What frustrates me is that to this day, I don’t think I’ve played a single game in the “open world” genre that I believe to be a true masterpiece: a game that I'm confident I can look back on in 50 years and comfortably call part of The Canon. In other words, unless we construe the genre very liberally, I don’t think a game exists within it that can’t effectively be supplanted by something better in the future. For all of its faults, however, Elden Ring is likely the closest thing to a masterpiece in its genre today. But that’s what’s most frustrating about Elden Ring. It’s a fantastic game on so many levels, but it’s also not exempt from the flaws seemingly universal to its genre.
For starters, following in the footsteps of and ultimately surpassing Breath of the Wild, Elden Ring presents a masterclass of overworld design. The game’s points-of-interest are expertly oriented both geographically and visually, resulting in exploration that’s both seamless and thoroughly compelling. And, unlike Breath of the Wild, there’s enough obscured or otherwise hidden within Elden Ring’s map that overworld gameplay transcends simply being led by the nose down a breadcrumb trail (not that there isn’t more to BotW than that, but I digress). Elden Ring also has the advantage of not being a Switch launch title, so FromSoft could better orient the game’s map around combat difficulty. Generally speaking, combat gets harder as you near the Erdtree, which appropriately serves as a visual anchor for the overworld. The game does a good enough job of signposting difficulty through aesthetics (red hellscape = harder than lush starting area, shocker). And Elden Ring also throws experienced players and challenge runners a bone by letting them outright bypass many early game areas, and even access mid and late-game areas early by acquiring certain items. At its best, Elden Ring sees the player bouncing around between encounters, finding what challenge best suits the player character’s current power level and ultimately overcoming it. Perhaps some players would prefer a more rigid progression, but the above described sort of player-driven exploration and (to an extent) self-imposed difficulty is what drew me to Souls in the first place.
However, as I previously said, Elden Ring still succumbs to universal open world frustrations, primarily seen in its underworld. In short, the game’s smaller dungeons scattered around its map, while not bad or even mediocre, recycle aesthetics and encounters to their detriment. And this recycling bleeds into the overworld as well, with many encounters being repeated around similar points of interest. I understand that there isn’t a realistic way around this given the current realities of gamedev and Elden Ring’s undeniable scale… but it nonetheless hinders immersion and the overall experience. The game’s “Legacy Dungeons,” on the other hand, are fantastic, impressively numerous and blend seamlessly into the overworld. In short, while Elden Ring does contain the sort of detrimental repetition that plagues its genre, it also contains so much high quality content that I frankly don’t even care that much. Simply, Elden Ring would eclipse the vast majority of AAA games on the market even if the frequently repeated content were axed outright.
Before I play a little defense for a commonly criticized part of the game, I’m going to contribute to the dogpiling of an aspect that deserves criticism: Elden Ring’s story. Though, there is an important distinction here that must be made. Elden Ring’s storytelling is great. FromSoft are experts in procedural, environmental storytelling: largely because so much time and effort is put into the lore and worldbuild. For contrast, while I seem to like Tears of the Kingdom more than most self-styled game critics on the internet, it’s undeniable that TotK’s worldbuild is weak, which has the collateral consequence of making satisfying moment-to-moment storytelling through its environment pretty much impossible. And, unfortunately, TotK doesn’t exactly make up for that through its plot. Elden Ring, on the other hand, constantly stimulates the player with lore, character details, aesthetic iterations, etc. as the player works through its environments. It’s often difficult to spend more than a few minutes in Elden Ring without learning more about its world: and what a world it is. However, like TotK, Elden Ring fails in its main narrative (though to a much lesser extent). Simply, while ER presents a conflict between factions over the fate of the Lands Between, with the “factions” largely being represented by a single individual, said individuals’ motivations are vague to a fault. It’s as if George R. R. Martin handed Michael Zaki the blueprint, and Zaki-and-friends figured the worldbuild and general intrigue would be enough to meet fan expectations. And, honestly, they were right… but it doesn’t change the fact that a properly fleshed out story would likely elevate Elden Ring to masterpiece status, so I can’t help but be let down. Yes, Dark Souls was also “vague,” but that’s in line with the story it successfully told. Elden Ring presents a more defined conflict between parties that the player can frequently interact with, and fails to present a comparatively defined narrative. Ultimately, none of the endings land: for me, at least. (If Shadow of the Erdtree doesn't at least partially address ER's narrative shortcomings, I'll be disappointed).
