Why do we have a sequel?

[Rick25]

No Demon Souls 2
No Bloodborne 2
Not sure about Sekiro tho.


But then... Why did Dark Souls had a sequel? Im aware it was a great game back in the day (and still is to this day) and gave them a budget to make a sequel but so do the other games.
One could say that DS3 is the true sequel to DS1 since 2 was not directed by Miyazaki, therefore is not a true continuation since the ideas are different.

Think of it like Dragon ball GT for example, yes it tried to continue the story of Z and brought new stuff to the series but it wasnt like a true sequel until many years later the author decided to keep going with the series and created Super. (Whether is good or not idk, this is just to put an example to help express my idea).

[MadHamster]

Cause after Demons it was a huge critical and monetary success. Also Bandai Namco sponsored a trilogy. That is about it.

[Andy_M1919]

Miyazaki did sequels out of his obligation to fulfill his contracts. That's it.

We don't need Bloodborne 2, first covered everything enough. No need to forcefully stuff more lore into it.

Demon Souls is getting a remaster, that's good enough.

Sekiro's story has been concluded.

[MOSLEY]

Because Sony own the rights to Demon's Souls and Bloodborne.

[E.N.D_Aleck]

Could anyone gift me dragon ball xenoverse 2 plz

[Chetter Hummin]

Miyazaki clearly stated he does not like sequels

Originally posted by Fatty Tuna:

Miyazaki did sequels out of his obligation to fulfill his contracts. That's it.

We don't need Bloodborne 2, first covered everything enough. No need to forcefully stuff more lore into it.

Demon Souls is getting a remaster, that's good enough.

Sekiro's story has been concluded.

and Miyazaki clearly stated he does not like sequels

[☀️Beaxboy]

Originally posted by Rick23:

No Demon Souls 2
No Bloodborne 2
Not sure about Sekiro tho.


But then... Why did Dark Souls had a sequel? Im aware it was a great game back in the day (and still is to this day) and gave them a budget to make a sequel but so do the other games.
One could say that DS3 is the true sequel to DS1 since 2 was not directed by Miyazaki, therefore is not a true continuation since the ideas are different.

Think of it like Dragon ball GT for example, yes it tried to continue the story of Z and brought new stuff to the series but it wasnt like a true sequel until many years later the author decided to keep going with the series and created Super. (Whether is good or not idk, this is just to put an example to help express my idea).

Demon's souls is the history before Dark souls 1.
We have Demons souls -> DS 1 -> DS 3

Bloodborne doesn't share the same universe
Sekiro has nothing to do with Souls universe dude

[☀️Beaxboy]

"Time is kind of convoluted in Dark Souls 2. All three games are in the same physical universe, but the time between the games are hundreds if not thousands of years apart and only occasionally references each other."
-Reddit

[☀️Beaxboy]

Originally posted by ☀️Beaxboy:

"Time is kind of convoluted in Dark Souls 2. All three games are in the same physical universe, but the time between the games are hundreds if not thousands of years apart and only occasionally references each other."
-Reddit

Adn a lot of things change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmtFKlLe1jI

Take a look (Dark souls 1 video). It seems like the path that we use to go to ringed city, after killing demon prince.

[Sabaithal]

Originally posted by Black Iron Tarkus:

Miyazaki clearly stated he does not like sequels

Originally posted by Fatty Tuna:

Miyazaki did sequels out of his obligation to fulfill his contracts. That's it.

We don't need Bloodborne 2, first covered everything enough. No need to forcefully stuff more lore into it.

Demon Souls is getting a remaster, that's good enough.

Sekiro's story has been concluded.

and Miyazaki clearly stated he does not like sequels

Which is why I find it ironic that Ds2 distanced itself far more substantially from the first game compared to Ds3...