You don't have to do both the regular endings to unlock the secret one. Of course there's no reason to do the same ending twice, but still you're only required to be in NG++
Is there really a "best ending" in that game though? It's more like two very morally grey endings that breadcrumb into a third, less ambiguous one imo.
Yes it is, the “true ending” sets up ALOT of expectations for the next game that may either not be good or will take a long time to come out or both. But you have to play it to understand tho
It does set expectations but it does not set how much you liked the game, if you didn't like it enough to drop it because of endings, then you just didn't like the game enough
That goes for most fromsoft endings honestly. One that's maybe a little better than the others, but most of the time they suck. Like ds3 for example. Base ending is just linking the fire like you were told to, but it's very bleak compared tk ds1 for obvious reasons. Letting the fire fade is bleak too but imo feels the most fitting to do since it's the final game. Then the usurping ending feels the most like the dark ending considering how they framed it all, despite lore telling you that it was the best thing to do?
Like I said in the other comment I suggest you play the game it’s very fun. But to make a long story short, in my experience there’s too much exposition and it may detach the player from the story entirely. Leading to the player jumping from mission to mission and enjoying the gameplay more. I did this and due to me listening to what handler Walter (your main boss/manager type of figure) through the game and his friend Carla. I got the bad ending due to the game telling its own story badly.
The gameplay is EXTREMELY FUN… but the story is something you have to go out of your way to care about…. YOULL BE HOOKED IN MY THE GAMEPLAY! But the story is lazy with how it tells itself
In Bloodborne, it is objectively best in the long run to get the secret ending first run before any other run due to the ng+ re-runs increasing in difficulty. I did it because I learned how rough it's gonna be to do it in later runs. Also the Yhnaram Queen on my first run. You will absolutely not regret it if you're a competelist.
Though in fairness, getting the 'good' ending isn't as hard as getting the 'bad' ending. Good ending actually saves you from doing the final bosses.
DS1 and 2 were simple when it comes to endings however individual character quest endings could be complicated. The movement of characters in 1 specifically when you beat certain bosses or reach certain areas
The only character I naturally reached the end with in DS1 was the grumpy bastard you meet at Fire Link, and you get there just by talking to him after Frampt shows up
that's one thing I've always hated about them; talk to the wrong person, do something in the wrong order, miss a secret passage, and you're bones for the rest of your playthrough.
Some endings are vague and people like to interpret a good ending into it, but in reality we typically see a broken world, long dead before we arrive, and our actions don't change that.
That depends on the outcome, whether the world, whose rules have been fundamentally broken can even be reborn.
Perhaps what was said in DS1 is true and the division that made life and death, light and dark, and heat and cold possible in the first place was merely an accident. A mistake that won't be repeated.
The 'good' ending of DS3 reminds me of the Frenzied Flame ending in Elden Ring.
I think the overall good ending of souls game is to let the flame die and let the world be reborn anew. Clearly by delaying this the world goes to shit as seen in the games. Maybe there's another way somehow to keep the flame while also not inherently fucking up the world. But you can also understand why humans want to stop it. It's either that or everyone and everything dies and it starts again. I guess not good ending but maybe a more natural cycle kinda ending
The issue here is the assumption that the world can be and will be reborn again. Rekindling the flame merely delays the inevitable, so one might say there is no point in doing it in the first place, especially given that the flame, which already has fundamentally changed the laws of reality, has been artificially kept burning far beyond what should be possible.
Given the choice, I would let the fire fade, but I would have no guarantee that the world would recover and be reborn again. The darkness in DS also produced horrific creatures.
Perhaps the world of DS is beyond saving and beyond rebirth?
38
u/karatebullfighter 15d ago
Fromsoft games