Now, on to that “defense” I mentioned earlier. What am I defending? Elden Ring's combat, and especially its boss design. Certain YouTubers (or Reddit) may have told you that ER’s bosses are “cheap,” or “unfair,” or “bad.” First of all, have you considered that being a YouTuber isn’t even a real job? I mean, I guess it technically is, but morally it isn’t. I’m aware that statement doesn’t really make sense and no, I will not elaborate. I will elaborate, however, as to why ER’s bosses are good, actually. You see, Little Timmy, this story starts all the way back with Ocarina of Time in ‘98. Due to hardware limitations, inexperience, or both, OoT’s enemy design was fairly basic and over reliant on enemy invulnerability to drag out encounters and feign difficulty. Iron Knuckles did manage to engage, though were overly simplistic and easily exploited. Which brings us Demon’s Souls, where FromSoft mercifully added a layer of complexity on top of OoT’s methodical third-person melee combat framework (adjectives!). In DeS, high damage, weighty attacks were exchanged between enemies and the player character. The result was an odd, lethargic dance that’s somehow come to define an entire genre. Sarcasm aside, DeS truly has a good combat system, which carried on to Dark Souls 1 with its improved, committal healing system (and the funny Adaptability game, forgot what it’s called).
Which brings us to Dark Souls 3, where Michael Zaki slapped another layer of complexity on top. For the most part, DS3 is just a faster game than DS1. It also added Weapon Arts, though those are really more of a flourish than an essential game mechanic. But there’s something else under the hood. DS3’s enemies are even more nuanced than DS1’s, with the most dynamic being the infamous Pontiff Sulyvahn. Why is he infamous? Well… he has strings! In the Souls series generally, an enemy will slowly move toward the player character and throw out an attack at least partially in accordance with the player character’s relative position. After that, the enemy essentially will reset, re-assess the player character, and throw out another attack. Accordingly, the Souls community developed a de facto default “fun” approach to taking on bosses (and enemies generally) as a melee build: what I will call Dodge-Counterattack. That is: roll-dodging an attack, counterattacking, observing the boss, roll-dodging on reaction to its next attack, etc. It’s a strategy that’s fundamentally enjoyable due to the thrill of the risk-reward and satisfaction that comes with proper execution. And it’s a strategy that works on literally every non-environmental boss in the series… until you reach Pontiff. Mr. Sulyvahn simply demands more than the above-described strategy. That’s because he doesn’t just reset after each of his attacks: he can branch one attack into another, and there’s an internal logic to his doing so. Cracking that logic is what he demands: that’s the additional “layer of complexity” I previously referred to. So, to recap: we went from detrimentally simple enemies in OoT, to more complex enemies that were nonetheless universally exploitable through well-timed roll-dodges in DeS and DS1 (and that other funny game if you level ADP), to Pontiff who, for true mastery, requires a deeper understanding than simply of the frame data on his individual attacks. Whether or not Pontiff is well designed in a broad sense can certainly be debated, and I certainly won’t try to argue that DS3 at its most complex is the peak of action games. However, it’s simply an objective falsehood to allege that Pontiff is “cheap” in the sense that he is supposedly inconsistent. He is undeniably consistent, just not in alignment with Dodge-Counterattack: at least in the way that self-styled “Souls Veterans” implement the strategy. And no, even without parrying, Pontiff doesn’t require the player to stand around and wait for obscure counterattack windows. If you thoroughly understand the boss, openings are indeed frequent, even with a slow, strength build. Is acquiring a thorough understanding of Pontiff’s moveset engaging, though? For me, yes, but I’ve self-diagnosed at least a dozen mental illnesses (thank you, TikTok!), so take what you will from that.
Now, you may be asking: Why did this idiot spend a whole paragraph talking about Pontiff Sulyvahn when this review is about Elden Ring? Well, my fellow imbecile, what if I told you that every boss in ER is (metaphorically) Pontiff? Ok, maybe not literally every boss on a deep level, but the point I’m trying to make is that, like with Pontiff, Elden Ring’s bosses demand more from the player than simply Dodge-Counterattack. And, believe it or not, ER makes things even more complex with its expanded posture system (taking a cue from Sekiro). In short, the player character can break an enemy’s (including bosses!) posture, opening them up to a critical hit (essentially an improved, omnipresent iteration of DS3’s equivalent mechanic). And the new guard-counter and jump-attack maneuvers do exceptional amounts of posture damage. Combine said maneuvers with a strength weapon, for example, and a deep understanding of a given boss’s moveset, and you’d be surprised how quickly you can decimate said boss. So why, then, are “Souls Veterans” (yes, I will continue to use that moniker passive-aggressively) up in arms about ER’s bosses? Well, based on my observation of prominent video essays and online discussion, it appears to me that “Souls Veterans” are opting to apply strength build Dodge-Counterattack to bosses uncritically as if they’re playing DS3: which is to say, without abusing the posture mechanic that was expanded largely for the benefit of, you know, strength builds. It’s also worth mentioning that Elden Ring makes it easier than ever to use multiple weapon and equipment types on the same build and, alternatively, to change the player character’s stats in case the player wants to completely 180 their build. So, the way I see it, ER provides “Souls Veterans” with several options: (1) adapt their strength build Dodge-Counterattack strategy to fit ER’s systems and boss design; (2), if they’re not in favor of the prior option, change their equipment to something more practical or subjectively enjoyable for the encounter; or (3), if they’re not in favor of the prior two options, respec their build until they find something that works for them. However, it seems that some have picked the secret fourth option: “None of the Above,” along with pushing the narrative that ER’s bosses are “cheap” so as to justify the game’s expanded NPC summoning mechanic.
