Dark Souls and Its Parallels to Capitalisim in 2020

[fOx]

Hmm, not really sure I agree with that. It's pretty clear that hundreds of thousands of years (at least) have passed between DS1 & 3, for instance, but the impact of stuff from DS1 is still acutely felt in DS3, and some of the entities are even still around.

Plus, the sheer weight of all the suffering on display in the series... I really doubt the point of the series is to say, "this doesn't matter". It's more to do with the folly of keeping a painful, malfunctioning system going long past its natural endpoint.

That is a small part of it, but you're missing the forest for the trees. Gwyn and Gwyndolin was consumed by their desire to maintain their power and authority, and to preserve the society they had built. Seeth was consumed by his fear of death. Big Hat Logan wanted knowledge. Solaire was searching for a purpose. Siegmeyer merely desired to go on a journey. You have a large host of characters, with diverse desires. Some are grand, and some are extremely humble. And yet, regardless of their desires, they all come to the same end. If there is any freedom from this, it is only to free yourself of earthly desires and attachments. Because, inevitably, everyone and everything will be forgotten. Most of the characters in DS2 aren't aware of what happened in DS1. And the world of DS3 is a dreamlike landscape where people, places, and time periods are all smacked together as time begins to break down.

Honestly, people here are over analyzing the series. The games are very inconsistent and even contradictory with their lore, and I don't think the creators thought much about how the games fit with one another. The themes of death and decay are the only things that are actually consistent between the different titles.

 

[Silvanus]

That is a small part of it, but you're missing the forest for the trees. Gwyn and Gwyndolin was consumed by their desire to maintain their power and authority, and to preserve the society they had built. Seeth was consumed by his fear of death. Big Hat Logan wanted knowledge. Solaire was searching for a purpose. Siegmeyer merely desired to go on a journey. You have a large host of characters, with diverse desires. Some are grand, and some are extremely humble. And yet, regardless of their desires, they all come to the same end. If there is any freedom from this, it is only to free yourself of earthly desires and attachments. Because, inevitably, everyone and everything will be forgotten. Most of the characters in DS2 aren't aware of what happened in DS1. And the world of DS3 is a dreamlike landscape where people, places, and time periods are all smacked together as time begins to break down.

But Gwyn, Gwyndolin, Logan and Seath aren't forgotten. They all have enormous impacts, are still felt and remembered in DS3. Gwyndolin is even still alive (or at least was alive until very shortly before the DS3 story begins).

Sure, the wants and needs of most of the human/undead characters have become unimportant by the time of DS2 & DS3, but I'd hardly call it a major theme. It's a society many thousands of years into the future; that's inevitable and expected. The game focuses more on the unwise efforts at perpetuation than anything else.

After all, had the fire remained unlinked at the end of DS1, the world as we knew it would have died much, much earlier. Many hundreds or thousands of years. The linking of the fire succeeded in keeping that world going-- but devolved it into a miserable shadow of its former self.

 

[Dalisclock]

That made me groan, honestly. The politics in dark souls was self evident, but the point being made was how insignificant it is in the face of the crushing expanse of time. The things that seem so important now will be forgotten in a thousand years. Humanity will not exist in a million. Or in the literal eternity that exists after. In the face of that, everyones problems seem petty. Jim, or others don't have to agree with that, but its clearly the central theme of dark souls. Jims video just makes it seem like he completely missed the point.

I thought he was doing it on a lark, honestly, just to prove a point that ANYTHING can be considering political. Not dissimilar to that time he did an "OBJECTIVE" review of Final Fantasy 13, which was bland as shit because it couldn't have anything subjective in it.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

Jim Sterling did something like this a year ago thought experiment, to prove any game could be considered political.


The comments section is so full of Salt I could cure a pig with it.

"Get your politics out of my Dark Souls!"
"Get your Dark Souls out of my Politics!"

