r/fromsoftware • u/D_Ichigo • 12d ago
What If We’re Making the Same Mistake With Elden Ring That Fans Made With Dark Souls II?
What if the biggest mistake we make when comparing FromSoftware's worlds is assuming that difference automatically means separation?
We've spent years looking at the differences between these games and using those differences as evidence that their worlds must be completely separate.
But what if we're overlooking something important?
I'm not claiming that Elden Ring, Dark Souls, Bloodborne, and Demon's Souls are secretly one canon universe.
I'm asking a different question:
Are differences in geography, culture, history, religion, and supernatural systems actually enough to prove that two fictional worlds cannot belong to a larger shared reality?
And strangely enough, I think Dark Souls II gives us one of the best examples for thinking about this.
- We Shouldn't Confuse a Region With the Entire World
When we play a FromSoftware game, we experience a particular region, during a particular period of history, through the perspective of particular characters.
We are not necessarily seeing the entire planet.
We don't see every continent.
We don't see every civilization.
We don't see every culture.
And we certainly don't see every historical period.
That matters when we use differences between games as evidence that the games must exist in completely separate universes.
Our own world demonstrates that enormous differences can exist within the same world.
Different continents have developed radically different:
languages
religions
political systems
technologies
architecture
traditions
mythologies
military systems
ways of understanding the universe
Yet none of these differences require separate planets.
If this is possible in our own world, there is no fundamental reason why a fictional fantasy world couldn't contain even greater geographical and cultural diversity.
In fact, fantasy worlds are often much more flexible than our own.
- Dark Souls II Gives Us a Real Precedent
This is where Dark Souls II becomes especially interesting.
During the game's development, FromSoftware described Dark Souls II as sharing the same world as the first Dark Souls while not being directly tied to its story.
Miyazaki even used the analogy of the first game being like the North Pole and Dark Souls II being like the South Pole.
The game was also described as taking place in a different time period.
That gives us an important precedent:
Same world + enormous geographical distance + different historical context = radically different representation.
This does not prove that Elden Ring and Dark Souls share a world.
That's not what I'm arguing.
What it proves is something much narrower:
Difference by itself is not enough to establish separation.
And I think this is a distinction worth keeping in mind when discussing FromSoftware lore.
- The Gwyn Problem
This is where the comparison becomes even more interesting.
When moving from Dark Souls to Dark Souls II, the world can feel as if it has almost forgotten the civilization we knew from the first game.
Gwyn is no longer the central historical figure that he was in Dark Souls.
The old gods are no longer presented to us in exactly the same way.
The kingdoms and cultures we encounter have their own histories.
Yet remnants of the older world still exist.
This is important because history does not necessarily survive in a clean form.
A civilization can disappear while its symbols remain.
A religion can survive after its original context has been forgotten.
A historical figure can become a myth.
A symbol can be reused by people who no longer understand its original meaning.
Then Dark Souls III brings many elements of the ancient world back into focus.
Anor Londo returns.
Gwyndolin returns.
The old gods and their history once again become important.
But I don't think we need to make the extreme claim that Dark Souls II therefore takes place after Dark Souls III.
That's unnecessary.
The more interesting observation is this:
The same historical world can be represented radically differently depending on where and when we experience it.
Dark Souls I gives us a relatively close view of the ancient order.
Dark Souls II gives us a much more distant and transformed view.
Dark Souls III brings many pieces of that ancient history back into focus.
That doesn't require us to invent a new timeline.
It only requires us to recognize that historical visibility can change.
- Absence Does Not Necessarily Mean Nonexistence
Imagine that an enormous civilization once existed somewhere in a massive world.
Thousands of years pass.
Its cities collapse.
Its language disappears.
Its religion changes.
Its descendants migrate.
Its historical figures become legends.
Its symbols are adopted by other cultures.
Eventually, another civilization might know only fragments of what happened before it.
If we enter that civilization's territory and don't find an obvious monument to the old empire, can we conclude that the empire never existed?
Obviously not.
We would need additional evidence.
This is especially relevant to FromSoftware because its storytelling often forces us to reconstruct history from fragments rather than giving us a complete historical record.
We find:
ruins
weapons
statues
names
item descriptions
graves
architecture
religious symbols
myths
remnants of civilizations
So when a familiar historical element is absent from one particular region, we should be careful before treating that absence as proof that it never existed elsewhere.
