Back to the Future

You might've said "What the hell does this film have anything to do with Dark Souls II?" after reading the title. Well, I thought it would be a fitting title concerning the poll. Is the new game of our favourite series going to take place before the events of the original Dark Souls, or after? Prequel or Sequel folks!

Feel free to comment and talk about your reasoning behind your vote. I am really curious to see if the majority will guess it correctly or not.

oh, email I sent ENB:

What if it is post dark souls, and the primordial serpents are
manipulating beings into meeting the everlasting dragons and
transforming themselves into dragons in order to retcon the situation?
This would explain the prevalence of dragons in the trailer, and the
world seems much darker and devoid of archtrees (I can't remember the
actual name of the trees) which would signify that it is after Dark
Souls and not before. Further, the dead dragon skeleton gives the
feeling that the dragons are thought to be dead, and for some reason are
coming back.

This is based off a theory I wrote earlier and posted in the Dark
Souls Wiki forum, sorry, I don't exactly have the time to rewrite it, so
I'll just link you to the thread about it: https://soulswiki.forumotion.com/t5302-the-opening-everlasting-dragon-and-dragon-scales?highlight=everlasting+dragons

Our theories are alike on some points Buggy Virus. Let me write my own theory here:

After 'the Chosen Undead' kills Gwyn and leaves (Dark Lord ending), the world keeps falling more and more into the Abyss (or 'the Dark' , I am not sure if there is a difference between the two) but is not consumed by it instantly.

The Abyss keeps slowly spreading, which I guess would result in a lot of difference to the world, for example a new form of Dragons appear? We have never seen Dragons or Drakes with three eyes before. We have Kalameet with a single eye, and all the rest with two eyes. Might be that the Dragon Covenant succeeded (I don't know if they were even trying, but hey) at bringing the Dragons back to power. Maybe the type of Dragon we see is the spawn of the Arch-Dragon in Ash Lake, and their lesser cousins, the Drakes of Valley of Drakes? If you haven't looked closely, the helmet of the hero on the trailer has a pattern / figure on it. It looks to me like it is the picture of a person with a sword fighting a Dragon. So we can say for sure that the game is set in a time in which Dragons are of high influence.

My last theory for now is the main man in the trailer, the hero of this game (called Demonslayer and The Chosen Undead in the last two games) is trying to reach Lordran, where Kiln of the First Flame is located, to understand how the First Flame appeared. There has to be a reson right? EpicNameBro also has this theory that the character we play is trying to reach Lordran for some reason, but he thinks it is more likely to be a prequel.

Last but not least, even if it's a prequel, it can not be too far back. It needs to be set at a very close time, because, well, the Undead EXIST. As said so at the beginning of the trailer, 'You are the Undead.'

Well, I think your theory is similar to mine and they really don't conflict, more that yours is embellished.

But on one point, I don't think a sequel would need it to be necessary for the dark lord ending to have happened.

Because in the "good" ending, all the main character really does is add fuel for the bonfires to continue buring, likely the curse of the undead is still going on and that it would end was just a lie of the primordial serpents.

So whether either ending happened, the flame would still gradually diminish over time, more quickly in the "first flame ending" than in the "dark Lord" ending, but either way we would end up at the same product at different times.

But does it really matter if we would reach the same product at different times anyways? Due to time distortion.

Wow, I did not think of it like that. That is excellent. That way they can make a sequel and not ruin the ending of the first game.

Also, about the curse of the undead. I wonder who branded people with the darksign in the first place? I thought it was Gwyndolin, desperately trying to cling to the Age of Fire. So if the Chosen Undead killed Gwyndolin in Dark Souls, wouldn't that stop more undead from appearing anyway?

Djem wrote:Wow, I did not think of it like that. That is excellent. That way they can make a sequel and not ruin the ending of the first game.

Also, about the curse of the undead. I wonder who branded people with the darksign in the first place? I thought it was Gwyndolin, desperately trying to cling to the Age of Fire. So if the Chosen Undead killed Gwyndolin in Dark Souls, wouldn't that stop more undead from appearing anyway?

Darksign has been around since the pygmy, it seems to be a curse that somehow is related to humanity. Or rather, the dark soul.

Really? I am not sure, but I think it says at the intro of Dark Souls that the Darksign has started appearing only recently.