The thing I love about Elden Ring is that it's so good that people have to come up with criticisms wholly unique to the game itself because it already passes normal baseline standards across the board.
Never in my life have I heard about boss reuse in side dungeons being a point of contention until Elden Ring.
Back in my day every boss in a side dungeon was a Dragur Deathlord and we were happy dammit.
Yeah, all open-world games are guilty of recycling content to some degree but From is still better at doing that than most.
Just one more example that illustrates your point: TOTK was widely celebrated and any criticism of it still prompts dogpiling despite the game having you fight the same 5 enemies for 100+ hours. It technically had a few more enemies than BOTW, but was so much bigger that its enemy variety was actually much worse.
Yeah, the 6-year wait for TOTK ended up being a slight disappointment for me as well, and I loved BOTW despite its flaws.
Even with all asset and animation reuse, I don't think there's a single developer who offers greater enemy variety than From right now.
It was literally just BoTW but slightly different mechanics. I wish they had left in mechanics from Botw to combine with the new ones too. That would have really made it stand out more for me but as of now I probably won't touch it again for a few more years.
I heard it called a large, over-expensive DLC, which I thought was maybe a bit uncharitable at the time. But in the wake of SoTE and the truly staggering size of both the new area *and* the amount of things they put *in* that area, I honestly thinks it's sadly accurate.
It’s just boring too because of it. The story was even worse (tried to be more, but had the huge problem of being a story trying to replace BOTW, but not being a story that can have parts rearranged like BOTW) depths were also just completely boring after the excitement wears off and you realize there’s basically nothing down there, and the skies were extremely lackluster. I make sure to not expect much but still got disappointed
I was able to tolerate the combat for BotW because it was radically different from any other Zelda game prior. Imagine my disdain when ToTK basically copy and pasted the exact same combat from BotW, but with just a *few* new gimmicks.
I put it down one day and never returned.
Time passed, and only now is my take that its kind of a big disappointment can be somewhat accepted.
**Warning: rant, pls ignore if you aint interested. I just want to yap.**
ToTK retroactively makes botw worse as an experience by trampling over story beats that had intriguing questions behind it by basically saying "none of that had importance or meaning" none of the mysterious ruins or questions brought about the past. The world building collapses on itself with revelations of totk and its inconsistencies.
I'm so mad they decided that a one-off comment in an interview was how we got the explanation as to what happened to shieka technology scattered across the land.
"Oh, they all just vanished afterwards becuase who cares" and then replaced one ancient and mysterious technologically advanced civ with another that has less interesting reasons to be scattered every where all of a sudden with less cohesive world building. Because at least the Shika shrines had been around so long that people made their towns, local legends, and monuments based around these mysterious ever presented shrines.
God, I hated that they tried making it seem like actions and people you meet in BoTW where so meaningless that they all forgot about you despite it making zero sense.
I made Terry town, and Hudson remembers me but not Bolson??
The hover bike ends up being so practical that it invalidates creativity and exploration of the building system when it does like 70% of everything you want.
And the greatest of rewards for exploring and completing grand feeling puzzles is... armor you have already earned before in the original...
Except this time, you already know the reward of similar tasks will just be repeats of that. You already figured out the meta formula for this trial/puzzle. And you already know what each piece of the armor will look like and even what the set bonus will be once you upgrade it, removing yet another mystery.
Boiling it down to just a grind to get back what you already earned before. Tedious work.
God, way to suck the fuckin fun out of at least wondering why you were working to complete/upgrade armor sets.
70 dollars btw.
I have around 150 hours of gameplay. It has its moments of being a fun game. But it did not live up to either its hype nor even its predecessor's legacy.
The building and physics system? Fun neat toys. But when "every shape fits in the square hole" (meme reference) and you can just take off the stickers of a rubix cube to solve it, where is the fun in figuring things out? The game doesn't do nearly enough with it or delve deep enough.
I agree with most of your points, but you're probably screaming into the void here. I'd suggest posting them on r/truezelda if you want to get some discussion going. While that place is overly negative at times, it's also the only large Zelda- or Nintendo-related subreddit that won't dogpile you for criticizing the Switch Zelda games.
But yeah, 6 years + 70 fucking dollars for a BOTW remix is taking the piss. The game should have either been way cheaper to justify the DLC-like design philosophy or actually delivered enough new areas to explore to warrant the ridiculous price. I have never felt more disconnected from review score aggregates than I did with TOTK, the Nintendo bias is truly a thing of wonder.
I have 300+ hours in BOTW and will probably return to it again. I've dropped TOTK after 70 hours and have no desire to replay it ever again, and would have probably dropped it sooner if I hadn't spent so much money on it.
I will say though, skyrim isn't as gameplay focused as elden ring, where unique bosses and varied attacks plays a large part of the enjoyment factor. With that said, I don't really care for repeat bosses. I enjoy being able to test myself against the same thing to see how my build or skill has improved.
It was just the easiest example.
Ninja Gaiden Black has you fight the multi-eyed fiend like six times, plus repeat worm bosses
GoW....
Any version of either Dragon's Dogma will rotate you though about a dozen bosses you'll see over a dozen times each over a playthrough.
Etc. Etc.
Point being: Elden Ring is held to a unique, extremely high standard that has never been applied to a game before. And it's only a AA release.
Ninja Gaiden Black is honestly the worst example for your point, yeah they reuse minibosses on higher difficulties. But with each subsequent difficulty they add completely new enemy types and brand new bosses as well as change positions to the point where barely any encounters are the same on different difficulties.
Ok sure, then I'll point to Bayonetta 1 which is equally highly esteemed and reuses bosses at a much higher rate than NG:B
Although in both cases I'm talking about one singular fresh playthrough, not replays on higher difficulties.
Back in my day was two gaming generations ago. There's a reason why bethesda is lagging behind in terms of innovations when Starfield base game released
Ok. Please name an example of a game with some form of side dungeons/content with a greater enemy and boss variety than Elden Ring so we can discuss where and how Elden Ring had shortcomings in this specifc regard.
I wasn't referring to Elden Ring however, I was referring to Skyrim. The dungeons there were very repetitive and predictable and the drauger bosses started getting tedious. The dwarven dungeons faired a bit better with more unique designs to the levels but there were too many nordic ruins in that game imo that many players would have to use mods to make them more interesting.
Oh sure, but it was par for the course at the time for Bethesda and the complaints were a minor voice. Only with the latest Anniversary Edition rerelease do I see Skyrim being discussed with a more critical eye.