The way Jim accurately tackles the subject of the video is revealing in a way that kinda reminds me of how the song, Born In the USA’s meaning has been infamously misinterpreted through the years.

 

[fOx]

But Gwyn, Gwyndolin, Logan and Seath aren't forgotten. They all have enormous impacts, are still felt and remembered in DS3. Gwyndolin is even still alive (or at least was alive until very shortly before the DS3 story begins).

Sure, the wants and needs of most of the human/undead characters have become unimportant by the time of DS2 & DS3, but I'd hardly call it a major theme. It's a society many thousands of years into the future; that's inevitable and expected. The game focuses more on the unwise efforts at perpetuation than anything else.

After all, had the fire remained unlinked at the end of DS1, the world as we knew it would have died much, much earlier. Many hundreds or thousands of years. The linking of the fire succeeded in keeping that world going-- but devolved it into a miserable shadow of its former self.

No, they're mostly forgotten by the time ds2 rolls around. people remember them in 3 because time and space is breaking down, so dofferent eras are being thrown together in a kind of weird, surreal dreamscape. But that's besides the point. the fact remains that all three games still exist within the era of fire. it hasn't even ended yet. once you get past that, it will be forgotten more and more.

I thought he was doing it on a lark, honestly, just to prove a point that ANYTHING can be considering political. Not dissimilar to that time he did an "OBJECTIVE" review of Final Fantasy 13, which was bland as shit because it couldn't have anything subjective in it.

I got that impression too, I just disagree with his premise that everything is, or can be, political. Dark souls is an easy example, because there is actually a lot of politics in it. which was kind of his point. but a lot of people carry that train of thought too far. what's political about a game of solitaire, for instance? nothing really. there isn't even competition. you can try and argue that the lack of a political statement is an endorsement of the status quo, but thats not really true either. there were times in my life where i was apolitical, not because i supported the status quo, but because my mental health literally wouldn't let me focus on it. that didn't mean i supported the status quo. the status quo was actively working against me. and just because one aspect of my life was apolotical, doesn't mean another part isn't. I just find his strain of logic flawed.

 

[deleted20220709]

DELETED

 

[Silvanus]

No, they're mostly forgotten by the time ds2 rolls around. people remember them in 3 because time and space is breaking down, so dofferent eras are being thrown together in a kind of weird, surreal dreamscape.

I don't think that's the reason at all. They're not recognised in DS2 because Drangleic is an entirely different locale. Much of DS3 overlaps geographically with DS1, so their presence is felt even millennia later. As I mentioned, one of them is even still alive.

But that's besides the point. the fact remains that all three games still exist within the era of fire. it hasn't even ended yet. once you get past that, it will be forgotten more and more.

Well, sure, but the Age of Fire lasted an exceptionally long time, encompassing the entirety of all three games, and a longer timespan than most fantasy universes. The theme is the folly of dragging it on. I really thought Ashes of Ariandel made that abundantly clear:

When the world rots, we set it afire. For the sake of the next world. It's the one thing we do right, unlike those fools on the outside.

 

[fOx]

I don't think that's the reason at all. They're not recognised in DS2 because Drangleic is an entirely different locale. Much of DS3 overlaps geographically with DS1, so their presence is felt even millennia later. As I mentioned, one of them is even still alive.



Well, sure, but the Age of Fire lasted an exceptionally long time, encompassing the entirety of all three games, and a longer timespan than most fantasy universes. The theme is the folly of dragging it on. I really thought Ashes of Ariandel made that abundantly clear:

Geography has nothing to do with why people forgot about ds1. Gwyn's behavior impacted the whole world, not just one continent. And its implies that drangleic may be the same geographical area as DS1. We even get to see ornsteins black phantom. Even if that's not the case, or it was changed later, it makes no sense that the people of drangleic would be unaware of ds1 due to geographic location.

