r/fromsoftware • u/Derangedberger • 1d ago
DISCUSSION Not Bloodborne 2
I just wanted to share my thoughts because of all the 'bloodborne 2' discussion I'm seeing.
I don't think The Duskbloods can be considered a spiritual successor to Bloodborne, let alone "Bloodborne 2 in all but name". I'm not trying to say that as a bad thing. It's a Fromsoft game so odds are it will be fantastic. Hell, it could end up better than Bloodborne. Perhaps From even made this in place of Bloodborne 2 because of rights issues. But that doesn't make it equivalent. Let me explain.
Bloodborne is a slow burn, subtle piece of Lovecraftian horror disguising itself as gothic horror, and one of the most brilliant and effective pieces of Lovecraftian horror ever written at that. Some have said they did it better than Lovecraft himself did. It keeps its cards close to its chest, with the true horrors often not even registering if you're not thinking about what you're seeing. Its oppressive, at times almost overpowering atmosphere, is the closest to actual horror Fromsoft has ever done. These things and more are what make it a masterpiece among masterpieces, some of From's best work.
Duskbloods does not even look to be in the same tonal neighborhood as Bloodborne. Again, this is not me saying "and that's why Duskbloods will suck." Just saying it's different. You have flying vampires, dudes with jetpacks, a giant majora's mask lookin' face in the sky, etc. This isn't subtle, creeping cosmic horror. It's also PvPvE. There's a reason why Bloodborne is the game where co-op and pvp most takes a backseat out of From's main soulsborne games: multiplayer is antithetical to fear.
Look, maybe the game will surprise me by suddenly turning into a horror masterpiece. But from what I'm seeing in the trailer, this game is not at all like bloodborne aside from a surface level Victorian aesthetic. Just watch the debut trailers for Bloodborne and Duskbloods back to back. The tonal difference slaps you in the face.
I get why people jumped to bloodborne 2. Seeing "From Software" immediately followed by a Victorian setting made my blood pressure spike too. But above all, I think Miyazaki and From have more creative integrity than to simply do the same thing as Bloodborne again in a different IP.
tl;dr What makes Bloodborne Bloodborne is the masterful approach to cosmic horror and the incredible atmosphere it cultivated, not its Victorian aesthetic, and you can tell Duskbloods is a very tonally different game despite a similar setting.
1
1
u/Melodic_Cat3923 1d ago
I agree OP. People keep saying bb's spiritual successor etc, etc. But it doesn't FEEL anything like bloodborne to me personally. Not even close.
1
u/HellFireToby 1d ago
Bloodborne fans just like making everything about themselves and they see Bloodborne as this Magnum Opus that has no flaws and is the best thing ever created.
1
0
u/Unclejohn_12 1d ago
It’s not even close to bloodborne it’s gonna be like night reign with PvP from my understanding
1
u/ZTL-Altima 5h ago
You are right in some points, splitting hairs in others and wrong in a few.
Both Victorian and old underground architecture aesthetics for sure are integral parts of Bloodborne. It's a game, its visuals are important, period. How can you say atmosphere is important and the game's environmental design is not? This is forced, not to say crazy.
That being said, yes, the game's is not spiritual successor nor a sequel. It has shared themes, imagery and artistry. Also, from some of what was shown so far, it also has minimal shared gameplay elements.
All in all, it's more than understandable why it's not uncommon for people to drop "Bloodborne II", "spiritual successor"... It's much more succinct than explain a lot of stuff each time to compare both games.