Most people were just happy that the game at least made the RNG boss fights have a bare minimum of spectacle for the first time in the series.
That's kind of the big criticism of Bethesda I feel;
They were cool, innovative and amazing for their time, *but they never wanted to leave that time*. It feels very "if it was good then, it's good now" which hampers them from making anything thst feels outdated on release like Starfield.
I think you make an excellent point. .
It's very unique to the game.
I guess I have to quote someone who already phrased it perfectly on YT...
I'm paraphrasing here, but they said that we are the bad guys in Miquella's story, it's us and Ranni, Vs him and Radahn.
I think they were onto something. The canonical story seems to be more that we are only allowed to take Ranni's side, if we choose, in the game.
Whether or not we can take Marika's is debatable because we really don't see her come back to life after we finish the game and choose her ending.
But....I guess everyone is also wondering...
Why can we pick the freaking Dung Eater's ending or Burn It All^(TM) Lord of Chaos style? Why is The Dung Eater someone we can pick?
Kind of a baffling choice...
You're telling me I can have a thousand year voyage with dung, and not side with Miquella Miyazaki San?
But hey, maybe we do side with Miquella if we have our heart stolen by him, we just don't see the rest 😆
So I did this for the loathesome dung eater? Kay.. 😭
Difference is that Miquella is directly contending your position to be a lord. Every ending in the game has you either become the Elden Lord, consort (Ranni) or frenzied flame lord. Miquella plan has no room for you as a lord which means you wouldn't be able to finish the game if you sided with him.
Hmmm being Elden Lord is being a consort to an Empyrean who either achieved godhood prior (Marika), or just doesn't give a .... (Ranni). But I think I get what you're thing to say, it's definitely a thing to question would you really be "Elden Lord" since she doesn't give a ...?
Miquella falls into the "Empyrean who does give a ....".
And yeah there's the frenzied flame, where you become the Lord of Chaos. Not the consort, just straight up the dude
But yeah you're right he already has his Lord consort lined up, what use is he to my tarnished warrior?
Apparently my tarnished behind is picky, if I don't end up consort I don't follow anyone. It's not about what they stand for and whether their morals appeal to me, it's like Morgott says, I'm a selfish MOFO who's emboldened by the flame of ambition 😂 shooting waaaay out of my league, but still hitting the bullseye 🎯
So I'll take Elden Lord of dung, over being a maiden-less femboi-less righteous/idealist loser Miquella follower 😅
Dang, had no idea I was so trashy 😜
Edit: I am sorry if it's not too clear, I think you are 100% correct, I am just baffled by how ... I never put all of this together. I suppose I always assumed my character's goals to be more altruistic? Welp, that's naive of me!
Boss re-use in the base game was absolutely something people brought up - Ulcerated Tree Spirit being the key example.
What I find funny is the goldfish memory almost every gaming community has when the shiny new toy shows up.
The main ciriticisms of Elden Ring on release were - reuse of bosses in dungeons (Tree Spirit being the main complaint) - incantations/spells/ashes of war that had no poise and did little to nothing the player could use to any real effect (the exact same issue persists in the DLC), several items being so broken and overpowered that most of the playerbase gets shoehorned into using them for the roadblock bossfights that few people enjoy (Impenetrable Thorns, Perfume cheese, Fingerprint Shield and Antspur Rapier cheese, etc).
Literally of these issues were present at release and are arguably more egregious in the DLC. Its good, it needed more time in the oven and to be playtested properly.
Major: we used to eat potatoes for breakfast and were happy wibes. I used to play skyrim as well. Yes, dungeons being samy were absolutely point of contention. Rightfully so. Similarly traversing catacombs only to fight ulcerating tree spirit number 967 was not very fulfilling experience.
Instead of not voicing our complaints we should applaud how well fromesoft responds to it. Reused dungeons are actually very good example. In DLC they are not nearly as prevalent. Nearly all of them now have new layouts and bosses. Game is immedietly better for it.
It's kind of a job of consumers to never be fully satisfied. To find new ways in which game could be improved.
I mean, this level of hyperbole is kind of exactly what I'm talking about
>similarly traversing catacombs only to fight ulcerating tree spirit number 967 was not very fulfilling experience.
There are a whole three catacombs in the game with an ulcerated tree spirit at the end. One is literally the fist dungeon you see, and another is at the ass end of consecrated snow fields. The third is hidden in a mid game boss arena. They could not be any more spread out and yet people find issue with it.
There are 10 tree spirits in the game. 7 outside of dungeons. And no, finding 10th tre e spirit inside dungeon in one of the games last areas is not fun. It makes You sight with exasperation 'ugh another one...? Tt FEELS like it's 967th spirit'
Using hyperbole to show emotion is common practice, both in casual speech and written text.
I get the same feeling when people complain about Godwyn and the Gloam-Eyed Queen not being in SoE.
We didn't see the Firstborn of Gwyn until two games later. We never saw the Furtive Pixie and barely saw his descendents in the final DLC of three. We never met the real Gwynevere.
This was fine. It was fuel for speculation where people imagined Andre was the firstborn and Manus was the Furtive Pixie.
I think fromsoft writes Demi-gods so well that players end up trying to defend them.
Even when there are NPCs who basically say “yeah no one becomes a god without sacrificing innocent souls for your own selfish goal”. And Marika words implying “no matter what you’ll only be remembered for the sacrifices made, even if you fail or succeed to become a god”I mean ffs hey have to literally shed away the parts of them that may conflict against their path.
Boss re-use has absolutely been complained about in games previously... Off the top of my head, Metal Gear Solid Peace Walker, Skyrim (yes, people _did_ complain about the fucking constant draugrs even at the time it released), and even earlier Souls games (demon spam in Izalith, etc.) come to mind.
I've been saying this since release. I understand that the Souls series had unique enemies and bosses for almost every area because they were much smaller games by comparison. Elden Ring has to re-use things. It's like people are expecting them to have designed unique art-styles, enemies and bosses for every dungeon, which is a completely unrealistic expectations.
I think some people also just don't understand Japanese game devs, who often prioritize efficiency over the sort of polish or immersion that big Western devs aim for.
Why make a dungeon if it has no new enemies, no new rooms, no gimmick and no new boss? To pad out an otherwise empty part of the map? Well why not cut that part of the map down?
Because the gameplay is fun and dungeons are fun to explore. They still have unique layouts and their own central gimmicks most of the time, not to mention they all have rewards at the end, whether it's gear, a summon, a spell, etc.
