Western players might be missing the Buddhist themes in FromSoftware's Dark Souls series

I’ve been thinking about how the Dark Souls games have deep Buddhist philosophy that many Western fans don’t notice.

Take Gwyn for example. His refusal to let go of power and throwing himself into the First Flame shows the Buddhist concept of attachment leading to suffering. He creates an endless cycle of rebirth and pain because he can’t accept that his age should end naturally.

The whole flame cycle itself mirrors Buddhist ideas about samsara. Someone links the fire, it fades, another person does it again. This creates perpetual suffering instead of accepting natural change.

The word ‘souls’ in the game probably doesn’t mean what English speakers think. In Asian languages, similar words often mean consciousness or awareness rather than a spiritual essence. When you collect souls from enemies, you’re gaining consciousness energy, not actual individual spirits.

Other Buddhist elements include fog representing unclear thinking (common in Japanese media), Aldia as an asura figure with multiple faces and flames, and the primordial serpents looking like Mara, the demon who tempted Buddha.

What’s really telling is the absence of Christian themes. No emphasis on redemption, forgiveness, or traditional Western moral concepts. This makes sense since Buddhism is much more prevalent in Japan than Christianity.

Many fans know every item description and lore detail but miss these philosophical foundations. It’s unfortunate because recognizing the Buddhist influence adds so much depth to understanding what FromSoftware was actually trying to convey about cycles, attachment, and acceptance.

That whole thing about souls meaning consciousness instead of spirits really clicked for me. Changes how I think about the whole upgrade system too.

That idea about NPCs going hollow really highlights the suffering tied to attachment. It’s like they can’t let go of their purpose or identity.

I love how this reframes the whole ending debate. People argue endlessly about which ending is ‘correct’ but if you look at it through this Buddhist perspective, maybe the point is that there isn’t a right choice. The Age of Fire and Age of Dark are both just more attachment to specific outcomes. The real wisdom would be accepting impermanence itself, which none of the endings really offer.

The fog gates always felt weird to me until you mentioned the unclear thinking thing. Makes way more sense now.

This is really interesting stuff. I always wondered why the endings felt so different from typical Western fantasy where you usually get some kind of clear good vs evil resolution. The Buddhist lens explains why even the ‘good’ endings in Dark Souls feel bittersweet or temporary. You’re not really saving the world, you’re just perpetuating another cycle.

Never thought about the attachment angle with Gwyn but that makes total sense. The guy literally burned himself alive rather than let his era end naturally.