10 Design Lessons Bethesda Can’t Ignore After Elden Ring

With The Elder Scrolls VI still on the horizon, it’s impossible to ignore how much Elden Ring reshaped expectations for open-world RPGs. From exploration and combat to storytelling and player freedom, FromSoftware proved that an open world doesn’t need to hold the player’s hand to be engaging. That doesn’t mean Bethesda should copy the Souls formula—but it does mean the bar has moved. This breakdown compares Elden Ring and The Elder Scrolls point by point, highlighting where their design philosophies diverge, where they overlap, and what TES VI can realistically adopt without losing its identity.

1. World Structure

Elden Ring:
A tightly curated open world built around intentional difficulty curves. Regions are visually distinct and mechanically hostile, often telling you “you’re not ready” without stopping you.

Elder Scrolls:
Traditionally flat difficulty scaling. Most areas are accessible early, which preserves freedom but dilutes tension.

What TES VI Should Take:
Soft-gated regions with real danger—no hard locks, just consequences.

---

2. Exploration Philosophy

Elden Ring:
Exploration is a gamble. You’re rewarded for curiosity but punished for recklessness. Secrets feel discovered, not handed out.

Elder Scrolls:
Exploration is comforting and predictable. You expect a cave, a chest, a quest marker.

What TES VI Should Take:
Unmarked discoveries, ambiguous rewards, and moments where walking away is the smart choice.

---

3. Combat Feel

Elden Ring:
High commitment. Animations matter, stamina matters, and enemy telegraphs are readable but unforgiving.

Elder Scrolls:
Loose and forgiving. Combat favors improvisation but lacks precision or consequence.

What TES VI Should Take:
Weight and clarity—not Souls difficulty, but Souls intentionality.

---

4. Enemy Design

Elden Ring:
Enemies have roles, behaviors, and patterns that teach through failure.

Elder Scrolls:
Enemies are mostly stat variations with similar behaviors.

What TES VI Should Take:
Behavioral diversity over numerical scaling.

---

5. Story Delivery

Elden Ring:
Minimalist, environmental, indirect. Players assemble the narrative themselves.

Elder Scrolls:
Dialogue-heavy, journal-driven, and explicit.

What TES VI Should Take:
Let the world speak first; dialogue should confirm, not explain.

---

6. Player Builds

Elden Ring:
Deep mechanical differentiation. Builds drastically change how the game is played.

Elder Scrolls:
Broad roleplay flexibility, but playstyles often converge.

What TES VI Should Take:
Sharper mechanical identities for builds—mages, thieves, and warriors should feel radically different.

---

7. Open-World Density

Elden Ring:
Dense, hand-crafted spaces. Few repeated layouts.

Elder Scrolls:
Large worlds with reused dungeon templates.

What TES VI Should Take:
Smaller map, higher density, zero filler.

---

8. Difficulty Scaling

Elden Ring:
Static world difficulty. The world doesn’t bend to you.

Elder Scrolls:
Aggressive level scaling ensures constant accessibility.

What TES VI Should Take:
Hybrid scaling—some areas scale, others stay lethal.

---

9. Guidance Systems

Elden Ring:
Sparse UI. Minimal hand-holding.

Elder Scrolls:
Quest markers and constant guidance.

What TES VI Should Take:
Optional guidance. Let players choose how lost they want to be.

---

10. Player Trust

Elden Ring:
Assumes the player is observant, patient, and capable.

Elder Scrolls:
Assumes the player needs constant direction.

What TES VI Should Take:
Trust the player—and let failure be part of learning.

---

Bottom Line

Elden Ring didn’t succeed because it was harder—it succeeded because it was deliberate. TES VI doesn’t need to become a Souls game, but it does need sharper systems, clearer consequences, and a world that doesn’t exist solely to flatter the player.

Comments