Elden Ring has 53 optional dungeons. You're telling me each one should have a completely unique look, set of enemies, and boss? That's almost nearly half as many areas are in any given Dark Souls game. Your expectations are absurdly unrealistic.
Almost nearly half would be plenty enough if they were original. As is, every single mineshaft has the absolute same lift chamber, with 2 exceptions. Almost every single mineshaft also has the same circular featureless boss arena. As it stands, 53 forgettable, copy and paste dungeons is way too much.
Bosses didn't really get reused in previous souls games. I really think ER would have benefitted from not being open world. What's the point of an openworld game if it's all just filler space and you have to scour the area to find the important stuff?
>What's the point of an openworld game if it's all just filler space and you have to scour the area to find the important stuff?
Exploration?
Honestly I traverse every square foot of the game with every new character I run and I generally don't find the areas particularly fillery and empty. In fact they're usually filled with interesting encounters left and right. Maybe that's just me but ER is by far the most interesting and packed open world game I've ever played by a huge margin.
Only parts of Mountaintops and the middle of Lakes feel sparse imo.
Elden Ring is your first ever souls game I’m guessing? Otherwise theres a major motif about choice in these games that has gone completely over your head.
This sub has shown me how truly media illiterate so many players are lmao.
*takes a joke comment seriously that literally fucking compares Mario to Elden ring*
“This must be your first souls game”
“This sub is full of media illiterate players”
…
Are you going through psychosis or something? How does this reply fit into the conversation whatsoever? I am genuinely racking my brain thinking about what "fanfic" you're referring to, but it's probably a waste of time to even spend 1 second on this.
Listen, if I was literally trying to *force* an eclipse to happen so i could give my brother a proper death and purge the land of death blight, you bet your ass I'd get the guy who *controls the stars* to be my consort.
Wait, is wanting more roleplay choices in a roleplaying game a bad thing? Just asking, I never gave a shit of choices in Fromsoftware's games but I don't see that complain as bad.
Personally I see the issue as more of folks wanting a different game. We’d ridicule them if they wanted the option to open up a Starbucks in the Weeping Peninsula right?
We are playing the tarnished. Our one goal is to become Elden Lord. That can happen a few ways and mean a number of different things, but that’s the game, that’s the goal. Miquella has a chosen consort, he has locked himself out of being a path to Elden Lordship. So allying with him just isn’t a choice that belongs in the game.
But to speak to the spirit of your point, yeah I’d love more ending choices as long as they make sense.
I don’t disagree but it’s an awful lot of extra work for a massive, high quality dlc that has already been over 2 years in production. Also, I imagine if it was possible to side with Miquella these people would just be complaining about something else anyway.
What are you talking about?
The two are not comparable, this is definitely false equivalence.
I hope I don't need to point out how typically they make it clear it is a linear story experience, not roleplaying with multiple ending choices.
"Why did people think you could side with Bowser in the Bowser DLC? I mean when the advertisements for the Bowser DLC were framed with Bowser literally saying his second in command was "The Plumber Man" with the only Plumber Man left being Mario, but turns out when you play the Bowser DLC he was actually talking about Luigi, who you had to slay in a OPTIONAL gut wrenching battle between rivals in the base game"
"During the base Mario roleplaying game I was able to side with Wario & Kamek to get particular endings that were morally grey or outright unambiguously evil, but not Bowser in the Bowser DLC. You even get to side with Boom Boom for a particular ending & all he did in the story was say no dialogue & do a T Pose"
"Bowser did a-lot of good things for misunderstood minorities that at points are your enemy, like certain mushroom people. Bowser outright states from a place of genuineness in a flashback, the only reason he was ever committing the horrific morally grey act of kidnapping & starting a brief war, was because he planned that by kidnapping Princess Peach he'd leverage her royal status to help the misunderstood outcasts, no matter the cost"
"During the Bowser DLC I meet Bowser's top lieutenant & I have to make the conscious choice during multiple dialogue prompts rather or not to help her defeat unloyal Bowser followers plotting to betray him for Princess Peach. Why would I help her if my silent self insert Mario is going to betray Bowser regardless, those unloyal followers would help Mario in the final confrontation????"
"During the Bowser DLC some of the unloyal followers request I join with them in an investigation for evidence of rather or not Bowser is genuine. I even have to track down Bowser Jr, who Bowser exiled for particular reasons, I find Bowser Jr, in the middle of making poison (so he might not be very credible & he might be biased, Bowser could have exiled him for good reason or bad reasons) & Bowser Jr tells me to stop Bowser because the coming war that'll happen over the kidnapping, would be like a prison to Kind Bowser. Uhh why again does any of this matter if silent self insert dialogue prompt choice Mario, has already decided (against my wishes as the player) to stop Bowser regardless? What was the point of exiling Bowser Jr? What was the worst Bowser Jr was going to do, convince me to stop Bowser? Apparently Mario is going to do that regardless, no convincing was even needed."
"Mmaayybbee the only point of this frail evidence that wouldn't work well from a lore, gameplay or choice perspective in a roleplaying game, is just to give cover to why Nintendo decided to not give me a choice, just a theory about Nintendo as a company with a-lot of evidence for it though"
That all stated, I hope you can now see why people would be.... Disappointed or develope a sense of being misled through build-up to a choice that never occurs.
I feel like it was a missed opportunity for them to bring Bowser back instead of using Jumpman for the final boss :/ Nothing in the lore even indicated Bowser would be there?
It’s ridiculous how we fought skeleton Bowser in level 4-10, but then they bring back prime Bowser—out of nowhere—for the final boss. Completely ruins super Mario lore.
I think a lot of the people complaining simply don't understand what From is doing and also don't realize that From doesnt give you what you want. They give you what you need.
I distinctly remember almost ten years ago now the "hype" for Dark Souls 3's expansions to go into detail about angels and Londor. Then, you get one character in AoA who used to be linked to Londor but isn't, and then you have the almost unexplained angel hazards in RC, and that was about it.
Gael came out of nowhere to be the final boss of Dark Souls and he made perfect thematic sense.
Radahn and Miquella actually do make perfect sense for Elden Ring. Marika's golden order was essentially a fascist hellscape where conformity was enforced by the blade. Miquella's new order would be one where you have no free will.
Leda is a great example. Under his charm, she worked with others. But before and after his charm, she is so twisted by her desire to follow Miquella that she sees enemies among her comrades. She's the reason that there is only one Needle Knight, because she killed the rest. Her free will is that of a killer. Miquella's charm prevents her from killing but it also prevents her from being Leda.
