. Behavior changes with time, and experience.
Keeping players doesn’t matter in a game that isn’t trying to bleed money. They rather make new games, it’s just that simple. The experience you want is an mmo experience, you’ll have to wait till the next gen of mmos drop and hope they have good action combat lol.
The production cycle of video games in wholly misrepresented in this video. Elden Ring was balanced and designed with the DLC in mind. Most of the game’s development was focused on combat balancing for PvE with PvP included as a way for players to fight others, with very little other purpose. The PvP was extensively beta tested and the netcode was improved as a result. Most of development time was focused on NPC balancing, and with the massive scope and scale of the game, it’s a surprise the game was released in the first place. In all likelihood another game is currently in development and any updates towards Elden Ring will make that game’s development longer and divert resources from that game, including it’s PvP, and will make the end product worse as a result. Game Developers work tight deadlines, like it or not, and your criticisms need to keep that in mind, or else you will remain unheard.
I’ve come to believe this to be a cursed problem. Aspects that I value the most in DS3 were often: * unintentional (eg. weird oddities left over from uneven balance patches, or mechanical quirks from player experimentation), * imperfectly implemented (eg. true combos), or * inherently controversial (eg. scaling back the variety of DS2 and producing a more focused experience with a limited set of balanced tools). At the end of the day, I’d have a lot more fun if ER was just a different game - one with fewer options, and one that is ostensibly worse for other players who don’t share my priorities. Because Elden Ring IS mostly better than DS3 for most players. You don’t have 20 million players calling it a generational masterpiece for nothing. In fact a lot of the stuff I hate most about it is stuff they changed intentionally from DS3 to address complaints, and as a result it’s a worse game for me and a better game for others. Removing most true combos, nerfing R1s, adding crouching/jumping attacks for variety, making poise a bigger consideration, buffing ranged and mage playstyles, etc. I loved learning the hitstun and combo game of DS3 SO much. Others hated the R1 spam fest. I loved how the focused movesets gave weapons identity and specific roles in PvP. Others hated the inflexibility and lack of variety. It goes on and on. From’s next game will not be DS3-2. They will continue moving onwards to try different things. And whether that is “forward” or “backward” is a matter of perspective. I hope it’s forward for me and backwards for others. And if it’s not, then good for them. TL;DR I’m becoming an old man and that’s okay. My priorities aren’t the same as those of other players, and so they probably won’t/shouldn’t be the priorities of Fromsoftware either. It is what it is.
Very much disagree with your points here. I can't say I've watched all your videos, but I don't think I've ever seen you post a clip of you being invaded while trying to play the base game (taunters tongue notwithstanding). I think it's clear that the experience you want from a game is connected with the core experience that FromSoft is after only tangentially, insofar as that the game's core audience is fuel for being invaded, and nobody wants to be the guy getting ganked all the time. Nobody is out there creating or watching channels of someone who gets invaded and killed 100's of times, and nobody wants to play a PVP game where they get ganked all day long. If they do play the game, they eventually want to move on to the top of the pack. The game that you want can only ever exist as a sideshow to a game with a strong PVE experience where people are playing it in spite of the invasion feature. There's a reason that all PVP games have moved in the direction of skill based matchmaking and extreme symmetrical balance - it's what the audience wants. A PVP game doesn't need to be built on the mountain that is Elden Ring to be a good PVP game, whereas an invasion based game does. Regardless, by doing PVE updates, From is catering to the invader audience by bringing back people to the game to be invaded. If the suggestion is that they should focus more on pure PVP features rather than invasions - that's simply a different game entirely. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
I think we might be on different pages. I'm not suggesting they shouldn't add PVE content or anything like that, just that the multiplayer tends to support long-term play better. Adding PVE content would almost certainly require a more substantial investment and while that could be cool, it's probably going to fall into a category of recurrent spending like a subscription (which I am open to but not everyone is) or just multiple DLCs that each get purchased separately as they've done in the past. What I wanted to get across here is that they tend to do very little with DLC, likely because of the aforementioned costs, and they could improve the time between game releases by building a foundation that lets them easily expand on something more player-driven like multiplayer. If they want to focus all efforts on a new game, that makes sense to me. Adding strong multiplayer elements can let players entertain themselves while they work on what's next. I'm very open to more DLC if they want to do it, or really any level of serious support they want to dedicate to their games, but long-term support, especially via PVE, has never been their style. As far as me being exclusively a PVPer, it's just my style and preference. I obviously play through the game as anyone else would but I don't do it in a way I think is particularly interesting, nor is it where my interest primarily lies. I think Souls games are generally single player first with multiplayer enhancing that experience. I'd like to see them further that enhancement because it's how I prefer the game, but that doesn't mean degrading the PVE or other experiences. Of course, it's largely a matter of perspective but I am arguing for mine. Thanks for the comment!
