E3 2014: The Similarities and Differences Between Bloodborne and Dark Souls

Yes, PS4 exclusive Bloodborne looks like a Souls game. But in what way is it different?

If you saw the announcement of From Software’s upcoming PS4 exclusive Bloodborne at the Sony E3 2014 press conference yesterday, then you probably thought the same thing I did: that this was a Souls game in everything but name. And after seeing the game in action today, I’m still of the same opinion, although it seems that Bloodborne won’t merely be a simple transposition of the successful Demon's/Dark Souls formula to a different environment. Bloodborne looks like it may be changing up the sometimes defensive-focused action of its progenitors, forcing you to become more offensive against its dangerous enemies.

First up, Bloodborne has no storyline ties to the Souls games, and has no link to those worlds apart from the fact that it’s being developed by From Software and directed by Hidetaka Miyazaki, who also oversaw both Demon's Souls and Dark Souls. Bloodborne takes place in a Victorian-era town called Yharnam, which, according to a post on the PlayStation blog from Sony Computer Entertainment Japan Studio producer Masaaki Yamagiwa, is a "terror-filled gothic world, a world full of deranged beings and nightmarish creatures."

The setting may be different to the medieval Souls series, but there are plenty of things that are highly reminiscent of both Demon's and Dark Souls. Everything from the way enemies hide around corners in ambush, or play dead until you walk right past them, to the way "souls" seem to flow out of a slain enemy into your body, or how your character hops backwards to avoid attacks, all looks very Souls. The game's structure also has shades of Dark Souls. In the demo I saw, the main character made his way around the narrow streets and bridges of Yharnam, taking on enemies in small groups and avoiding large gatherings. Eventually, the character was able to open up a shortcut that allowed him to access the area where he first began. While this is certainly more reminiscent of Dark Souls, game director Miyazaki did say that the overall layout of the game would be more akin to that of Demon's Souls.

What did look different, however, was combat. The character in Bloodborne wields both a melee weapon and a gun at the same time. In this demo I saw, he had a mean-looking weapon called a saw cleaver in one hand, and a blunderbuss in the other. The saw cleaver could transform on the fly--its compact form seemed to allow for quicker swings, but when extended, it seemed to swing slower but deal more damage.

This translated to a faster combat feel in this Bloodborne demo, or certainly faster than most shield-wielding characters in a Souls game can muster. The character in Bloodborne often had to get in close to enemies, blasting them with the blunderbuss before following up with a swing from the saw cleaver. In fact, game director Miyazaki says making players more proactive in combat is one of the key things the team wants to introduce in Bloodborne, a deliberate move away from the defensive engagement he saw many players who played with sword and shield in previous Souls games relied on. In fact, Miyazaki said players who play passively in Bloodborne would be "overwhelmed", and that they needed to be aggressive at most times.

With aggression comes more death, however, but there may be some relief in that regard (or at the very least some changes). Miyazaki said that while the penalties for dying in Bloodborne had not been finalised yet, he did want the death penalty to be "not too severe this time".

The Bloodborne demo ended with a large boss fight against a towering, emaciated creature with long straggly fur and an exposed chest cavity. It looked tough to beat, which for any Souls fans, is great to hear. How the game's greater focus on aggression and its changes to death penalties will affect the crushing, oppressive, and demanding feel of a Souls game remains to be seen, but there's one thing that's clear about Bloodborne even at this early stage: it's building off a solid base, and I'm excited to see more.

Source: http://www.gamespot.com/articles/e3-2014-the-similarities-and-differences-between-bloodborne-and-dark-souls/1100-6420378/

Bump.

I'm kinda confused as to why this game doesn't have the Souls name attached to it. Sure there are apparently some differences between this and Dark Souls or Demon Souls, but there's also differences between Demon Souls and Dark Souls, and that didn't stop them from giving the Souls name to both.

I'm getting the impression that the only reason this name doesn't carry the Souls name is because Sony promised so and so many new IPs last year at E3, and needs to make good. Either that or From Software doesn't wanna be seen as the developer who only makes Souls games (even though that's what they are right now).


All that aside though, I love me some Souls games, so when I eventually end up getting a PS4 this will probably be one of the first games I pick up

And you think this game is the result of merely a year of work?  Damn the PS4 is easy to program for!

Yes. Because changing a game's final name (especially before it's been officially announced), is such a long and grueling task. The decision couldn't have possibly been made in the last year or even in the last few months.

What, you expected the name to be Project Beast?  SCEJ and From Software have been working on this for awhile, and if you're thinking that this was a multiplat game that Sony locked down as exclusive, again, that's simply not accurate with SCEJ involved, and both Microsoft and Sony have shown that they typically don't step in and try to nail down exclusivity until they see how people react (ala Titanfall).

If you really think that Bloodborne is 1 years worth of work, I don't know what to tell you.  But it doesn't sound like you're very familiar with the effort that goes into creating a new engine designed specifically for static hardware that hasn't been used by that developer before.

I'm sorry but you're really not very bright. Nowhere did I ever say or imply anything that you just said lol.

The game had a code name, which as we all know was Project Beast, and my only point was that as long as the public only knows the game by a code name, developers/publishers still have ample opportunity to settle on whatever final name they want.

Nowhere did I suggest this game only took a year to make. You're putting words in my mouth, because you feel that I took a shot at Sony in my original post. You're being defensive for no reason, I was merely speculating as to why this game has the name that it does.