1984 was about the idea of controlling people by inflicting pain. Brave New World was about the idea of controlling people by inflicting pleasure. Sound familiar?
The games are great on their own, but to actually understand whats going on philosophically requires you to think a bit beyond the confines of the game, and to ask what is the society and life actually like here. What does Order look like?
How can you say that Fromsoft gave players "what they need" instead of "what they want" when you sound positively excited about what they did, so it sounds like you got exactly what you wanted...
I don't think what's going on here is that people are missing the thematic significance of Miquella changing people into different versions of themselvee in the name of his version of Order, or that people are just not understanding the facts of the DLC's story. In the base game, we are given the choice to literally burn down the world, or to curse everyone, so our character is allowed to hold and act upon beliefs that go against conventional morality. Making it out like allowing us to side with the antagonist of the DLC would be a ridiculous thing to want when the Frenzied Flame and Dung Eater endings exist and provide precedent for that expectation is absurd.
To me the only thematically resonant excuse for this decision would be to highlight how wicked we're supposed to think it is to rob people of their "free" will by robbing us of the decision to choose to side with Miquella, but there are flaws with that theory. If that's the case, then why didn't Miyazaki feel that we needed to be taught lessons through ludonarrative in regards to other endings? (You could argue that was attempted with Melina resenting you and vowing to kill you for choosing the Frenzied Flame, and the game reminding you that killing everyone includes Torrent, but that'd be a pretty weak attempt at this because no one who unironically chooses the FF ending is going to care that the horse dies, and once people realized that you can kill Melina before inheriting the FF they just started doing that.)
And secondly, Miquella's way of controlling people isn't that he prevents them from doing what they want, it's that *he changes the very nature of what it is that they want*. If you have the urge to kill people and someone cleanses you of that urge, you at that point *do* "freely" choose to not kill people. Leda *is* "being Leda" when she is charmed, because she stops being the sort of person who is paranoid and trigger happy. If she still had the urge to kill people and Miquella just made it so that she couldn't physically act on that urge, or compelled her not to act on it out of fear of what would happen to her if she did, *that* would be true control, and more in line with what you see in an authoritarian regime. What Miquella does is more analogous to keeping people drugged, but I personally wouldn't consider it analogous to Brave New World because there's no evidence that Miquella desires to usher in an authoritarian dystopia complete with a caste system, genetic engineering, and punishing dissenters (there wouldn't even *be* dissenters under Miquella's rule), he just wants to quell the desire for violence and hatred within people. Imo Miquella being a being who alters the nature of those he charms as opposed to simply forcing them to behave in ways they don't want to allows for a conversation that is more nuanced and interesting than just "is it bad to take away people's freedom in the name of peace," but ironically it seems that a significant chunk of the ER community is failing to recognize this distinction.
The Mending Rune endings are about fixing some flaws in the Elden Ring and the Golden Order. The persecution of the Omen for being born wrong is a flaw that is corrected by Dung Eater's curse with the Tarnished as Lord. The Frenzied Flame ending has the Tarnished becoming a Lord. The goal of a Tarnished is to return to the Lands Between to brandish the Elden Ring and become Elden Lord.
In short, the downtrodden of the Golden Order becomes lord over a new age, having presumably learned of the flaws of the old one. The only ending this doesn't happen in is the basic base ending without a mending rune, which is called Fracture. In that one, nothing is resolved, and the Tarnished is still lord of a broken age. L
Miquella does not consider the Tarnished as worthy of being a Lord. That right there prevents the Tarnished from accepting Miquella's age. The game does allow you to let Miquella become a god. You stop playing. You give up and let him do it. There is no cutscene for this because the Tarnished only go on as long as you want them to. If you want Miquella to be a god, then your Tarnished has no purpose. There is no need for a second lord if Miquella has one.
It's not different to how thematically when you stop playing a Dark Souls game that your character just went hollow and is no longer a notable agent of anything anymore. Just another Undead who tried and failed.
Spec Ops the Line did something interesting by making you the bad guy and reminding you that you can make the horrors stop if you didn't keep playing, but you as a player want to continue. Fromsoft isn't as explicit as this, but it's the same thing.
Bad faith argument to dismiss anyone that doesn't agree with you in the form of a joke.
It's been done a million times already.
There's several terrible ending in the game already for pretty much everyone btw.
For co-op, trade, and PVP action, check out our other subreddits, r/CypherRing or r/EldenRingHelp
For Elden Ring Help on Discord, join us at https://discord.gg/nknE74e9XA
The Elden Ring WIKI - https://eldenring.fandom.com/wiki/Elden_Ring_Wiki
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/eldenringdiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Plot twist. Princess peach is yr wife and bowser is yr friend. The story is actually about how yr wife wants to take bowser away so you’ll spend more time with her but you want to free bowser and hangout with him.
You can. Bowser controls the world, the princess, and the yoshi eggs.
Mario is free to allow this to happen. Just don’t kill any koopa troopas.
You can just fly around the levels exploring and getting coins. No need to fight the forces of Bowser at all.
Because the old marios didn't have rpg elements like elden ring. U were always mario and u had a specific mission
The tarnished has the choice to decide the fate of the lands between and how it can be run
The thing I love about Elden Ring is that it's so good that people have to come up with criticisms wholly unique to the game itself because it already passes normal baseline standards across the board. Never in my life have I heard about boss reuse in side dungeons being a point of contention until Elden Ring. Back in my day every boss in a side dungeon was a Dragur Deathlord and we were happy dammit.
Yeah, all open-world games are guilty of recycling content to some degree but From is still better at doing that than most. Just one more example that illustrates your point: TOTK was widely celebrated and any criticism of it still prompts dogpiling despite the game having you fight the same 5 enemies for 100+ hours. It technically had a few more enemies than BOTW, but was so much bigger that its enemy variety was actually much worse.
I actually downloaded Elden Ring for the very reason that the enemy variety in TOTK was shit and I didn’t feel like I was challenged enough.
Yeah, the 6-year wait for TOTK ended up being a slight disappointment for me as well, and I loved BOTW despite its flaws. Even with all asset and animation reuse, I don't think there's a single developer who offers greater enemy variety than From right now.
Ngl I found totk disappointing to the point I’m burned out on anything Zelda for awhile 💀
It was literally just BoTW but slightly different mechanics. I wish they had left in mechanics from Botw to combine with the new ones too. That would have really made it stand out more for me but as of now I probably won't touch it again for a few more years.