@@emotionaljonxvx Yeah waiting two freaking years for SOTE turned out to be so not worth it. I'd rather they spent that time working on something new because ERs shelf life was nowhere close to DS3s.
bro hosts literally have all the advantages. I invade every day and constantly face 1v3s and 1v4s and its so rare to get a teammate as an invader. I have the tongue active every time I’m exploring, getting invaded makes it more interesting.
Don't forget Deracine :) One of the reasons SOTE took so long is the number of patches for the base game, it was the same team working on both. And most of those patches were for PVP. I think Elden Ring is Fromsoft's best PVP btw. Invasions should be hard, and they were probably too easy in the other games, so ER has been a skill-check for a lot of players. Interesting video though. You make engaging content so good to see your channel grow!
@arsenii_yavorskyi It doesn't though. Most of the complaints in youtube comments are people upset they can't bully solo noobs like they could before. PvP activity is down because there aren't as many Hosts to invade. Why? Because the game has been out 2.5 years and they're playing other stuff now.
@@thunderstrucktb4758 Yeah DS3, everyone gets so misty-eyed about it. But when it came out people complained the PVP wasn't as good as DS2. And when the next game comes out people will complain the PVP isn't as good as ER, and so the cycle continues...
kinda sad how the mayority of players emigrated of elden ring, activity is slow and low level in ps5 is kinda dead af, the game is cooked, dark souls 2 is really gonna outlive elden ring LOL
eveything is gimmicky for you folks. even youcall bosses in demon gimmicky. all you said gimmicky this gimmicky that. now we have roll slop boss fight and you think it's not gimmicky when in reality that shit is peak gimmicky than demon's souls boss fights.
I dont think it's right to characterize multi-player as the most dedicated ir core of the fanbase. While they may be playing the game for the longest duration of time, dedication and appreciation can take many forms. My key example would be the lore community. They may not engage with multiplayer, but could easily put in as many hours combing through supplemental releases like artbooks, soundtracks, and albums. Or finding more to uncover about artistic inspirations in environment design. Second would be fanfiction, Or the use of open world games for alternative artistic processes. Game photography or the creation of machinema ans original stories is alao present in the community and involves a time dedication that cannot be underestimated. Third are the mod community. Modders arguably have more intimate awareness of the systems and mechanics of the game ans use them to create new ans interesting experiences. I would say that the mod community kept DS3 going in the wait for Elden Ring moreso than anything else.
SOTE is prolly the most rushed DLC i've ever seen. because it was made from sudden change of mind. miyazaki was not planning any dlc. only because he saw the success ELDEN RING brought then he suddenly wants to make a dlc
@@duvetboa it was rushed. You musta been blind look at how some areas in the game was unfinished like the one above rauh ruins there's a video showcasing a land that were supposedly accessible. And then we have radahn boss fight that were def rushed as well due to how they just lazily made the second phase as just yeah we gonna spam Light beams all over the arena possibly nauseating our players and perhaps screwed over our player who has photosensitive epilepsy at the same time. Creepy ahh forest was rushed as well they just places buncha goats with frenzy flmae and buncha rats and priests. And that enemy from bloodborne winter lantern. The mansion only good redeeming quality is the boss fight the rest is just a gimmicks.