To be clear, I don’t love all of Elden Ring’s bosses. Godskin Duo has always sucked ass (fuck Godskin Noble in particular, he’s unironically cheap). Also: large, raidboss-type encounters where the boss flops around and launches huge AoE attacks (see: Dragonlord Placidusax)... not my thing. As for Malenia, however: sorry “Souls Veterans,” but she’s great. Her strength is lore appropriate (nerd emoji), and she’s actually consistent. Even in Phase 2, Malenia is very manageable once you learn how to not die to Waterfowl Dance, which is not nearly as difficult as “Souls Veterans” make it out to be. Seriously: once you stop, look past the flashiness, and actually analyze what the move is, dodging it is unironically straightforward. It’s definitely tricky at point-blank, but that honestly has less to do with the move on a mechanical level and more to do with the panic-inducing psychic-damage inflicted on players when the animation starts. You literally just strafe past her and let her launch past you. It’s not that hard, gamers: hardly a “speedrun strat,” or whatever “Souls Veterans” want to call it (however, taking literally zero damage from the move consistently is admittedly more particular, but that's primarily an issue for no-hit runs). I'm going to take this opportunity to point out that shields are, in fact, a thing: even against the Blade of Miquella. To be honest, the community’s reaction to Malenia isn’t all that surprising. She’s an optional superboss who is unwilling to compromise for players unwilling to compromise with the game’s systems. Or, in the alternative, use the summoning mechanic. But, you know, that’s for noobs. And you’re not one of those, are you?
Art direction good! Soundtrack good! Blah blah review over bye.
8/10.
For starters, following in the footsteps of and ultimately surpassing Breath of the Wild, Elden Ring presents a masterclass of overworld design. The game’s points-of-interest are expertly oriented both geographically and visually, resulting in exploration that’s both seamless and thoroughly compelling. And, unlike Breath of the Wild, there’s enough obscured or otherwise hidden within Elden Ring’s map that overworld gameplay transcends simply being led by the nose down a breadcrumb trail (not that there isn’t more to BotW than that, but I digress). Elden Ring also has the advantage of not being a Switch launch title, so FromSoft could better orient the game’s map around combat difficulty. Generally speaking, combat gets harder as you near the Erdtree, which appropriately serves as a visual anchor for the overworld. The game does a good enough job of signposting difficulty through aesthetics (red hellscape = harder than lush starting area, shocker). And Elden Ring also throws experienced players and challenge runners a bone by letting them outright bypass many early game areas, and even access mid and late-game areas early by acquiring certain items. At its best, Elden Ring sees the player bouncing around between encounters, finding what challenge best suits the player character’s current power level and ultimately overcoming it. Perhaps some players would prefer a more rigid progression, but the above described sort of player-driven exploration and (to an extent) self-imposed difficulty is what drew me to Souls in the first place.
However, as I previously said, Elden Ring still succumbs to universal open world frustrations, primarily seen in its underworld. In short, the game’s smaller dungeons scattered around its map, while not bad or even mediocre, recycle aesthetics and encounters to their detriment. And this recycling bleeds into the overworld as well, with many encounters being repeated around similar points of interest. I understand that there isn’t a realistic way around this given the current realities of gamedev and Elden Ring’s undeniable scale… but it nonetheless hinders immersion and the overall experience. The game’s “Legacy Dungeons,” on the other hand, are fantastic, impressively numerous and blend seamlessly into the overworld. In short, while Elden Ring does contain the sort of detrimental repetition that plagues its genre, it also contains so much high quality content that I frankly don’t even care that much. Simply, Elden Ring would eclipse the vast majority of AAA games on the market even if the frequently repeated content were axed outright.