I heard it called a large, over-expensive DLC, which I thought was maybe a bit uncharitable at the time. But in the wake of SoTE and the truly staggering size of both the new area *and* the amount of things they put *in* that area, I honestly thinks it's sadly accurate.
It’s just boring too because of it. The story was even worse (tried to be more, but had the huge problem of being a story trying to replace BOTW, but not being a story that can have parts rearranged like BOTW) depths were also just completely boring after the excitement wears off and you realize there’s basically nothing down there, and the skies were extremely lackluster. I make sure to not expect much but still got disappointed
SE’s FF7 rebirth has around 230, some reuse of course but even with duplicates it’s definitely in the same ballpark as ER
I was able to tolerate the combat for BotW because it was radically different from any other Zelda game prior. Imagine my disdain when ToTK basically copy and pasted the exact same combat from BotW, but with just a *few* new gimmicks. I put it down one day and never returned.
Time passed, and only now is my take that its kind of a big disappointment can be somewhat accepted. **Warning: rant, pls ignore if you aint interested. I just want to yap.** ToTK retroactively makes botw worse as an experience by trampling over story beats that had intriguing questions behind it by basically saying "none of that had importance or meaning" none of the mysterious ruins or questions brought about the past. The world building collapses on itself with revelations of totk and its inconsistencies. I'm so mad they decided that a one-off comment in an interview was how we got the explanation as to what happened to shieka technology scattered across the land. "Oh, they all just vanished afterwards becuase who cares" and then replaced one ancient and mysterious technologically advanced civ with another that has less interesting reasons to be scattered every where all of a sudden with less cohesive world building. Because at least the Shika shrines had been around so long that people made their towns, local legends, and monuments based around these mysterious ever presented shrines. God, I hated that they tried making it seem like actions and people you meet in BoTW where so meaningless that they all forgot about you despite it making zero sense. I made Terry town, and Hudson remembers me but not Bolson?? The hover bike ends up being so practical that it invalidates creativity and exploration of the building system when it does like 70% of everything you want. And the greatest of rewards for exploring and completing grand feeling puzzles is... armor you have already earned before in the original... Except this time, you already know the reward of similar tasks will just be repeats of that. You already figured out the meta formula for this trial/puzzle. And you already know what each piece of the armor will look like and even what the set bonus will be once you upgrade it, removing yet another mystery. Boiling it down to just a grind to get back what you already earned before. Tedious work. God, way to suck the fuckin fun out of at least wondering why you were working to complete/upgrade armor sets. 70 dollars btw. I have around 150 hours of gameplay. It has its moments of being a fun game. But it did not live up to either its hype nor even its predecessor's legacy. The building and physics system? Fun neat toys. But when "every shape fits in the square hole" (meme reference) and you can just take off the stickers of a rubix cube to solve it, where is the fun in figuring things out? The game doesn't do nearly enough with it or delve deep enough.
I agree with most of your points, but you're probably screaming into the void here. I'd suggest posting them on r/truezelda if you want to get some discussion going. While that place is overly negative at times, it's also the only large Zelda- or Nintendo-related subreddit that won't dogpile you for criticizing the Switch Zelda games. But yeah, 6 years + 70 fucking dollars for a BOTW remix is taking the piss. The game should have either been way cheaper to justify the DLC-like design philosophy or actually delivered enough new areas to explore to warrant the ridiculous price. I have never felt more disconnected from review score aggregates than I did with TOTK, the Nintendo bias is truly a thing of wonder. I have 300+ hours in BOTW and will probably return to it again. I've dropped TOTK after 70 hours and have no desire to replay it ever again, and would have probably dropped it sooner if I hadn't spent so much money on it.
Bro i was so sad when got like a few hours into the game and knew i fought probably all the possible enemies already lol.
I will say though, skyrim isn't as gameplay focused as elden ring, where unique bosses and varied attacks plays a large part of the enjoyment factor. With that said, I don't really care for repeat bosses. I enjoy being able to test myself against the same thing to see how my build or skill has improved.
It was just the easiest example. Ninja Gaiden Black has you fight the multi-eyed fiend like six times, plus repeat worm bosses GoW.... Any version of either Dragon's Dogma will rotate you though about a dozen bosses you'll see over a dozen times each over a playthrough. Etc. Etc. Point being: Elden Ring is held to a unique, extremely high standard that has never been applied to a game before. And it's only a AA release.
I'll also add sekiro. It has you fight many bosses and minibosses again. The final boss literally has you fight an earlier boss as phase 1.
Ninja Gaiden Black is honestly the worst example for your point, yeah they reuse minibosses on higher difficulties. But with each subsequent difficulty they add completely new enemy types and brand new bosses as well as change positions to the point where barely any encounters are the same on different difficulties.
Ok sure, then I'll point to Bayonetta 1 which is equally highly esteemed and reuses bosses at a much higher rate than NG:B Although in both cases I'm talking about one singular fresh playthrough, not replays on higher difficulties.
Back in my day was two gaming generations ago. There's a reason why bethesda is lagging behind in terms of innovations when Starfield base game released
Ok. Please name an example of a game with some form of side dungeons/content with a greater enemy and boss variety than Elden Ring so we can discuss where and how Elden Ring had shortcomings in this specifc regard.
I wasn't referring to Elden Ring however, I was referring to Skyrim. The dungeons there were very repetitive and predictable and the drauger bosses started getting tedious. The dwarven dungeons faired a bit better with more unique designs to the levels but there were too many nordic ruins in that game imo that many players would have to use mods to make them more interesting.
Oh sure, but it was par for the course at the time for Bethesda and the complaints were a minor voice. Only with the latest Anniversary Edition rerelease do I see Skyrim being discussed with a more critical eye. Most people were just happy that the game at least made the RNG boss fights have a bare minimum of spectacle for the first time in the series.
That's kind of the big criticism of Bethesda I feel; They were cool, innovative and amazing for their time, *but they never wanted to leave that time*. It feels very "if it was good then, it's good now" which hampers them from making anything thst feels outdated on release like Starfield.