Dude pvp is not the end all be all of souls games by all metrics eldenring is a success it has its flaws yes but just because you like the pvp to be a certin way dose not mean it should be that way every game they make
You need to understand that games don't need to last forever. Most people pick up and play a game until they finish it and may never touch it again. The reason anyone plays a souls game for the first time is to experience what the game has to offer. You play it start to end and move on. The only time I revisit one of these games is when I have that itch to play it again. I want to experience the game again. The enemy variety the bosses the characters and the world design. Not for some annoying kid to come invade me. If I am not co oping with a friend I play offline. Co op is a secondary feature that is not required to experience 99% of what the game has to offer. That's why it isn't necessary to try and cater to this small audience. It purley exists for those that it appeals to which is again a small minority. This is not a game who's identity is based purely from PvP or online play. WoW CoD Halo and such are those types of games. The peak of any game will always be its release and slowly declines as people finish the game and move on to play other games. If it is not a live service game then it wont keep many players around. That's the point. Dark souls is a single player focused experience with co op as an optional afterthought and has always been the case. I never once touched the Coliseums in Elden ring because I never cared for pvp. My max level bloodborne character has never bought the invader bell and never will. At some point in your life you need to accept the game ran its cycle and move on to something else. All the time I see posts saying " guys I played through the game 523 time and tried 16 builds what else do I do "? IDK man try doing something ELSE?? You were lucky enough to get pvp balance changes ( which also unfairly affected pve in some cases ) Play something else and quit complaining.
I have a way for Elden Cringe's successor to keep players: 1. Don't put it out on last gen consoles requiring PC platform people to actually make the garbage game playable to a small degree. 2. Do everything DS3 did, and everything ER didn't do with the pvp mechanics. 3. Limit AOW interchanges to weapon class changes only. Colossal weapons shouldn't be able to use QS or blood hound step 4. If it's going to be open world, make it co op only. Regardless, all my faith has been lost for FS, ER is absolutely terrible and I don't see how people actually play this mid pvp at all.
@@dev4159 and that's the problem that mentality right there. Redditors get mad about pvp, invaders all that. They make 1 successful playthrough and drop the game, vs pvpers that actually keep the game alive and well for years to come. Look at DS3 for example, came out in 2016, currently on life support as far as players left, but still going. You don't have a community based on a game with inherently bad mechanics that PC players literally have to fix in order to make it SOMEWHAT playable.
@shtshw nobody has to be like you just to keep a game alive, if the game is failing to be kept running for that reasons, then i believe that's a problem with the game.
the best support is a strong foundation. I did a co-op playthrough of Ds3 with my brother this year and the multiplayer was super active and fun as hell. Even with a few twinks at low level and a cheater or two it's still a blast getting invaded by a swarm of aldritch faithfuls or watchdogs as we fought our way through pontiff and faron. 3v3 is just unlimited fun in that game...but in ER colosseum 3v3 feels kinda lame due to overtuned projectiles like wave of gold or magic spam. also:
- *PC has horrible net* compared to Ds3 (during my run with my bro it felt like butter compared to ER).
- *input issues* in ER make the moment to moment gameplay feel cheap and frustrating.
- the *Ember system* is just way healthier for invading/dueling/co-op compared to ER's furlcalling finger remedy garbage that castrates activity.
DS3 just have stronger foundation
I basically expect the souls like pvp experience we've been seeking is as likely to come from outside fromsoft as it is to come from fromsoft itself, by this point.
next pvp game is gonna be hated just like elden ring but elden ring is gonna turn into the best pvp ever..
like it always is
@@junoglrr9119 imo elden ring haven't reach it's actual potential yet especially potential like ds3 albeit without glitches
Elden ring does not need "longevity", as it is not a live service game. If you bought their game, they won, doesn't matter if you play it for five days, or five years. The won't profit because you keep playing it, just as they didn't profit from six years of existing ds3 players.
Edit: what you want from Fromsoft is exactly what bad companies like ubisoft or ea or even atctivision blizzard do: release and unfinished game and then add "features" that they already had planned out, and could charge you more money for various items, lootboxes and what not.
Fromsoft games do not need longevity, they have a full experience, with minor changes here and there, that you can enjoy on day one. If the game is good enough, the player base will always be there. Look at ds2, a lot of people shit on it, but I could log in, go to the iron keep bridge and fight a duel or even a fight club pretty quickly.
