Board Thread:Lore Discussion/@comment-26331079-20150617060625/@comment-202.57.1.26-20151018135311

Here we go again...

@Tdarcangelis506, I think Link the Fire is not the 'good' ending, since that means you pretty much falls for Gwyn's/Gwyndolin's trap. Linking the Fire is what caused all these Undead Curse mess in the first place, and you linking the Fire means you not only unnaturally prolonged the Age of Fire, but also further condemning humanity to the effect of the Darksign. Though, I won't say the Dark Lord ending is the 'good' ending either, since whatever happens next would probably you being manipulated further by the Serpents, but at least, it's the 'better' ending because with the flames finally faded, the Darksign would disappear, no flames can be kindled by humanity, thus the humanity returned to their respective owner, and since you are so powerful after defeating Gwyn, means you had a chance to do something about the world now.

Now, on Dark Souls 3, I probably gonna get a lot of salts for this....

I think Dark Souls 3 are going to retcon some of the lore in Dark Souls 2. Why? This is because not only the lore and the story in Dark Souls 2 are weak (and personally, I think the notion of an 'endless cycle', 'take the throne' are too cliche for the Souls caliber. Heck, I think Dragon's Dogma pulled off those ideas way better than Dark Souls 2), but also because there are contradiction that, if we are to compare it to Dark Souls 1, is fatal and is the main reasons why Dark Souls 2 are weak in lore and story. Although, if you would accept certain perspective and look from there, Dark Souls 2 would make sense in this equation, though execute it poorly.

For example, even with the information we got so far for Dark Souls 3, now we can pretty much confirm that linking the Fire would left the perpetrator as a husk of their former selves, a Lord of Cinder. What's missing from Dark Souls 2? Lord(s) of Cinder. If there are no Lord(s) of Cinder present, that means the First Flame is currently dead. But, if the First Flame is dead, why are the bonfires still exist? And even can still be lit? What is the bonfires in the world of Dark Souls, if not an extension of the First Flame?

Also, you might disagree with me that linking the Fire is what caused all this Undead mess in the first place, since the Undead Curse still exist if we are to assume that First Flame is dead in Dark Souls 2 due to the absence of a Lord of Cinder, but I'm going to say to you that with SoftS, Aldia pretty much confirmed that linking the Fire DOES caused the Darksign to appear, thus, the 'First Sin'. The Curse still present even with the First Flame is currently unlit, can be taken as an extended punishment for humanity because humans perpetrated Gwyn's misdeed, thus, 'an endless cycle'. How and why the Kiln of the First Flame became Throne of Want, with the need of Giant's Kinship to open up its' gate and sit upon it, is still unclear to me.

But now, Dark Souls 3 are going to focus on this figure(s), the Lord(s) of Cinder. I personally think this move by Miyazaki, of focusing on Lord(s) of Cinder, is to retcon the lore of Dark Souls 2, or at least, correct it, since in the trailers we do see (possibly) one of the three Crowns and Alsanna. Not yet hyped because currently my hype is for Bloodborne's the Old Hunters, but still excited for 2016!