Eurogamer:
As someone who writes about video games for a living and plays them in their spare time, it's fairly important that I keep up with what's new and fresh and exciting in this industry. And in 2015, I've been doing a rubbish job of that. You see, this year something like 90 per cent of my gaming time has been split between only two games: Bloodborne and Monster Hunter 4: Ultimate. And why wouldn't it? They're both Essential titles, after all. They're also quite similar! Both are known for their steep difficulty, bombastic bosses, varied weapons, deep combat, and cooperative multiplayer. And yet, only Bloodborne has seen any kind of notable success in the west while Monster Hunter has famously struggled to replicate its craze from Japan.
The creator of the 60 fps patch for Bloodborne has been hit with a DMCA notice from publisher Sony after 3 years.
People will read this and assume "must be a bloodborne remake coming".
Unfortunately, more likely theyre just being d***s
A prominent former PlayStation executive has discussed the future of Bloodborne, stating that everyone is likely waiting on Miyazaki.
This has been stated many times. Everyone keeps blaming Sony but it is in fact up to when Miyazaki is 'Not Busy'.
Sony Interactive Entertainment's titles Bloodborne and The Last Guardian are now playable on the Steam Deck via emulation.
Great written comparison. Although many don't see the similarities, I for one am really drawn to both games in the same way. The article made the differences very clear with articulate strengths and weaknesses.
In the end, MH has a deeper history in gameplay (branching on bosses, weapon types, and farming) that it's built upon while Bloodborne has a very polished run through (with very unique and deep lovecraft atmosphere). Both MH and "Soul" games have been fundamental building blocks in a "boss hunting" genre that we may hopefully see more of.
More than 500 hours in Ultimate. The game is so amazing I actually took a week off from work when I first bought it.
Haven't played Bloodborne as I'm still invested on Ultimate but I personally find it hard switching to other games with similar gameplay than the Monster Hunter series. A bit naive way of thinking I know, but I guess my love for the series has made me pretty bias towards it.
They aren't really all that comparable other than to say that both games respect player intelligence and are more "hardcore" in terms of commitment. There is little handholding by either game.
Im elated that both games are as successful as they have been. It will hopefully show other developers and publishers that when you manage development costs and make a game that is intricate and detailed, you will be rewarded with sales.
Oh, and they are both awesome.
Why they don't make this for next-gen consoles I don't understand.
As a Monster Hunter fan I noticed quite a few similarities with Bloodborne straight away. Gameplay based around well timed dodges, invulnerability frames, timing your heals is important, big emphasis on boss fights, weapon upgrading. Both games can be very hard too.