Jon.. I run a group that facilitates covenants, invasion zones, and consistent invasions.
It’s not as polished as an ingame system but this is how it works:
Host + 1 Ally + Taunters Tongue = 2 Invaders (they can still hit each other 😢)
All activity happens at level 125 - 150 for constant invading
I created lore friendly covens and we have a small rather active group.
I have been trying to build this community, especially the quickly dying Xbox side. I don’t know if this is the right way to go about it, but please check us out.
I really do appreciate this sort of player organization. Sadly, I play on PC but it's great that there's a community on Xbox.
Whoop whoop Panda! Love to see you spreading the word
@@InhaledPancakestrying my best out here! I don’t wanna see this game die
@@emotionaljonxvxI eagerly await Thursday because you are the only content creator I know actively fighting for a better experience. I think our only hope now is that FS at the very least gives us no more friendly fire to invaders.
Bounty hunts, randomizers, boss rushes, etc are all great for adding value and replayability to these type of games. For multiplayer obviously covenants and more incentives to invade would be ideal.
I made covenants for xbox!
@ActualPandaa I'm on pc but that's cool. How did you do it?
invading is the best part of the game. Fighting 1v3s is hard but killing them makes you a better player. I would like to see invaders join before a blue joins as the 3rd or 4th. 1v4s
@@cinemaster9012 maybe this is a hot take but I think they should just get rid of blues.
@@s-noozeit’s really all head cannon tbh, you pick a couple of locations, choose a coven to represent them.
To “attack” a coven you are present in their zone and have the TT active. Having one ally gets you two invaders. As long as everyone is at levels 125-150 the activity is constant.
The invaders “defend” their coven invasion zone by… invading
"Blood must spill, the blood of your fellows."
"Does that mean we're getting new PvP mechanics?"
"lmao"
I think Fromsoft has this weird fetish for having everything couched in the game’s setting and lore. We can have colosseums because it fits with the aesthetic, but we can’t have capture the flag because that breaks kayfabe. Which is absolutely tragic because the sandbox is as big as it’s ever been! Picking up the commanders standard and running it back for the big FLAG CAPTURED text to flash’s cross the screen would be so awesome. All the mechanics for prop hunt are right there! There’s so much potential and they just don’t want to do it, and any kind of community made mods that could create these silly and serious competitive game modes would exclude the entire console player base.
They treat their games more like art rather than a product unfortunately. Up to community to figure out the other stuff.
ctf? prop hunt? are those in previous souls games?
You want capture the flag in a souls game? Smh
i mean they even have jousting from the horse and heavy charged lance mechanic to knock other player down
Dude. The entire franchise has been inspired by Berserk.
Ain't no way in HELL they'd put these kinds of mechanics.
I miss the DS2 invasions. Everyone could get invaded at anytime regardless if all area bosses have been beaten or not and regardless if you were in human form or not. I'd love to have this system back together with solo host invasions as it would tremendously increase the pool of invadable players.
Next I hope they never try to make a game like Elden Ring. Either a much smaller open world with high quality "side" content or straight back to the old formula without open world. Elden Ring has such a low replayability value compared to previous titles as on NG+ you just run on Torrent from Legacy Dungeon to Legacy Dungeon to get to the fun content. In NG playthrough you need to fight the lackluster side content or do some other farming as the difficulty scaling is a bit off after the capital. No wonder, why people don't do multiple playthroughs of Elden Ring
i rather use cheat engine to warp to legacy dungeon to legacy dungeon at this point imo
it's still baffling to me how amazing yet frustrating fromsoft is. how can a company put so much effort into environmental storytelling and historical accuracy (look at tarnished archeologist's videos) and yet "simplify" the mutliplayer by taking out core aspects of it? Yeah im thankful to not have to farm silver knights in anor londo to get all achievements, but really fromsoft? not even a 6 player limit?
I miss fight clubs at Pontiff's... They were fantastic. 🥲
It's more that they didn't have enough time. Miyazaki has said he wanted to do more with pvp and you can see that there was definiteyl gonig to be more with the Yura questline which was small but definitely could've been bigger and explored bloody finger hunters, etc.
