[b]!This video contains spoilers![/b]
I didn't actually have to say anything other than this critique hit spot on. A hard but fair review of Dark Souls II with comparisons to its predecessors.
I have to say: I was disappointed with Dark Souls II before I even watched the video. Don't get me wrong - Dark Souls II is a good game, but it's a bad Soul's game. To explain it; I acknowledge the Soul's games as an experience rather than just only a game. The feeling of despair, the feeling of accomplishment after beating a boss and the deep story behind the Soul games made them unique.
I still remember Oscar, Sif, Artorias, Ciaran, Sigmeyer, Solaire, Gwyn and my fair lady - hell, I know the name of every single Dark Souls character because everyone of them was memorable.
Sadly this is not the case with Dark Souls II. I don't even remember the name of crestfallen warrior 2.0 and the last time I played was yesterday.
After you have watched this video I just want to make a suggestion; spread the information - the points of this video are valid. I don't want you to whine on different forums but give constructive critisism on the right boards. It [i]might[/i] have an effect on future games of the Soul's series.
I will at least send one mail to the developers and publishers and open a topic about this on another board to at least have the feeling that I did something.
-
Honestly I think that dark souls II is a really good game, but what makes it different from dark souls is the fact that it feels more medieval. I don't know how to describe it. It's just that to me dark souls felt more mystical, and had more likable characters. The only character that I actually liked w as that female person that was turning halo. A lot of the other characters were basically "buy something or GTFO"