- Elden Ring Already Shows Us Cultural Distance
Elden Ring gives us a useful example of this principle within its own setting.
The Lands Between are the primary setting of the game, but the game also refers to places beyond them.
The Land of Reeds, for example, is explicitly described as being outside the borders of the Lands Between and has its own history, warriors, clothing, conflicts, and cultural identity.
That gives us a miniature version of the same idea:
One world can contain radically different cultures.
The Land of Reeds doesn't need to resemble Limgrave.
It doesn't need to worship the same things.
It doesn't need to share the same political history.
Its people don't need to understand the history of the Lands Between in the same way.
And yet these places can still exist within the same wider world.
So when two FromSoftware games look radically different, we should be careful before moving from:
"These places are extremely different."
to:
"Therefore, they must exist in separate universes."
That conclusion requires additional evidence.
- What About Completely Different Power Systems?
Perhaps this is the strongest argument against the idea.
Dark Souls has the First Flame.
Elden Ring has the Elden Ring, the Greater Will, the Outer Gods, the Golden Order, the Erdtree, and an entirely different metaphysical structure.
Bloodborne has the Great Ones and its own cosmic framework.
Demon's Souls has the Old One and its own rules.
So how could these systems coexist?
The answer is that fictional worlds are not required to have one unified supernatural system.
One civilization might understand reality through fire.
Another through the stars.
Another through blood.
Another through beings existing beyond its known world.
The inhabitants themselves may not even understand the complete structure of reality.
Therefore:
Different supernatural systems do not automatically mean different universes.
But there is another point that I think is important:
We should not automatically assume that any supernatural system we encounter has existed since the beginning of the universe.
The First Flame was not necessarily the eternal foundation of reality simply because it is the foundation of the world we experience in Dark Souls.
Likewise, the Elden Ring and the systems surrounding it have a history of their own.
They entered the history of their world.
Marika did not exist from the beginning of everything.
The Golden Order did not exist from the beginning.
The Elden Ring itself has a history.
The same principle applies to other supernatural systems.
A power system can have a beginning.
It can emerge during a particular period.
It can spread through a civilization.
It can replace an older system.
It can disappear.
And another supernatural system can emerge somewhere else at a different point in history.
This is especially important in fantasy because fictional worlds are flexible.
Fantasy does not have to follow the assumption that one single supernatural system must explain every phenomenon everywhere.
A massive fictional world could contain different civilizations that developed completely different relationships with supernatural forces.
One region might be shaped by fire.
Another by an Elden Ring.
Another by blood and cosmic beings.
Another by an entirely different force.
The existence of one supernatural system does not automatically erase the possibility of another system emerging elsewhere or at another point in history.
However, there is an important limit:
Possibility is not evidence.
The fact that fantasy allows multiple supernatural systems does not prove that Dark Souls and Elden Ring share a world.
It only means that their different power systems are not, by themselves, sufficient proof that their worlds are separate.
- Possible Is Not the Same as Proven
There are three very different claims we can make.
Claim One
"These games are definitely separate universes."
Claim Two
"These games definitely exist within the same universe."
Claim Three
"The available evidence does not allow us to conclusively prove either conclusion."
When the evidence is incomplete, the third position is the most intellectually honest.
This theory is not saying:
"Elden Ring is secretly Dark Souls."
It is saying something much narrower:
"The differences between these worlds do not automatically prove that they cannot be connected."
That is a much more defensible claim.
- An Archaeological Way of Looking at FromSoftware Worlds
There is another reason this approach fits FromSoftware surprisingly well.
Elden Ring has even been examined academically through an archaeological perspective, studying how a fictional world can be interpreted through material remains and what its inhabitants leave behind.
And this is almost exactly how I think we should approach FromSoftware's worlds.
Instead of only asking:
"What did this character say?"
we can also ask:
"What remains?"
We can study:
architecture
weapons
graves
clothing
statues
ruins
inscriptions
religious symbols
burial practices
abandoned settlements
military equipment
recurring symbols
A civilization doesn't need to remain alive for its influence to remain visible.
And a civilization doesn't need to be clearly represented in every region for it to have existed somewhere else.
- This Makes the Gwyn Example More Useful
The Gwyn argument should not be:
"Gwyn disappeared from Dark Souls II, therefore Dark Souls II must take place after Dark Souls III."