@@CrysJaL yeah but they could have done more than just colosseums and "invade near and far" if the wanted to in patches. so something else is the problem
@@Tilespawn Yes, I'm suggesting that there were ideas, but they were never implemented.
Hey Jon, We care. Lets put together a player covenant on PC. Morne castle TT runs at level 30, 60, 90, 150? We can change location and rules monthly ect. What do you say?
I do this on Xbox
I've thought about doing some form of player assembly for a while. Really, I think I need to launch a discord to organize but I've just been so preoccupied.
An offline mode for the Colosseum (Including spirit ash modes) would be a very good way for both PvP and PVE players to enjoy, maybe a Chalice dungeon-esque system from the roundtable for specific zones or cleared out caves with a few randomized enemies to spice up any risk of repetition and give worthwhile loot such as upgrade materials or high amounts of runes, just a few off the top of my head.
Saw some other ideas for a horde mode with other players working together in the Colosseum as waves of enemies rush in from the gates.
0:35 I think this will also happen for hollow knight silksong
I think just taking out the "summons" requirement could go a long way to solving everything you've mentioned. Maybe limit invasions to players with their Great Runes active, instead of players with summons? That'd be a little closer to the Ember system from DS3. Also allows players to opt out if they just want a run with the boys.
Great video. I'm really wondering what the playerbase of their next souls-ish game will be like.
I'm glad you mentioned the old content creators more or less disappearing after ER came out. It was the space left by their departure which you felt able to occupy. And there's no doubt that streamers, video makers, etc. drove the fascination with Souls for years after its natural shelf-life had ended. Compare DS3's quite active PVP in early 2022, almost 6 years after release, to almost any other game with multiplayer that isn't an MMORPG. The community made this happen. But ER alienated a lot of the older ones. It's astonishing how many streamers and channels for Souls stuff went dead in 2022.
I like this idea. It's exactly as you say, even the small additions would be significant in some way. It always bothered me that they do some minimalist updates and then abandon the game.
No doubt that time crunch and cost both play a huge factor in all of this. But it's not like features like those suggested are anywhere near as much work as making an entire DLC again.
And it's not like fromsoft faces that many financial challenges, they're mainstream these days, they've got the money. Sure there's probably tech debt, but I imagine they are able to turn a profit still with each release.
i still remember how depressing it was to be a ds3 player back in 2018... we didnt know anything about elden ring and had to wait 6 years for the new pvp game where we didnt even know for sure its gonna have pvp.. not cool times.
i hoped for FS to work a bit differently with ER but oh well, time will tell
ds3 was hated maybe even more so than elden ring..
Yeah, elden ring was the title to bring new folks into the series, by far. These next years are going to leave a souring taste in all these new mouths.From’d be wise to beef up the longevity to keep all these new players happy and willing to try the next title.
Dark souls 3 was a staple to the community
the vision of invasions was to pose as tough in story fights on your journey to become toe elden ring. i dont think that they will make any gamemodes for pvp any time soon. while the covenants were very fun and its sad to see them go, the games are not tuned well for pvp, the latency is too much for me as i live in india and not many people here play elden ring so most of my battles have a lot of latency.
6 player limit could make a good difference
I think part of Elden Ring's problem too was there were just so many weapons, so many spells, and lots of ways to just spam. DS3 pvp I think was more solid because there was just... less. Making it easier to balance and pvp not be a clusterfuck.
Seamless co-op like Remnant 2, facilitating fight clubs like DS3, adding more rewards every month or so for participating like a new weapon
a new layton game will come out next year and im still waiting for another silk song trailer.. playing some ds2 when i have the time but currently focused on other things haha
edit. i hope youre doing well, your videos are always a treat each week though it must be insane to still find things to talk about in this game
I have a hypothesis. I think maybe Fromsoft was worried about what could happen in PvP in this new world design. The open world with largish dungeons may have made them skiddish to implement PvP like Dark Souls. I hope they are performing an experiment in Elden Ring, and will give some more thought to PvP in their next game based on what they learned in Elden Ring. There is a chance they limited PvP because they never made a game like Elden Ring before.
Though they had never made a game quite like Demon's Souls before they made it. I think they were much more risky back then. Behavior changes with time, and experience.