DS3 doesn't "overlap" with ds1 at all. The map is literally different times and places smashed together. We see anor londo, the demon ruins, and the earthen peak all mixed together. We see the pyromancy sisters and drangleic armor from 2, and multiple items from 1, together in the same locations, despite many of these countries being seperated by time, and being continents apart. You yourself said so. And yet, geographically, they're right next to one another.

You're not wrong about the theme of dragging things on, but there's more to it then that. The time span of the age of fire may be long, but within the universe of dark souls, it's not that exceptional. Who onows how long the age of dragons lasted. Endless eons. And who knows what may have existed before that? By the time the age of darkness ends, the dragons probably won't even be a faint memory. That's the point being made.

 

[Silvanus]

Geography has nothing to do with why people forgot about ds1. Gwyn's behavior impacted the whole world, not just one continent. And its implies that drangleic may be the same geographical area as DS1. We even get to see ornsteins black phantom. Even if that's not the case, or it was changed later, it makes no sense that the people of drangleic would be unaware of ds1 due to geographic location.

DS3 doesn't "overlap" with ds1 at all. The map is literally different times and places smashed together. We see anor londo, the demon ruins, and the earthen peak all mixed together. We see the pyromancy sisters and drangleic armor from 2, and multiple items from 1, together in the same locations, despite many of these countries being seperated by time, and being continents apart. You yourself said so. And yet, geographically, they're right next to one another.

Drangleic is certainly not the same geographic area as DS1; Ornstein's phantom simply travelled, as phantoms frequently do (Kirk travels a huge amount), just as he travelled to Archdragon Peak.

In Lothric, we only see areas from DS1 (Anor Londo, the Demon Ruins). Earthen Peak and the Desert Pyromancers appear only in the time-and-space-warped reality surrounding the Kiln of the First Flame. That area truly is all different times and places smashed together; the majority of the DS3 map isn't that far-gone.

Surely you've noticed that from the Kiln, you can literally see mountains of cities crushing into one another in the background. The rest of the DS3 map is nothing like that. Sure, reality will eventually come together like that, but it yet maintains some coherence in Lothric.

You're not wrong about the theme of dragging things on, but there's more to it then that. The time span of the age of fire may be long, but within the universe of dark souls, it's not that exceptional. Who onows how long the age of dragons lasted. Endless eons. And who knows what may have existed before that? By the time the age of darkness ends, the dragons probably won't even be a faint memory. That's the point being made.

But they never make that point. The dragons are not forgotten. References to them are everywhere, in all three games, though their age is long since passed.

 

[Dalisclock]

In Lothric, we only see areas from DS1 (Anor Londo, the Demon Ruins). Earthen Peak and the Desert Pyromancers appear only in the time-and-space-warped reality surrounding the Kiln of the First Flame. That area truly is all different times and places smashed together; the majority of the DS3 map isn't that far-gone.

Small point of contention: We see one of the giant corpses turned into a tree outside of fire-link shrine and Yorhm himself is one of the DS2 style giants. So there are a few references to DS2, just not nearly as many as DS1.

More debatable, but there's a reference that Prince Lothic fell prey to a Scholar who caused him to doubt the linking of the flame. One could make the argument that was Aldia being referred to.

 

[Silvanus]

Small point of contention: We see one of the giant corpses turned into a tree outside of fire-link shrine and Yorhm himself is one of the DS2 style giants. So there are a few references to DS2, just not nearly as many as DS1.

Are you sure about Yhorm? I never got the impression he was of the same race of giants as appear in DS2; his bodily proportions are different, and you can see his eyes, indicating he has a face under the shadows.

 

[Dalisclock]

Are you sure about Yhorm? I never got the impression he was of the same race of giants as appear in DS2; his bodily proportions are different, and you can see his eyes, indicating he has a face under the shadows.

I thought Yhorm was one of those DS2 faceless giants. At least in the vids I've seen.

I'll take another look but he's also mentioned as being descended from a conqueror and that would fit with the DS2 giants to some degree. I haven't gotten to his fight yet so I'll be sure to keep an eye out.