Before I play a little defense for a commonly criticized part of the game, I’m going to contribute to the dogpiling of an aspect that deserves criticism: Elden Ring’s story. Though, there is an important distinction here that must be made. Elden Ring’s storytelling is great. FromSoft are experts in procedural, environmental storytelling: largely because so much time and effort is put into the lore and worldbuild. For contrast, while I seem to like Tears of the Kingdom more than most self-styled game critics on the internet, it’s undeniable that TotK’s worldbuild is weak, which has the collateral consequence of making satisfying moment-to-moment storytelling through its environment pretty much impossible. And, unfortunately, TotK doesn’t exactly make up for that through its plot. Elden Ring, on the other hand, constantly stimulates the player with lore, character details, aesthetic iterations, etc. as the player works through its environments. It’s often difficult to spend more than a few minutes in Elden Ring without learning more about its world: and what a world it is. However, like TotK, Elden Ring fails in its main narrative (though to a much lesser extent). Simply, while ER presents a conflict between factions over the fate of the Lands Between, with the “factions” largely being represented by a single individual, said individuals’ motivations are vague to a fault. It’s as if George R. R. Martin handed Michael Zaki the blueprint, and Zaki-and-friends figured the worldbuild and general intrigue would be enough to meet fan expectations. And, honestly, they were right… but it doesn’t change the fact that a properly fleshed out story would likely elevate Elden Ring to masterpiece status, so I can’t help but be let down. Yes, Dark Souls was also “vague,” but that’s in line with the story it successfully told. Elden Ring presents a more defined conflict between parties that the player can frequently interact with, and fails to present a comparatively defined narrative. Ultimately, none of the endings land: for me, at least. (If Shadow of the Erdtree doesn't at least partially address ER's narrative shortcomings, I'll be disappointed).
Now, on to that “defense” I mentioned earlier. What am I defending? Elden Ring's combat, and especially its boss design. Certain YouTubers (or Reddit) may have told you that ER’s bosses are “cheap,” or “unfair,” or “bad.” First of all, have you considered that being a YouTuber isn’t even a real job? I mean, I guess it technically is, but morally it isn’t. I’m aware that statement doesn’t really make sense and no, I will not elaborate. I will elaborate, however, as to why ER’s bosses are good, actually. You see, Little Timmy, this story starts all the way back with Ocarina of Time in ‘98. Due to hardware limitations, inexperience, or both, OoT’s enemy design was fairly basic and over reliant on enemy invulnerability to drag out encounters and feign difficulty. Iron Knuckles did manage to engage, though were overly simplistic and easily exploited. Which brings us Demon’s Souls, where FromSoft mercifully added a layer of complexity on top of OoT’s methodical third-person melee combat framework (adjectives!). In DeS, high damage, weighty attacks were exchanged between enemies and the player character. The result was an odd, lethargic dance that’s somehow come to define an entire genre. Sarcasm aside, DeS truly has a good combat system, which carried on to Dark Souls 1 with its improved, committal healing system (and the funny Adaptability game, forgot what it’s called).
Which brings us to Dark Souls 3, where Michael Zaki slapped another layer of complexity on top. For the most part, DS3 is just a faster game than DS1. It also added Weapon Arts, though those are really more of a flourish than an essential game mechanic. But there’s something else under the hood. DS3’s enemies are even more nuanced than DS1’s, with the most dynamic being the infamous Pontiff Sulyvahn. Why is he infamous? Well… he has strings! In the Souls series generally, an enemy will slowly move toward the player character and throw out an attack at least partially in accordance with the player character’s relative position. After that, the enemy essentially will reset, re-assess the player character, and throw out another attack. Accordingly, the Souls community developed a de facto default “fun” approach to taking on bosses (and enemies generally) as a melee build: what I will call Dodge-Counterattack. That is: roll-dodging an attack, counterattacking, observing the boss, roll-dodging on reaction to its next attack, etc. It’s a strategy that’s fundamentally enjoyable due to the thrill of the risk-reward and satisfaction that comes with proper execution. And it’s a strategy that works on literally every non-environmental boss in the series… until you reach Pontiff. Mr. Sulyvahn simply demands more than the above-described strategy. That’s because he doesn’t just reset after each of his attacks: he can branch one attack into another, and there’s an internal logic to his doing so. Cracking that logic is what he demands: that’s the additional “layer of complexity” I previously referred to. So, to recap: we went from detrimentally simple enemies in OoT, to more complex enemies that were nonetheless universally exploitable through well-timed roll-dodges in DeS and DS1 (and that other funny game if you level ADP), to Pontiff who, for true mastery, requires a deeper understanding than simply of the frame data on his individual attacks. Whether or not Pontiff is well designed in a broad sense can certainly be debated, and I certainly won’t try to argue that DS3 at its most complex is the peak of action games. However, it’s simply an objective falsehood to allege that Pontiff is “cheap” in the sense that he is supposedly inconsistent. He is undeniably consistent, just not in alignment with Dodge-Counterattack: at least in the way that self-styled “Souls Veterans” implement the strategy. And no, even without parrying, Pontiff doesn’t require the player to stand around and wait for obscure counterattack windows. If you thoroughly understand the boss, openings are indeed frequent, even with a slow, strength build. Is acquiring a thorough understanding of Pontiff’s moveset engaging, though? For me, yes, but I’ve self-diagnosed at least a dozen mental illnesses (thank you, TikTok!), so take what you will from that.