They should’ve put in throws
I miss vow of silence…
Keeping players doesn’t matter in a game that isn’t trying to bleed money. They rather make new games, it’s just that simple. The experience you want is an mmo experience, you’ll have to wait till the next gen of mmos drop and hope they have good action combat lol.
Random events like in Terraria or Diablo(-like) games would be cool.
The production cycle of video games in wholly misrepresented in this video. Elden Ring was balanced and designed with the DLC in mind. Most of the game’s development was focused on combat balancing for PvE with PvP included as a way for players to fight others, with very little other purpose. The PvP was extensively beta tested and the netcode was improved as a result. Most of development time was focused on NPC balancing, and with the massive scope and scale of the game, it’s a surprise the game was released in the first place. In all likelihood another game is currently in development and any updates towards Elden Ring will make that game’s development longer and divert resources from that game, including it’s PvP, and will make the end product worse as a result. Game Developers work tight deadlines, like it or not, and your criticisms need to keep that in mind, or else you will remain unheard.
I’ve come to believe this to be a cursed problem. Aspects that I value the most in DS3 were often:
* unintentional (eg. weird oddities left over from uneven balance patches, or mechanical quirks from player experimentation),
* imperfectly implemented (eg. true combos), or
* inherently controversial (eg. scaling back the variety of DS2 and producing a more focused experience with a limited set of balanced tools).
At the end of the day, I’d have a lot more fun if ER was just a different game - one with fewer options, and one that is ostensibly worse for other players who don’t share my priorities.
Because Elden Ring IS mostly better than DS3 for most players. You don’t have 20 million players calling it a generational masterpiece for nothing. In fact a lot of the stuff I hate most about it is stuff they changed intentionally from DS3 to address complaints, and as a result it’s a worse game for me and a better game for others.
Removing most true combos, nerfing R1s, adding crouching/jumping attacks for variety, making poise a bigger consideration, buffing ranged and mage playstyles, etc.
I loved learning the hitstun and combo game of DS3 SO much. Others hated the R1 spam fest. I loved how the focused movesets gave weapons identity and specific roles in PvP. Others hated the inflexibility and lack of variety. It goes on and on.
From’s next game will not be DS3-2. They will continue moving onwards to try different things. And whether that is “forward” or “backward” is a matter of perspective. I hope it’s forward for me and backwards for others. And if it’s not, then good for them.
TL;DR I’m becoming an old man and that’s okay. My priorities aren’t the same as those of other players, and so they probably won’t/shouldn’t be the priorities of Fromsoftware either. It is what it is.
the fact that Competitive players have left from ELDEN RING is good enough explanation why it has dogshit pvp
Very much disagree with your points here. I can't say I've watched all your videos, but I don't think I've ever seen you post a clip of you being invaded while trying to play the base game (taunters tongue notwithstanding). I think it's clear that the experience you want from a game is connected with the core experience that FromSoft is after only tangentially, insofar as that the game's core audience is fuel for being invaded, and nobody wants to be the guy getting ganked all the time. Nobody is out there creating or watching channels of someone who gets invaded and killed 100's of times, and nobody wants to play a PVP game where they get ganked all day long. If they do play the game, they eventually want to move on to the top of the pack.
The game that you want can only ever exist as a sideshow to a game with a strong PVE experience where people are playing it in spite of the invasion feature. There's a reason that all PVP games have moved in the direction of skill based matchmaking and extreme symmetrical balance - it's what the audience wants. A PVP game doesn't need to be built on the mountain that is Elden Ring to be a good PVP game, whereas an invasion based game does.
Regardless, by doing PVE updates, From is catering to the invader audience by bringing back people to the game to be invaded. If the suggestion is that they should focus more on pure PVP features rather than invasions - that's simply a different game entirely. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
I think we might be on different pages. I'm not suggesting they shouldn't add PVE content or anything like that, just that the multiplayer tends to support long-term play better. Adding PVE content would almost certainly require a more substantial investment and while that could be cool, it's probably going to fall into a category of recurrent spending like a subscription (which I am open to but not everyone is) or just multiple DLCs that each get purchased separately as they've done in the past.
