The Philosophy of Death in Souls-like Games: Challenge, Learning, and Limits
- Chris Kim
- Feb 5
- 4 min read
Author: Chris Kim
Souls-like games, though popularized by the massive success of Elden Ring, still remains a fundamentally challenging structure, tailored to a specific type of player. The high difficulty and repetitive deaths can serve as a source of immersion and achievement for some while acting as a barrier to entry for others. This essay reflects on my play style and perspective on death in these games and explores the design structures and psychological dynamics that shape the Souls-like genre.
My playstyle in Souls-like games is analytical and procedural.
On the first attempt, I focus on defense and observation without attacking, carefully analyzing the boss's patterns.
On the second try, I begin applying attacks or countermeasures strategically, based on what I observed earlier.
From the third attempt onward, I consciously anticipate danger patterns and refine my strategy.
By the fourth attempt, my strategy is usually solidified through repeated experience, and I often achieve victory at this stage. But if I fail at this moment, I repeat what I did in the third and fourth attempts.
After defeating a boss, I often engage in self-imposed challenge runs. Such as no healing, full parry, or limited gear, to achieve mastery and additional accomplishment.
Of course, persistence and maintaining emotional composure are key factors in these processes.
I don't perceive death as an emotional failure but as an integral part of the learning process. Mistakes are met with light humor, and I remain calm and become focused on the next attempt. This attitude of immersing in repeated attempts without emotional turbulence gradually enhances focus and responsiveness. Ultimately, this leads me to a highly immersive state of concentration, akin to the psychological concept of "Flow" proposed by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. Boss battles often fulfill the core Flow conditions. Balance between challenge and skill, clear goals, immediate feedback, and reduced self-consciousness arise from structural game design and the player's mindset.
Then why do some players struggle to enjoy or adapt to Souls-like games? The answer lies in differing psychological tendencies and play motivations. First, the genre imposes a heavy cognitive load due to the need to process complex patterns and manage multiple resources simultaneously. Some players may find this overwhelming, leading to delayed reactions or execution issues. Second, repeated failure can create emotional strain, triggering frustration or defensive attribution toward external factors. Third, a lack of patience or a tendency to view repetition as tedious can hinder adaptation. Fourth, some players may not be accustomed to metacognitive approaches, such as recognizing mistakes and turning them into learning opportunities. Lastly, motivational differences between players seeking mastery and those pursuing casual enjoyment can also impact compatibility with the genre. These are not skill issues but natural variations in cognitive and emotional disposition.
Although Souls-like games have gained mainstream attention post-Elden Ring, they are not experienced the same way by all players. Some may skip cutscenes and narrative elements or struggle to manage frustration after repeated failure. These tendencies can conflict with the genre's immersive and learning-driven design. As such, players with particular preferences may encounter steeper barriers to entry. A critical point of consideration for game designers.
While finding complete solutions may be challenging, system design offers several ways to lower the barrier. For example, reducing the fatigue of retrying bosses by placing respawn points just before the boss arena, offering phase-based practice modes or optional guides, and strengthening visual telegraphs for attack patterns can all aid player learning. Some games may also introduce early fixed pattern loops to give players predictable data on their first try. Providing post-death feedback outlining the causes of failure can help players revise their strategies. Additionally, dedicated training areas for practicing core mechanics like parrying, dodging, and timing can prepare players before challenging encounters.
Such approaches preserve the philosophy of death-as-learning while offering structural support to help players understand why they died and how to improve.
Beyond system design, UX and narrative strategies can also reduce the emotional sting of death. Replacing the typical "YOU DIED" message with alternatives like "Recorded" or "The flow has stopped" can soften the impact. Early tutorials could include NPCs or narrators who contextualize failure, e.g., "All beings here progress through repeated defeat", to establish death as a narrative expectation. UI elements and cutscenes can frame death not as failure but as part of the world's lore and the player's evolving role. Adjusting visual and audio cues after death can shift the player's response from frustration to calm re-engagement.
Souls-like games are not for everyone. Yet, for those who resonate with their structure and philosophy, they offer a uniquely deep and rewarding experience. As one of those players, I want to become a designer who respects and builds upon these structural values. And someday, I hope more players will appreciate the meaning behind the challenge and immersion these games provide.
[Essay Copyright]
The Philosophy of Death in Souls-like Games: Challenge, Learning, and Limits © 2025 Chris Kim. All text and analysis are original and copyrighted by the author.
[Image Copyright]
The images used in this post are copyrighted by their respective owners and are included here under the principles of fair use for the purposes of commentary, criticism, and educational analysis.
Dark Souls III and Elden Ring © FromSoftware / Bandai Namco
Lies of P © Neowiz / Round8 Studio
Collage created by Chris Kim for non-commercial, educational commentary. Images © their respective owners and used under fair use.
Comments