By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Bloodborne Review Thread - MetaCritic 93% ~ GameRankings 91.47%

FATALITY said:
estebxx said:
OttoniBastos said:
Redborne coming for ps4/one 2017 and pc 2018

so Bloodborne is the new Demons Souls confirmed?


again dark souls only happened because sony didnt have faith in demons souls ip. although thanks to darks souls, bloodborne is a huge success

I thought From wanted to make a multiplayer game, and since Sony owned demon's souls, they had to make a new title.



Around the Network

Finally a AAA retail PS4 exclusive in the 90s. We need more quality games to restore SCE to the height it was at last gen



SjOne said:
Finally a AAA retail PS4 exclusive in the 90s. We need more quality games to restore SCE to the height it was at last gen

We'll hopefully get some more at E3.



I think Bloodborne will give sony a slight boost in hardware sales



Bloodborne Remastered confirmed for 2016! :-p



Around the Network

Damn there are a lot of people streaming the game on twitch. I feel jealous.



Angelv577 said:
Damn there are a lot of people streaming the game on twitch. I feel jealous.


I dont want any spoilers. The game comes out a day later in europe. Im gonna have to be careful around the forums today...



someone send Phil Spencer a twitter msg saying ink a deal with From Software



craighopkins said:
someone send Phil Spencer a twitter msg saying ink a deal with From Software


Please dont...



Nuvendil said:



If you're going to accumse me of being a hypocrit, you had better have more effing evidence than your excessive quibbling for...what is even the bloody point of this?  All I said - ALL  I said - was that I knew the game would score well - well being a general statement of quality, not a specific one - because past games have scored well.  I was merely contrasting my perspective to the one put forward by numerous individuals on the internet and, yes, this very forum, that it would score significantly lower than previous souls games due to an anti-Sony conspiracy or anti-Sony sentiments.  In that context, it being the best or worst is insignificant so long as it scored well - which it has - and within a reasonable deviation - 1 or 2 points  - of the previous titles, which it has.  In the context of my statements, it's place in history is entirely irrelevant. 

I don't know what you're accusing me of or arguing with me over but it's not what I said.  So I'd appreciate it if you would stop your strawmanning cause it is seriously starting to chafe. 

Well I tried explaining it with lots of words so we'll switch things up since I don't want to write a text wall and you don't want to read another.  It's not just scoring well, it's scoring better.  Say that is semantics but it's an important distinction to make.



I am Iron Man