What I wanted to get across here is that they tend to do very little with DLC, likely because of the aforementioned costs, and they could improve the time between game releases by building a foundation that lets them easily expand on something more player-driven like multiplayer. If they want to focus all efforts on a new game, that makes sense to me. Adding strong multiplayer elements can let players entertain themselves while they work on what's next. I'm very open to more DLC if they want to do it, or really any level of serious support they want to dedicate to their games, but long-term support, especially via PVE, has never been their style.
As far as me being exclusively a PVPer, it's just my style and preference. I obviously play through the game as anyone else would but I don't do it in a way I think is particularly interesting, nor is it where my interest primarily lies. I think Souls games are generally single player first with multiplayer enhancing that experience. I'd like to see them further that enhancement because it's how I prefer the game, but that doesn't mean degrading the PVE or other experiences. Of course, it's largely a matter of perspective but I am arguing for mine.
Thanks for the comment!
@@emotionaljonxvx Yeah waiting two freaking years for SOTE turned out to be so not worth it. I'd rather they spent that time working on something new because ERs shelf life was nowhere close to DS3s.
"skill based matchmaking"
How do we tell him?
@@thunderstrucktb4758 DS3 manage to stay in life support for 8 years now
bro hosts literally have all the advantages. I invade every day and constantly face 1v3s and 1v4s and its so rare to get a teammate as an invader. I have the tongue active every time I’m exploring, getting invaded makes it more interesting.
Maybe I’ll run back to splatoon and mess around in ranked
Don't forget Deracine :) One of the reasons SOTE took so long is the number of patches for the base game, it was the same team working on both. And most of those patches were for PVP.
I think Elden Ring is Fromsoft's best PVP btw. Invasions should be hard, and they were probably too easy in the other games, so ER has been a skill-check for a lot of players.
Interesting video though. You make engaging content so good to see your channel grow!
a skill-check that filters out 99% of potential players is a little much, don't you think?
@arsenii_yavorskyi It doesn't though. Most of the complaints in youtube comments are people upset they can't bully solo noobs like they could before.
PvP activity is down because there aren't as many Hosts to invade. Why? Because the game has been out 2.5 years and they're playing other stuff now.
@@paolo2696 Funny how that wasn't a problem in DS3.
@@thunderstrucktb4758 Yeah DS3, everyone gets so misty-eyed about it. But when it came out people complained the PVP wasn't as good as DS2. And when the next game comes out people will complain the PVP isn't as good as ER, and so the cycle continues...
@@paolo2696 The point is DS3 was still super active two and half years after release, (and then some) while ER is not.
kinda sad how the mayority of players emigrated of elden ring, activity is slow and low level in ps5 is kinda dead af, the game is cooked, dark souls 2 is really gonna outlive elden ring LOL
Yeah you’re so right. I’m still playing 2. Wild since it gets so much crap compared to the other games. I get invaded frequently humaned up.
DS2 is just simply better as a game with long lasting community activity
Low level isn't dead, I consistently get invasions/co op at Stormveil at level 30. But the mid level between 50-100 is basically barren.
@@duvetboa on PC is dead lmfao
Love from mexico 🇩🇰
Dark souls pvp is gimmicky… that’s kind of how it’s meant to be
eveything is gimmicky for you folks. even youcall bosses in demon gimmicky. all you said gimmicky this gimmicky that. now we have roll slop boss fight and you think it's not gimmicky when in reality that shit is peak gimmicky than demon's souls boss fights.
Yep that's them gatekeeping souls@@LyllianaofMirrah
I dont think it's right to characterize multi-player as the most dedicated ir core of the fanbase. While they may be playing the game for the longest duration of time, dedication and appreciation can take many forms.
My key example would be the lore community. They may not engage with multiplayer, but could easily put in as many hours combing through supplemental releases like artbooks, soundtracks, and albums. Or finding more to uncover about artistic inspirations in environment design.
Second would be fanfiction, Or the use of open world games for alternative artistic processes. Game photography or the creation of machinema ans original stories is alao present in the community and involves a time dedication that cannot be underestimated.
