@GregoryBastards:Actually, the opposite might happen too. It took about six months for that new Souls high to wear off when Dark Souls 2 first hit. Most critics and most players wouldn't stop praising it. Meanwhile, those with a more critical eye realized how much of a step back it was from the previous two games, and how it was a technical mess.

@Fia1:This is exactly what I was thinking too. This is the third "Dark Souls" game and the fifth that falls under the "Souls" umbrella in general since 2009. It would be extremely odd to jump into the series your first time with this game. The majority of the people complaining about this review are coming at it like the game should be given a review based in a vacuum, where the previous games from the same developer that follow the same blueprint do not exist. Almost no review ever works like that.

There's also a big difference between being a fan of the games and being a fanboy. Fanboys are the absolute worst when it comes to any type of criticism at all.

@TheZeroPercent:No, they actually didn't. 8/10 is actually the average, and some are even giving it a 7/10.

@Hellcanwait:Dark Souls 2 was also a lot longer. Many people have finished this game in 25 hours or less, so no, 40 isn't really a short amount of time, especially if you've played the previous games. The only other Souls game this is longer than is Demon's.

@alcohollol: So you created an account just to reply to a review you didn't like, despite the fact that the review is an opinion? He also didn't say what you claimed he said about the last bosses, he said that about a handful of the other enemies and bosses. You obviously didn't even read what was written, or you can't actually understand what he said. FROM recycles a lot, and this game was developed at the same time as Bloodborne, so there's no reason to doubt recycling happened here as well.

Getting upset, and whining over a review is the stupidest thing on the internet too. It's like your ego gets super crushed if a game doesn't actually deserve what YOU either think it does, or want it to. I wouldn't even be surprised if you haven't even actually played the game yet either.

@snk0610: You can always downsample to a higher resolution. It won't be the same as playing native, but it will still look a lot better than 1080p.

@snk0610: LMAO, you're so full of it. I have the exact same CPU/GPU combination, and there's a distinct difference in both graphics and performance. Now if you want to claim that the differences between the two won't noticeably impact your enjoyment, that's entirely different. But saying "there isn't much difference between pc and consoles" with that CPU/GPU combination is either a flat out lie, or you are seriously imperceptive.

@snk0610: You can say that you're a "PC gamer" as well, but that doesn't really mean anything if you're using a low end PC to play games on. Not only do PC games typically have way more options (especially resolution), but even if you want others to believe that graphical differences are barely noticeable, what's not barely noticeable is performance. Give me a game that struggles to even reach 1080p/30fps on a console, and I'll show you the same game at 1080p+/60fps on PC.

Unless it's just flat out, horribly optimized like Akham Knight. But scenarios like that are usually outliers anymore. If you can afford both, the only reason to even bother with consoles anymore is for exclusives. Even then, this generation doesn't have enough yet to warrant any of them. Bloodborne was good, but not worth a PS4 just for that. UC4 might be good too, but chances are it's going to have the same stale formula as the previous games. Just nicer looking.

@tsunami2311:Have you actually seen the original Assassin's Fist? I agree that the trailer for this is something else, but Assassin's Fist was so unexpectedly good.

The points made in the video might actually have impact if you completely ignored all logic within the game and the motivations of the main character. This isn't even really an RPG anymore, and even though you could mostly skip the main quest in FO3 if you wanted, it makes much less sense here to do so.

So, if you were in the shoes of the protagonist, would you drop searching for information about your family to instead spend months building up a village from the scraps of your previous home? If so, why? Are you trying to have somewhere safe for your family to return to in the event you find them? Most of what you do benefits everyone else more than it does you and potentially your family anyway (even counting setting up sweat-shops for purified water and vegetable starch). This goes against what most rational humans would do.

Spin the base building all you like, but it's just a side game added in to appease those that love "house mods", modders and Minecraft fanatics. There's nothing wrong with enjoying it, but it's nowhere near as deep as this video wants you to believe.