 

[BrawlMan]

'Dark Souls' Is A Game About Living Under Capitalism In 2020

If we truly are living in the end-times, From Software's bleak fantasy world should inspire us to transcend our grim reality and forge a new path.

www.vice.com

Interesting or at least original take on it. Just have to wonder what it would take for such a broad swath of people to band together in good times vs just bad. Going beyond market systems, I recall reading the two party (being real, the others have never amounted to much) political system was always meant to divide and conquer.

Sounds like just another pretentious asshole trying to come off as a profound intellectual. One of the most dumbest takes I have ever seen.

 

[Shadyside]

'Dark Souls' Is A Game About Living Under Capitalism In 2020

If we truly are living in the end-times, From Software's bleak fantasy world should inspire us to transcend our grim reality and forge a new path.

www.vice.com

Interesting or at least original take on it. Just have to wonder what it would take for such a broad swath of people to band together in good times vs just bad. Going beyond market systems, I recall reading the two party (being real, the others have never amounted to much) political system was always meant to divide and conquer.

Being used and discarded by an upper class is almost universal throughout many cultures, stories, and economic ideologies. Hierarchy will inevitably make everyone into a parasite and a vulture in some way shape or form.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

"If you love X so much, why don't you marry it!"

I think I remember arguments of this maturity and depth in primary school.

Being real though, isn’t that almost entirely the point of immigration? When one place isn’t working out for someone, go somewhere else they think will be better for them?

Another twist to this would be when someone does complain about some perceived negative aspect of society (like for instance a classic would be a once quiet, peaceful neighborhood that now has house parties or cars blasting loud music at all hours), and they’re responded to with a, “Well if you don’t like it then leave!”

An equally correct rebuttal could be, “Why should I if I’m not a part of the problem? I’m just pointing out what is.”

Catch, meet 22.

 

[Silvanus]

Being real though, isn’t that almost entirely the point of immigration? When one place isn’t working out for someone, go somewhere else they think will be better for them?

Well, sure, but relocating to another country is an enormous and costly upheaval. It might involve leaving behind one's friends, family & career, as well as childhood memories. People don't tend to do it unless they're really committed. The cost alone would make be prohibitive to a lot of people.

Besides, having criticisms for one's current country and/or praise for the way another country is run politically doesn't mean you'd prefer to live there. You might prefer your own country culturally, or in terms of climate or food.

It's just an inane response to say that if someone has spoken positively about another country's current political situation, they might as well move there.

Another twist to this would be when someone does complain about some perceived negative aspect of society (like for instance a classic would be a once quiet, peaceful neighborhood that now has house parties or cars blasting loud music at all hours), and they’re responded to with a, “Well if you don’t like it then leave!”

An equally correct rebuttal could be, “Why should I if I’m not a part of the problem? I’m just pointing out what is.”

Catch, meet 22.

Not sure how that's a catch 22; that precisely fits what I'm saying.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

Well, sure, but relocating to another country is an enormous and costly upheaval. It might involve leaving behind one's friends, family & career, as well as childhood memories. People don't tend to do it unless they're really committed. The cost alone would make be prohibitive to a lot of people.

Besides, having criticisms for one's current country and/or praise for the way another country is run politically doesn't mean you'd prefer to live there. You might prefer your own country culturally, or in terms of climate or food.

It's just an inane response to say that if someone has spoken positively about another country's current political situation, they might as well move there.



Not sure how that's a catch 22; that precisely fits what I'm saying.

Meaning the overarching issue often seems like a viscous cycle.

 

[fOx]

Drangleic is certainly not the same geographic area as DS1; Ornstein's phantom simply travelled, as phantoms frequently do (Kirk travels a huge amount), just as he travelled to Archdragon Peak.

In Lothric, we only see areas from DS1 (Anor Londo, the Demon Ruins). Earthen Peak and the Desert Pyromancers appear only in the time-and-space-warped reality surrounding the Kiln of the First Flame. That area truly is all different times and places smashed together; the majority of the DS3 map isn't that far-gone.