Third are the mod community. Modders arguably have more intimate awareness of the systems and mechanics of the game ans use them to create new ans interesting experiences. I would say that the mod community kept DS3 going in the wait for Elden Ring moreso than anything else.
You want a different game creator, not a FromSoft game.
Shadow of Erdtree was fucking amazing and worth the wait.
If all you took out of this was “SOTE was mid” then you thoroughly missed the point
SOTE is prolly the most rushed DLC i've ever seen. because it was made from sudden change of mind. miyazaki was not planning any dlc. only because he saw the success ELDEN RING brought then he suddenly wants to make a dlc
@@LyllianaofMirrah Hyperbolic statements like this make serious discussion impossible. "The most rushed DLC I've ever seen", give me a break 🙄
@@duvetboa it was rushed. You musta been blind look at how some areas in the game was unfinished like the one above rauh ruins there's a video showcasing a land that were supposedly accessible.
And then we have radahn boss fight that were def rushed as well due to how they just lazily made the second phase as just yeah we gonna spam Light beams all over the arena possibly nauseating our players and perhaps screwed over our player who has photosensitive epilepsy at the same time.
Creepy ahh forest was rushed as well they just places buncha goats with frenzy flmae and buncha rats and priests. And that enemy from bloodborne winter lantern.
The mansion only good redeeming quality is the boss fight the rest is just a gimmicks.
Dude pvp is not the end all be all of souls games by all metrics eldenring is a success it has its flaws yes but just because you like the pvp to be a certin way dose not mean it should be that way every game they make
before the gabri patch i think the pvp is already good enough
You need to understand that games don't need to last forever. Most people pick up and play a game until they finish it and may never touch it again.
The reason anyone plays a souls game for the first time is to experience what the game has to offer. You play it start to end and move on.
The only time I revisit one of these games is when I have that itch to play it again. I want to experience the game again. The enemy variety the bosses the characters and the world design. Not for some annoying kid to come invade me. If I am not co oping with a friend I play offline.
Co op is a secondary feature that is not required to experience 99% of what the game has to offer. That's why it isn't necessary to try and cater to this small audience. It purley exists for those that it appeals to which is again a small minority.
This is not a game who's identity is based purely from PvP or online play. WoW CoD Halo and such are those types of games.
The peak of any game will always be its release and slowly declines as people finish the game and move on to play other games. If it is not a live service game then it wont keep many players around. That's the point.
Dark souls is a single player focused experience with co op as an optional afterthought and has always been the case.
I never once touched the Coliseums in Elden ring because I never cared for pvp. My max level bloodborne character has never bought the invader bell and never will.
At some point in your life you need to accept the game ran its cycle and move on to something else. All the time I see posts saying " guys I played through the game 523 time and tried 16 builds what else do I do "? IDK man try doing something ELSE??
You were lucky enough to get pvp balance changes ( which also unfairly affected pve in some cases )
Play something else and quit complaining.
that's for you for some they do pvp and pve co-op
I have a way for Elden Cringe's successor to keep players:
1. Don't put it out on last gen consoles requiring PC platform people to actually make the garbage game playable to a small degree.
2. Do everything DS3 did, and everything ER didn't do with the pvp mechanics.
3. Limit AOW interchanges to weapon class changes only. Colossal weapons shouldn't be able to use QS or blood hound step
4. If it's going to be open world, make it co op only.
Regardless, all my faith has been lost for FS, ER is absolutely terrible and I don't see how people actually play this mid pvp at all.
well, you see, not everyone plays the game for the pvp. People also have different tastes.
@@dev4159 and that's the problem that mentality right there. Redditors get mad about pvp, invaders all that. They make 1 successful playthrough and drop the game, vs pvpers that actually keep the game alive and well for years to come. Look at DS3 for example, came out in 2016, currently on life support as far as players left, but still going. You don't have a community based on a game with inherently bad mechanics that PC players literally have to fix in order to make it SOMEWHAT playable.
@shtshw nobody has to be like you just to keep a game alive, if the game is failing to be kept running for that reasons, then i believe that's a problem with the game.
@@dev4159 umm which was exactly my point lol
@@shtshw ur point was that the game is bad cause the PVP is mid, when that's not even the reason on why most people play it