Digitally Downloaded writes: "One of the big announcements in the games industry in recent weeks has got to be the existence of Dark Souls II. A sequel to a game that has got to have one of the most fanatical and loyal fan bases, Dark Souls II is promising more of the same from the first game. When the first game was almost unique in its genius level design and new-age difficulty, the promise of more of the same is something to get excited about.
But."
50°
110°
130°
240°
Ad 
40°
10°
30°
30°
40°
30°
Look dude, the only reason Darks souls got it's name is because it was multiplat instead of Ps3(demons souls)/ Dark souls was Demons souls 2.
Final Fantasy does the same thing. They aren't sequels, just...same series.
Also, I hope you are proven incorrect. Lets hope you are for the sake of this amazing series.
It was a master stroke of genius From Software had going on by naming each Souls game differently and essentially creating a new mythology with each. I certainly hope this is the case with Dark Souls 2, but the name implies otherwise.
You are right about Final Fantasy being different each time, but that series really is rare, almost unique, in terms of how sequels are handled.
As I mentioned in the article - I'm certainly not complaining about the game's existence, just voicing my concerns that there's some challenges that this one is going to face to have the same impact as the other two Souls games.
And I absolutely agree. I really hope these concerns are proven unfounded. I would hate for this series to lose any of its quality and integrity.
I thought Dark Souls had enough tidbits of lore that could have made for a more cohesive, fleshed out story, so I'm excited about this change. I'd like to see a better (hopefully still highly user driven) plot. NPCs that don't just stand there and attack.
Heck, if they end up with an Elder Scrolls/ Dark Souls hybrid with all their wacky lore and cool Asian pseudo-medieval aesthetic, THAT will be the only game I ever need.
Not only have I heard of Demon's Souls, but I played it multiple times. I'll even one-up you. Demon's Souls wasn't the first game in the franchise. It was a spiritual sequel to the King's Field games. Of which there are four.
Have you played those?
The reason for the name change between Demons' Souls & Dark Souls is because Sony actually owns the rights to Demons' Souls. It was a necessary change to allow the title to go multi-platform.
If not for that, it would have been Demons' Souls II (& with this title, III). I don't think you have anything to worry about. FromSoftware are incredible.
I thought it looked more like a Dragon Age 3 trailer than Dark Souls.
Wouldve loved to have seen gameplay.. even 5seconds, BUT that wouldve made me unhealthily crave more lol.
Truth is.. the ONLY thing that has me worried is their want to draw in a casual audience/new crowd.
There is solace and hope in the Souls series for the hardcore gamer..
I hope the casuals dont ruin this.
This game is going to destroy the best franchise to come along in 20 years. The difficulty and brain candy is what makes the games fun. The player must critically think, not read tutorials for every single action like today's games. Souls games give players a true sense of accomplishment.
They're going to gimp this game to a level which will render it unrecognizable Im afraid.
Plz for the love of all that is holy...........let it go. Just leave it the way it is.
May thine strength help the world be mended