It started with Demon's Souls, and ended with Dark Souls 1. Dark Souls 2 is a derived, watered-down version of the 'Souls' experience. Therefore it is not deserving of the name, and should not be considered a Souls game. It is a cool game in its own right though.
All the call backs and items from DkS1 feel like they're tacked on. DkS2 is a great game, but it would've benefited more from being D____ Souls instead of staying with the existing lore. It feels like it limits things.
Disney Souls, because it's super cartoony, NPC's are super friendly and helpful, and there is no blood or violence like the other games that would scare the little kiddies. This game should be called Disney Souls.
It's still a good game and better than most on the market but the game world is kind of a letdown, soundtrack, atmosphere and exploration are quite poor in comparison to the previous game, only places that were reasonable in terms of exploration were the FotFG and the Bastille, this game should've been made smaller with a lot more attention to detail, same goes for bosses, sometimes less is more.
This. Personally I played dks1 for hundreds of hours and much of it was honestly just reading descriptions and plain replaying and visiting areas in the game just to look at it. Now Dark Souls wasn't the best-looking game, but it was interesting and decent enough to want to look at even with an overly used bloom effect that you'd eventually love. I play Dark Souls 2 for the pvp, but the only reason to keep playing pve is to further the pvp aspect or just the new surprises in ng+ that were almost really cool if ng had been cool and original itself. Personally if the fact this game's personality and atmosphere sucking is addressed publicly, and promised to be restored in a souls sequel with a double disc install type deal(For the purpose of having dark souls 1 attention to detail with dark souls 2 content+world environment Size) I would have no problems buying it. I think I'll go make a thread about that now.