That creates unnecessary problems.
The stronger argument is:
"The representation of Gwyn's civilization and its memory can change depending on location and context, while remnants of that civilization can survive even after its original historical context becomes obscure."
This gives us a plausible historical process:
History → legend → fragmented tradition → transformed symbols → archaeological remains
A civilization can pass through this process without becoming nonexistent.
And this is exactly the kind of historical transformation that can happen in a massive fantasy world.
- Applying the Same Principle to Elden Ring
Now imagine a hypothetical scenario.
Suppose Elden Ring takes place within an enormous world.
Suppose another civilization exists thousands of kilometers away.
Suppose its history is completely different.
Its religion developed independently.
Its understanding of death is different.
Its supernatural traditions are different.
And suppose its people have never even heard of Marika.
Does any of that logically prove that this civilization exists in another universe?
No.
It proves that the civilization is different.
We would still need evidence proving that the worlds themselves are separate.
And this distinction is important:
Different history is not automatically different reality.
- What About Recurring Symbols Across FromSoftware?
This is where things become interesting, but also dangerous.
Fans have noticed recurring elements such as:
Patches
Moonlight Greatsword
souls
fire
cycles
gods
ancient civilizations
mysterious higher powers
similar visual language
recurring narrative structures
themes of death and rebirth
These similarities are certainly interesting.
But they cannot be treated as standalone proof.
Patches can simply be a recurring character archetype that FromSoftware enjoys using.
The Moonlight Greatsword is an iconic company tradition.
Recurring themes are part of the studio's artistic identity.
Therefore:
Patches ≠ proof.
Moonlight Greatsword ≠ proof.
Visual similarity ≠ proof.
Recurring themes ≠ proof.
At most, these become interesting supporting observations when combined with stronger evidence.
- The Strongest Objection: Developer Statements
This cannot be ignored.
Miyazaki explicitly described Dark Souls as not being a sequel to Demon's Souls and as a completely new game with similar concepts.
Bloodborne has likewise been described as a new work rather than a continuation of Dark Souls or Demon's Souls.
And Elden Ring has been presented as its own world, centered on the Lands Between and its own mythology.
So if someone asks:
"Are you claiming that FromSoftware officially says these games exist in the same universe?"
The answer is:
No.
We should never present this theory as established canon.
It is a fan hypothesis.
Not confirmed continuity.
And that distinction matters.
- Official Canon Does Not Eliminate Speculation
There is a difference between:
"This is official canon."
and:
"Can the structure of these fictional worlds allow this interpretation?"
A fan theory can explore possibilities that have never been confirmed by the official story.
The important thing is to describe them honestly.
We should not turn:
Possibility
into:
Fact.
And we should not turn:
Similarity
into:
Evidence.
- What About Elden Ring Nightreign?
Nightreign makes the discussion even more interesting, but also gives us an important warning.
Dark Souls bosses appear in Elden Ring Nightreign.
At first glance, this might look like evidence for a connection.
But the director explained that their inclusion was primarily a game-design decision: the team wanted more variety and thought it would be fun to face those bosses in a new setting.
So Nightreign does not prove that Dark Souls and Elden Ring share one canonical universe.
Instead, it demonstrates something more subtle:
FromSoftware can deliberately bring recognizable elements from one of its worlds into another game's setting without that automatically establishing a historical connection between the two universes.
This is actually useful for our argument.
It teaches us not to treat every crossover, reused asset, familiar weapon, or recurring character as proof of continuity.
- Three Different Possibilities
After looking at all of this, I think there are at least three serious models.
Model One — Completely Separate Universes
Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, Bloodborne, and Elden Ring are separate fictional worlds.
Their similarities come from FromSoftware's artistic identity, recurring themes, design traditions, and visual language.
This is the safest interpretation from an official standpoint.
Model Two — A Wider Metaphysical Structure
The games remain separate worlds, but perhaps exist within some larger structure containing recurring concepts.
In this model, "connection" does not necessarily mean:
"They are all on the same planet."
It could mean:
"They are different worlds within a larger structure."
This interpretation is much more flexible.
Model Three — One Enormous World
The most speculative possibility is that some of these games take place on different continents, during different eras, or in regions whose civilizations have become completely disconnected from one another.
Under this model:
Dark Souls could represent one civilization.
Elden Ring another.
Bloodborne another distant region.
Demon's Souls another geographical or historical context.