Surely you've noticed that from the Kiln, you can literally see mountains of cities crushing into one another in the background. The rest of the DS3 map is nothing like that. Sure, reality will eventually come together like that, but it yet maintains some coherence in Lothric.



But they never make that point. The dragons are not forgotten. References to them are everywhere, in all three games, though their age is long since passed.

That still doesn't make any sense. The entire map is altered, in terms of time and space. The locations aren't just different, they're completely geographically warped, with different kingdoms from different era's all connected. It's basically a dreamscape.

The rest of it is just plotholes. I didn't want to get into ds3 too much for this reason. Why do you find ornsteins armor in archdragon peak, despite killing him and collecting his soul in ds1, and fighting his spirit in 2? Because the writing in DS3 is atrocious, and contradicts what happened in the other games.

Honestly, the theme of inevitable destruction, loss, and death is about the only thing that's consistent.

 

[Silvanus]

That still doesn't make any sense. The entire map is altered, in terms of time and space. The locations aren't just different, they're completely geographically warped, with different kingdoms from different era's all connected. It's basically a dreamscape.

Different kingdoms from different eras are only smashed together around the kiln of the first flame, and the Ringed City DLC, which is not Lothric proper. Its very explicitly distinct, as made clear by the Firelink Shrine becoming an alternate version of itself.

The rest of it is just plotholes. I didn't want to get into ds3 too much for this reason. Why do you find ornsteins armor in archdragon peak, despite killing him and collecting his soul in ds1, and fighting his spirit in 2? Because the writing in DS3 is atrocious, and contradicts what happened in the other games.

The most common stated explanation is that the Ornstein you fight in DS1 is an illusion conjured by Gwyndolin, just like the Sentinels. This is supported by DS3 stating that Smough alone was the last knight to stand in defence of Anor Londo.

You find Ornstein's armour in Archdragon Peak because he travelled there to seek Gwyn's son. Its possible that the "Dragonslayer" you battle in DS2 is someone using his armour, just as its stated that Havel's followers also use his armour. Its also possible that Ornstein is undead, and returns from death after DS2 (just like you do) to resume his travels.

I mean, its vague as all hell, but plausible explanations exist.

 

[Dalisclock]

The most common stated explanation is that the Ornstein you fight in DS1 is an illusion conjured by Gwyndolin, just like the Sentinels. This is supported by DS3 stating that Smough alone was the last knight to stand in defence of Anor Londo.

You find Ornstein's armour in Archdragon Peak because he travelled there to seek Gwyn's son. Its possible that the "Dragonslayer" you battle in DS2 is someone using his armour, just as its stated that Havel's followers also use his armour. Its also possible that Ornstein is undead, and returns from death after DS2 (just like you do) to resume his travels.

I mean, its vague as all hell, but plausible explanations exist.

I do have issues with the O+S thing. Aside from the fact they hit VERY hard to just be illusions, the one you kill last drops a soul just like all the other bosses(and which can be crafted). That and they give you the cutscene of O paying respect to S or S smashing O with a hammer depending on which order you kill them. That seems like a lot of effort for an Illusion, which implies as far as DS1 was concerned, it was real.

So you can either read DS3 O+S thing as either a retcon, fanservice, or Time is really convoluted in Lothic, to the point that Anor Londo was pulled to Lothic and somehow both O+S were as well before their demise to the Chosen Undead. It wouldn't be the first time characters from earlier games somehow made ti all the way to 3 for bizarre reasons.

Or you could also just ignore it, since it doesn't really connect to much. You never see any of these events and Smough being there or not made no difference at all. I'll admit the idea of O+S being illusions rubs me the wrong way a bit because beaten the duo is meant to be a moment of achievement for anyone who got that far in DS1 and to play it off as not being real feels cheap.