Now, you may be asking: Why did this idiot spend a whole paragraph talking about Pontiff Sulyvahn when this review is about Elden Ring? Well, my fellow imbecile, what if I told you that every boss in ER is (metaphorically) Pontiff? Ok, maybe not literally every boss on a deep level, but the point I’m trying to make is that, like with Pontiff, Elden Ring’s bosses demand more from the player than simply Dodge-Counterattack. And, believe it or not, ER makes things even more complex with its expanded posture system (taking a cue from Sekiro). In short, the player character can break an enemy’s (including bosses!) posture, opening them up to a critical hit (essentially an improved, omnipresent iteration of DS3’s equivalent mechanic). And the new guard-counter and jump-attack maneuvers do exceptional amounts of posture damage. Combine said maneuvers with a strength weapon, for example, and a deep understanding of a given boss’s moveset, and you’d be surprised how quickly you can decimate said boss. So why, then, are “Souls Veterans” (yes, I will continue to use that moniker passive-aggressively) up in arms about ER’s bosses? Well, based on my observation of prominent video essays and online discussion, it appears to me that “Souls Veterans” are opting to apply strength build Dodge-Counterattack to bosses uncritically as if they’re playing DS3: which is to say, without abusing the posture mechanic that was expanded largely for the benefit of, you know, strength builds. It’s also worth mentioning that Elden Ring makes it easier than ever to use multiple weapon and equipment types on the same build and, alternatively, to change the player character’s stats in case the player wants to completely 180 their build. So, the way I see it, ER provides “Souls Veterans” with several options: (1) adapt their strength build Dodge-Counterattack strategy to fit ER’s systems and boss design; (2), if they’re not in favor of the prior option, change their equipment to something more practical or subjectively enjoyable for the encounter; or (3), if they’re not in favor of the prior two options, respec their build until they find something that works for them. However, it seems that some have picked the secret fourth option: “None of the Above,” along with pushing the narrative that ER’s bosses are “cheap” so as to justify the game’s expanded NPC summoning mechanic.
To be clear, I don’t love all of Elden Ring’s bosses. Godskin Duo has always sucked ass (fuck Godskin Noble in particular, he’s unironically cheap). Also: large, raidboss-type encounters where the boss flops around and launches huge AoE attacks (see: Dragonlord Placidusax)... not my thing. As for Malenia, however: sorry “Souls Veterans,” but she’s great. Her strength is lore appropriate (nerd emoji), and she’s actually consistent. Even in Phase 2, Malenia is very manageable once you learn how to not die to Waterfowl Dance, which is not nearly as difficult as “Souls Veterans” make it out to be. Seriously: once you stop, look past the flashiness, and actually analyze what the move is, dodging it is unironically straightforward. It’s definitely tricky at point-blank, but that honestly has less to do with the move on a mechanical level and more to do with the panic-inducing psychic-damage inflicted on players when the animation starts. You literally just strafe past her and let her launch past you. It’s not that hard, gamers: hardly a “speedrun strat,” or whatever “Souls Veterans” want to call it (however, taking literally zero damage from the move consistently is admittedly more particular, but that's primarily an issue for no-hit runs). I'm going to take this opportunity to point out that shields are, in fact, a thing: even against the Blade of Miquella. To be honest, the community’s reaction to Malenia isn’t all that surprising. She’s an optional superboss who is unwilling to compromise for players unwilling to compromise with the game’s systems. Or, in the alternative, use the summoning mechanic. But, you know, that’s for noobs. And you’re not one of those, are you?
Art direction good! Soundtrack good! Blah blah review over bye.
8/10.