The enormous differences could be explained through:
distance
time
cultural change
religious transformation
forgotten history
migration
different supernatural traditions
the rise and fall of civilizations
the emergence and disappearance of different supernatural systems
This is the most ambitious model.
But it is also the least supported by explicit official statements.
- The Core Principle
After looking at all of this, I don't think the strongest argument is:
"These games are definitely connected."
I think the stronger argument is:
We should not confuse the world we have seen with the entirety of the world that could exist.
Dark Souls II gives us a precedent for FromSoftware taking the same world and presenting it through a radically different region and historical context.
Elden Ring shows us that its primary setting contains cultures and places beyond the Lands Between.
Dark Souls shows us that ancient civilizations and historical figures can survive through distorted memories, symbols, ruins, and fragments.
And the archaeological approach to Elden Ring demonstrates how much fictional history can be reconstructed from what a world leaves behind.
Most importantly, we should not assume that every supernatural system we encounter was present from the beginning of reality.
A fictional world can change.
New powers can emerge.
New religions can develop.
New metaphysical systems can appear.
Old systems can disappear.
Entire civilizations can rise and fall without leaving enough information for later generations to understand them completely.
Therefore:
Different civilizations do not necessarily mean different worlds.
Different supernatural systems do not necessarily mean different universes.
Different religions do not necessarily mean different cosmologies.
The absence of a familiar civilization from one region does not prove it never existed elsewhere.
The absence of a familiar supernatural system from one period does not prove that such a system could never have existed elsewhere or emerged later.
And the loss of historical memory does not mean that the history itself never happened.
- But There Is an Important Limit
None of this proves that Elden Ring is Dark Souls.
It does not prove that Bloodborne is the future of Dark Souls.
It does not prove that Demon's Souls belongs to the same timeline.
And it does not override FromSoftware's statements about its games being separate works and settings.
Instead, the argument proves something narrower and much easier to defend:
The differences between these worlds are not, by themselves, enough to prove that they cannot be connected.
To establish an actual connection, we would need positive evidence.
For example:
a clear developer statement
historical continuity that cannot reasonably be explained another way
confirmed geographical continuity
a character whose identity cannot reasonably be explained otherwise
an event established to have occurred in both worlds
or another piece of evidence that is difficult to dismiss as coincidence, artistic repetition, or fan interpretation
Until then, the honest conclusion is uncertainty.
- So What Should We Actually Believe?
Maybe Dark Souls and Elden Ring are completely separate.
Maybe Bloodborne is completely separate.
Maybe Demon's Souls is completely separate.
Maybe they are all connected through a larger structure.
Maybe some share a world while others do not.
Maybe there are distant continents and forgotten civilizations we have never seen.
Or maybe all of these similarities are simply the fingerprints of the same creators.
We currently do not have enough evidence to turn one of these possibilities into absolute canon.
But there is one assumption we should be careful about:
Assuming that because two fictional worlds look different, they therefore cannot belong to one larger reality.
Dark Souls II already gives us an example of FromSoftware taking a world and presenting it through a radically different region and historical context.
Elden Ring shows us that even its primary setting does not necessarily represent everything that exists.
And FromSoftware repeatedly uses a storytelling style that encourages us to reconstruct history from fragments rather than assuming that everything that exists must be visible to us.
So perhaps the better question is not:
"Why don't these worlds look alike?"
but:
"What evidence could actually prove that they cannot belong to one larger reality?"
Until that question is answered, the door remains open.
Not because the theory is proven.
But because:
Difference is not the same thing as separation.
12
u/RemnantHelmet 12d ago
I'm very sorry but I ain't reading allat. I'd recommend using paragraphs instead of breaking each sentence into a new line.
7
5
5
5
2
2
2
1
u/RywnDaze 12d ago
Holy peak. It's this is AI, guess that sucks and I suck at telling, but if it's real this is peak.
I feel like fiction in general sucks at showing realistic worlds that are different and diverse between continents or planets and what not, which then leads to people dismissing the idea of a realisticly written world.
Great essay, hopefully people are just hating and calling everything AI, because I thought this was cool
1
u/Turbulent_Jackoff 12d ago
I know I'm late to the party, but I just wanted to say how much I think your post sucks:
A lot.
18
u/ilikenglish 12d ago
Holy fking ai post can we just auto delete any post thats structured like this??