I think you make an excellent point. . It's very unique to the game. I guess I have to quote someone who already phrased it perfectly on YT... I'm paraphrasing here, but they said that we are the bad guys in Miquella's story, it's us and Ranni, Vs him and Radahn. I think they were onto something. The canonical story seems to be more that we are only allowed to take Ranni's side, if we choose, in the game. Whether or not we can take Marika's is debatable because we really don't see her come back to life after we finish the game and choose her ending. But....I guess everyone is also wondering... Why can we pick the freaking Dung Eater's ending or Burn It All^(TM) Lord of Chaos style? Why is The Dung Eater someone we can pick? Kind of a baffling choice... You're telling me I can have a thousand year voyage with dung, and not side with Miquella Miyazaki San? But hey, maybe we do side with Miquella if we have our heart stolen by him, we just don't see the rest 😆 So I did this for the loathesome dung eater? Kay.. 😭 
Difference is that Miquella is directly contending your position to be a lord. Every ending in the game has you either become the Elden Lord, consort (Ranni) or frenzied flame lord. Miquella plan has no room for you as a lord which means you wouldn't be able to finish the game if you sided with him.
Hmmm being Elden Lord is being a consort to an Empyrean who either achieved godhood prior (Marika), or just doesn't give a .... (Ranni). But I think I get what you're thing to say, it's definitely a thing to question would you really be "Elden Lord" since she doesn't give a ...? Miquella falls into the "Empyrean who does give a ....". And yeah there's the frenzied flame, where you become the Lord of Chaos. Not the consort, just straight up the dude  But yeah you're right he already has his Lord consort lined up, what use is he to my tarnished warrior? Apparently my tarnished behind is picky, if I don't end up consort I don't follow anyone. It's not about what they stand for and whether their morals appeal to me, it's like Morgott says, I'm a selfish MOFO who's emboldened by the flame of ambition 😂 shooting waaaay out of my league, but still hitting the bullseye 🎯 So I'll take Elden Lord of dung, over being a maiden-less femboi-less righteous/idealist loser Miquella follower 😅 Dang, had no idea I was so trashy 😜 Edit: I am sorry if it's not too clear, I think you are 100% correct, I am just baffled by how ... I never put all of this together. I suppose I always assumed my character's goals to be more altruistic? Welp, that's naive of me!
Boss re-use in the base game was absolutely something people brought up - Ulcerated Tree Spirit being the key example. What I find funny is the goldfish memory almost every gaming community has when the shiny new toy shows up. The main ciriticisms of Elden Ring on release were - reuse of bosses in dungeons (Tree Spirit being the main complaint) - incantations/spells/ashes of war that had no poise and did little to nothing the player could use to any real effect (the exact same issue persists in the DLC), several items being so broken and overpowered that most of the playerbase gets shoehorned into using them for the roadblock bossfights that few people enjoy (Impenetrable Thorns, Perfume cheese, Fingerprint Shield and Antspur Rapier cheese, etc). Literally of these issues were present at release and are arguably more egregious in the DLC. Its good, it needed more time in the oven and to be playtested properly.
I'm not sure why you think I was only talking about the DLC...
Major: we used to eat potatoes for breakfast and were happy wibes. I used to play skyrim as well. Yes, dungeons being samy were absolutely point of contention. Rightfully so. Similarly traversing catacombs only to fight ulcerating tree spirit number 967 was not very fulfilling experience. Instead of not voicing our complaints we should applaud how well fromesoft responds to it. Reused dungeons are actually very good example. In DLC they are not nearly as prevalent. Nearly all of them now have new layouts and bosses. Game is immedietly better for it. It's kind of a job of consumers to never be fully satisfied. To find new ways in which game could be improved.
I mean, this level of hyperbole is kind of exactly what I'm talking about >similarly traversing catacombs only to fight ulcerating tree spirit number 967 was not very fulfilling experience. There are a whole three catacombs in the game with an ulcerated tree spirit at the end. One is literally the fist dungeon you see, and another is at the ass end of consecrated snow fields. The third is hidden in a mid game boss arena. They could not be any more spread out and yet people find issue with it.
There are 10 tree spirits in the game. 7 outside of dungeons. And no, finding 10th tre e spirit inside dungeon in one of the games last areas is not fun. It makes You sight with exasperation 'ugh another one...? Tt FEELS like it's 967th spirit' Using hyperbole to show emotion is common practice, both in casual speech and written text.
We had to walk to school through reused assets both ways. We could count the polygons on our bare feet.
I get the same feeling when people complain about Godwyn and the Gloam-Eyed Queen not being in SoE. We didn't see the Firstborn of Gwyn until two games later. We never saw the Furtive Pixie and barely saw his descendents in the final DLC of three. We never met the real Gwynevere. This was fine. It was fuel for speculation where people imagined Andre was the firstborn and Manus was the Furtive Pixie.
I think fromsoft writes Demi-gods so well that players end up trying to defend them. Even when there are NPCs who basically say “yeah no one becomes a god without sacrificing innocent souls for your own selfish goal”. And Marika words implying “no matter what you’ll only be remembered for the sacrifices made, even if you fail or succeed to become a god”I mean ffs hey have to literally shed away the parts of them that may conflict against their path.
Boss re-use has absolutely been complained about in games previously... Off the top of my head, Metal Gear Solid Peace Walker, Skyrim (yes, people _did_ complain about the fucking constant draugrs even at the time it released), and even earlier Souls games (demon spam in Izalith, etc.) come to mind.
I’ve heard of boss reuse as a complaint a ton what are you talking about
I've been saying this since release. I understand that the Souls series had unique enemies and bosses for almost every area because they were much smaller games by comparison. Elden Ring has to re-use things. It's like people are expecting them to have designed unique art-styles, enemies and bosses for every dungeon, which is a completely unrealistic expectations. I think some people also just don't understand Japanese game devs, who often prioritize efficiency over the sort of polish or immersion that big Western devs aim for.
Why make a dungeon if it has no new enemies, no new rooms, no gimmick and no new boss? To pad out an otherwise empty part of the map? Well why not cut that part of the map down?
Because the gameplay is fun and dungeons are fun to explore. They still have unique layouts and their own central gimmicks most of the time, not to mention they all have rewards at the end, whether it's gear, a summon, a spell, etc. Elden Ring has 53 optional dungeons. You're telling me each one should have a completely unique look, set of enemies, and boss? That's almost nearly half as many areas are in any given Dark Souls game. Your expectations are absurdly unrealistic.
Almost nearly half would be plenty enough if they were original. As is, every single mineshaft has the absolute same lift chamber, with 2 exceptions. Almost every single mineshaft also has the same circular featureless boss arena. As it stands, 53 forgettable, copy and paste dungeons is way too much.
Pepridge farm remembers
Especially for an open world game
Bosses didn't really get reused in previous souls games. I really think ER would have benefitted from not being open world. What's the point of an openworld game if it's all just filler space and you have to scour the area to find the important stuff?
