With three main entries, a massive influence on game design, and a legacy that helped shape an entire genre, the Dark Souls franchise has always been praised for its world design, maybe in more ways than one.

But does that actually make any of its games open world?

When people ask which entry in the series qualifies, the short answer is simple: none of them are.

At least, that is if we are not counting Elden Ring, which clearly embraces a full open-world design. The Dark Souls trilogy takes a very different approach, one that sits somewhere between interconnected design and structured progression.

Dark Souls 1: The Strongest Case

Dark Souls is often brought up as the closest the series gets to an open world. Its map is deeply interconnected, filled with shortcuts, vertical layering, and cleverly designed pathways that loop back into previously explored areas.

This creates a strong sense of spatial awareness and continuity. As you progress, you recontextualize earlier areas. Unlocking a shortcut doesn’t just save time, it reinforces the feeling that the world is physically connected in a believable way.

However, it still feels more like a carefully constructed battlefield than a truly open world. Progression is guided through difficulty curves, key item requirements, and intentional level gating. While exploration is rewarding and sometimes flexible, it is not entirely freeform. 

Because of that, it fits best as a semi open-world game, albeit one of the strongest examples of that category.

Dark Souls 2: Hub-Based Structure

Dark Souls II shifts toward a more traditional hub-based design. The coastal town of Majula serves as a central anchor point that players repeatedly return to throughout the game.

From this hub, multiple branching paths extend outward into different regions. This gives players a degree of choice in how they approach progression, especially early on, where several areas can be tackled in varying orders.

However, the world itself is less interconnected compared to the first game. Instead of one cohesive map that folds into itself, the game feels more like a collection of distinct zones linked through Majula. Transitions between areas can sometimes feel abrupt or loosely connected.

This structure clearly places it in the category of a hub-based semi open-world game, where freedom exists in choice of direction, but not in a seamless world layout.

Dark Souls 3: A Step Toward Linearity

With Dark Souls III, the series moves even further away from open-ended design. While there are still occasional shortcuts and minor interconnections, they are far more limited in scope and impact.

Progression is heavily directed, guiding players along a more fixed path with fewer meaningful branches or optional routes. The game focuses more on pacing, spectacle, and tightly designed encounters rather than exploration freedom.

There are moments where you can diverge slightly or revisit areas, but these rarely change the overall structure in a significant way. As a result, the sense of carving your own path is reduced compared to earlier entries.

Because of this, it arguably leans closer to a linear structure than even a semi open-world one, making it the most straightforward and guided experience in the trilogy.

So Close Yet So Far

This series of hardcore, or shall I say “souls”, games one of the Dark Souls games qualify as full open world, and I heavily emphasize on the full part of it.

Dark Souls 1 comes closest with its interconnected design, Dark Souls 2 leans into hub-based exploration, and Dark Souls 3 becomes largely linear. They all offer strong world design, but not the level of freedom or seamless exploration that defines the open-world genre.

If anything, Dark Souls 1 and 2 made a good attempt at being open world, which they do at the very least qualify as semi-open world, but the backwards move on the 3rd entry remains to be questionable.