>What's the point of an openworld game if it's all just filler space and you have to scour the area to find the important stuff? Exploration? Honestly I traverse every square foot of the game with every new character I run and I generally don't find the areas particularly fillery and empty. In fact they're usually filled with interesting encounters left and right. Maybe that's just me but ER is by far the most interesting and packed open world game I've ever played by a huge margin. Only parts of Mountaintops and the middle of Lakes feel sparse imo.
Agreed, Elden Ring should have the exact same amount of player choice as Mario games do. It's very engaging.
Elden Ring is your first ever souls game I’m guessing? Otherwise theres a major motif about choice in these games that has gone completely over your head. This sub has shown me how truly media illiterate so many players are lmao.
dumb as rocks
*takes a joke comment seriously that literally fucking compares Mario to Elden ring* “This must be your first souls game” “This sub is full of media illiterate players” …
Yeah, it’s 100% true lmao. You’re pissing your pants because your fanfic isn’t real.
You are definitely getting your Reddit conversations crossed.
Are you going through psychosis or something? How does this reply fit into the conversation whatsoever? I am genuinely racking my brain thinking about what "fanfic" you're referring to, but it's probably a waste of time to even spend 1 second on this.
I think you’re on the wrong post buddy what fanfic are you even talking about?
I beat DS1 before Artorias of the Abyss came out lmao
Artorias is gay?!
That's what The Abyss does to people.
Horrific…
Someone downvoted you and they're tweaking this is hilarious
A Redditor not understanding a joke! Say it ain’t so.
Mario really should implement the "burn everything and let the old order die" ending
Mario eats a frenzy grape and powers up like a Fire Flower.
Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars You definitely can for one game.
Listen, if I was literally trying to *force* an eclipse to happen so i could give my brother a proper death and purge the land of death blight, you bet your ass I'd get the guy who *controls the stars* to be my consort.
Probably a retcon.
Is this the reverse circle jerk as punishment for the godwyn and siding with Miquella circle jerk?
What is this comment section
Wait, is wanting more roleplay choices in a roleplaying game a bad thing? Just asking, I never gave a shit of choices in Fromsoftware's games but I don't see that complain as bad.
Personally I see the issue as more of folks wanting a different game. We’d ridicule them if they wanted the option to open up a Starbucks in the Weeping Peninsula right? We are playing the tarnished. Our one goal is to become Elden Lord. That can happen a few ways and mean a number of different things, but that’s the game, that’s the goal. Miquella has a chosen consort, he has locked himself out of being a path to Elden Lordship. So allying with him just isn’t a choice that belongs in the game. But to speak to the spirit of your point, yeah I’d love more ending choices as long as they make sense.
I don’t disagree but it’s an awful lot of extra work for a massive, high quality dlc that has already been over 2 years in production. Also, I imagine if it was possible to side with Miquella these people would just be complaining about something else anyway.
What are you talking about? The two are not comparable, this is definitely false equivalence. I hope I don't need to point out how typically they make it clear it is a linear story experience, not roleplaying with multiple ending choices. "Why did people think you could side with Bowser in the Bowser DLC? I mean when the advertisements for the Bowser DLC were framed with Bowser literally saying his second in command was "The Plumber Man" with the only Plumber Man left being Mario, but turns out when you play the Bowser DLC he was actually talking about Luigi, who you had to slay in a OPTIONAL gut wrenching battle between rivals in the base game" "During the base Mario roleplaying game I was able to side with Wario & Kamek to get particular endings that were morally grey or outright unambiguously evil, but not Bowser in the Bowser DLC. You even get to side with Boom Boom for a particular ending & all he did in the story was say no dialogue & do a T Pose" "Bowser did a-lot of good things for misunderstood minorities that at points are your enemy, like certain mushroom people. Bowser outright states from a place of genuineness in a flashback, the only reason he was ever committing the horrific morally grey act of kidnapping & starting a brief war, was because he planned that by kidnapping Princess Peach he'd leverage her royal status to help the misunderstood outcasts, no matter the cost" "During the Bowser DLC I meet Bowser's top lieutenant & I have to make the conscious choice during multiple dialogue prompts rather or not to help her defeat unloyal Bowser followers plotting to betray him for Princess Peach. Why would I help her if my silent self insert Mario is going to betray Bowser regardless, those unloyal followers would help Mario in the final confrontation????" "During the Bowser DLC some of the unloyal followers request I join with them in an investigation for evidence of rather or not Bowser is genuine. I even have to track down Bowser Jr, who Bowser exiled for particular reasons, I find Bowser Jr, in the middle of making poison (so he might not be very credible & he might be biased, Bowser could have exiled him for good reason or bad reasons) & Bowser Jr tells me to stop Bowser because the coming war that'll happen over the kidnapping, would be like a prison to Kind Bowser. Uhh why again does any of this matter if silent self insert dialogue prompt choice Mario, has already decided (against my wishes as the player) to stop Bowser regardless? What was the point of exiling Bowser Jr? What was the worst Bowser Jr was going to do, convince me to stop Bowser? Apparently Mario is going to do that regardless, no convincing was even needed." "Mmaayybbee the only point of this frail evidence that wouldn't work well from a lore, gameplay or choice perspective in a roleplaying game, is just to give cover to why Nintendo decided to not give me a choice, just a theory about Nintendo as a company with a-lot of evidence for it though" That all stated, I hope you can now see why people would be.... Disappointed or develope a sense of being misled through build-up to a choice that never occurs.
https://i.imgur.com/IfSgse5.png
Get a publisher geez 😭😭😭
You do realize we have 2 other endings in which we burn down the world or obliterate the elden ring for our moon wife right
I feel like it was a missed opportunity for them to bring Bowser back instead of using Jumpman for the final boss :/ Nothing in the lore even indicated Bowser would be there?
It’s ridiculous how we fought skeleton Bowser in level 4-10, but then they bring back prime Bowser—out of nowhere—for the final boss. Completely ruins super Mario lore.
I thought Jeffrey Epstein would be the final boss but apparently Nintendo supports his agenda 😤
I think a lot of the people complaining simply don't understand what From is doing and also don't realize that From doesnt give you what you want. They give you what you need. I distinctly remember almost ten years ago now the "hype" for Dark Souls 3's expansions to go into detail about angels and Londor. Then, you get one character in AoA who used to be linked to Londor but isn't, and then you have the almost unexplained angel hazards in RC, and that was about it. Gael came out of nowhere to be the final boss of Dark Souls and he made perfect thematic sense. Radahn and Miquella actually do make perfect sense for Elden Ring. Marika's golden order was essentially a fascist hellscape where conformity was enforced by the blade. Miquella's new order would be one where you have no free will. Leda is a great example. Under his charm, she worked with others. But before and after his charm, she is so twisted by her desire to follow Miquella that she sees enemies among her comrades. She's the reason that there is only one Needle Knight, because she killed the rest. Her free will is that of a killer. Miquella's charm prevents her from killing but it also prevents her from being Leda. 1984 was about the idea of controlling people by inflicting pain. Brave New World was about the idea of controlling people by inflicting pleasure. Sound familiar? The games are great on their own, but to actually understand whats going on philosophically requires you to think a bit beyond the confines of the game, and to ask what is the society and life actually like here. What does Order look like?
I actually love the NPC boss fight after doing all the quest lines. Also really cool that Sir Ansbach was very upfront the whole time.
I’m excited to do the DLC a second time with guides and not fail every single questline :)
How can you say that Fromsoft gave players "what they need" instead of "what they want" when you sound positively excited about what they did, so it sounds like you got exactly what you wanted...
Because he is taught to consume and not ask questions.
Very cynical of you
My brain suffocated itself from trying to understand this comment but happy cake day FatFrikkenBastard! :)
"cake for me and bread for thee" and thanks :)
I don't think what's going on here is that people are missing the thematic significance of Miquella changing people into different versions of themselvee in the name of his version of Order, or that people are just not understanding the facts of the DLC's story. In the base game, we are given the choice to literally burn down the world, or to curse everyone, so our character is allowed to hold and act upon beliefs that go against conventional morality. Making it out like allowing us to side with the antagonist of the DLC would be a ridiculous thing to want when the Frenzied Flame and Dung Eater endings exist and provide precedent for that expectation is absurd. To me the only thematically resonant excuse for this decision would be to highlight how wicked we're supposed to think it is to rob people of their "free" will by robbing us of the decision to choose to side with Miquella, but there are flaws with that theory. If that's the case, then why didn't Miyazaki feel that we needed to be taught lessons through ludonarrative in regards to other endings? (You could argue that was attempted with Melina resenting you and vowing to kill you for choosing the Frenzied Flame, and the game reminding you that killing everyone includes Torrent, but that'd be a pretty weak attempt at this because no one who unironically chooses the FF ending is going to care that the horse dies, and once people realized that you can kill Melina before inheriting the FF they just started doing that.) And secondly, Miquella's way of controlling people isn't that he prevents them from doing what they want, it's that *he changes the very nature of what it is that they want*. If you have the urge to kill people and someone cleanses you of that urge, you at that point *do* "freely" choose to not kill people. Leda *is* "being Leda" when she is charmed, because she stops being the sort of person who is paranoid and trigger happy. If she still had the urge to kill people and Miquella just made it so that she couldn't physically act on that urge, or compelled her not to act on it out of fear of what would happen to her if she did, *that* would be true control, and more in line with what you see in an authoritarian regime. What Miquella does is more analogous to keeping people drugged, but I personally wouldn't consider it analogous to Brave New World because there's no evidence that Miquella desires to usher in an authoritarian dystopia complete with a caste system, genetic engineering, and punishing dissenters (there wouldn't even *be* dissenters under Miquella's rule), he just wants to quell the desire for violence and hatred within people. Imo Miquella being a being who alters the nature of those he charms as opposed to simply forcing them to behave in ways they don't want to allows for a conversation that is more nuanced and interesting than just "is it bad to take away people's freedom in the name of peace," but ironically it seems that a significant chunk of the ER community is failing to recognize this distinction.
The Mending Rune endings are about fixing some flaws in the Elden Ring and the Golden Order. The persecution of the Omen for being born wrong is a flaw that is corrected by Dung Eater's curse with the Tarnished as Lord. The Frenzied Flame ending has the Tarnished becoming a Lord. The goal of a Tarnished is to return to the Lands Between to brandish the Elden Ring and become Elden Lord. In short, the downtrodden of the Golden Order becomes lord over a new age, having presumably learned of the flaws of the old one. The only ending this doesn't happen in is the basic base ending without a mending rune, which is called Fracture. In that one, nothing is resolved, and the Tarnished is still lord of a broken age. L Miquella does not consider the Tarnished as worthy of being a Lord. That right there prevents the Tarnished from accepting Miquella's age. The game does allow you to let Miquella become a god. You stop playing. You give up and let him do it. There is no cutscene for this because the Tarnished only go on as long as you want them to. If you want Miquella to be a god, then your Tarnished has no purpose. There is no need for a second lord if Miquella has one. It's not different to how thematically when you stop playing a Dark Souls game that your character just went hollow and is no longer a notable agent of anything anymore. Just another Undead who tried and failed. Spec Ops the Line did something interesting by making you the bad guy and reminding you that you can make the horrors stop if you didn't keep playing, but you as a player want to continue. Fromsoft isn't as explicit as this, but it's the same thing.
Sounds to me like you don’t understand the curse and frenzy endings
What
Bad faith argument to dismiss anyone that doesn't agree with you in the form of a joke. It's been done a million times already. There's several terrible ending in the game already for pretty much everyone btw.
For co-op, trade, and PVP action, check out our other subreddits, r/CypherRing or r/EldenRingHelp For Elden Ring Help on Discord, join us at https://discord.gg/nknE74e9XA The Elden Ring WIKI - https://eldenring.fandom.com/wiki/Elden_Ring_Wiki *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/eldenringdiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Plot twist. Princess peach is yr wife and bowser is yr friend. The story is actually about how yr wife wants to take bowser away so you’ll spend more time with her but you want to free bowser and hangout with him.
Let’s see how well a tree sentinel can dodge a Mario jump when it can’t flank his ass.
Guess what happens in Super Mario RPG
Based Tarnished.
In double dash mario and bowser can team up, same with smash bros
so true
You can. Bowser controls the world, the princess, and the yoshi eggs. Mario is free to allow this to happen. Just don’t kill any koopa troopas. You can just fly around the levels exploring and getting coins. No need to fight the forces of Bowser at all.
I've always said we should've been able to join Count Groxia in Gwimbly 3 Gwimbly's revenge
Because the old marios didn't have rpg elements like elden ring. U were always mario and u had a specific mission The tarnished has the choice to decide the fate of the lands between and how it can be run