Hmmm, not sure of that is better or worse. We shall see someday. I am really tempted to skip to 2 though, it sounds more my speed.

Darksiders bears many resemblances to Zelda and, as StingingVelvet mentioned, I'm far from the only one to think that. I'm honestly surprised you've never heard that before. Saying it has nothing to do with Zelda because it's combat heavy is like saying combat-oriented platformers aren't platformers because they have more combat than their puzzle-oriented counterparts.

Anyways, I didn't shy away from DSII because it bears resemblances to Zelda. I shied away from it because whereas DS1 was a solid game, Zelda was a great game that gave me marginally the same experience but better, and I didn't see that changing in the sequel.

EDIT: Left some words out.

Fine, but all those people who compared it to Zelda must never have payed Devil May Cry or God of War then, because Darksiders is much closer to those than to Zelda.

Again, Darksiders is 90% combat, and the combat is very different than in Zelda. So any similarities between the 2 are mostly superficial.

Except that everything you mentioned in the first paragraph isn't present in GoW nor DMC, and 90% of the time fighting enemies is a bit of a exaggeration. So the same argument could be used to conclude that calling Darksiders a somethingsomething GoW/DMC is a flawed comparision. I mean, I spent quite a bit of time exploring DS's open world for collectibles, something that I do in Zelda games but most certainly not in God of War nor Devil May Cry.

I've played both. I still think it bears a large resemblance to Zelda. >.>

No amount of superficial similarities could make people who have played through both games think they were the same unless they were at least marginally the same.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then.

Personally I skipped most of the "exploring the world for consumables" part in Darksiders, because I found that boring. Maybe that's why it seems much closer to God of War to me.
But you can't really tell me that combat isn't the main part of the game, or that the combat is similar to the one in any Zelda game.

My first thoughts when playing Darksiders was how remarkably similar it was to God of War. Admittedly, God of War was the most recent action game I had played before Darksiders, but I liked God of War, so it was all cool. I hadn't considered it being like Zelda, but now that I think about it, it does share a lot of things in common with that as well. Of course, I liked Zelda also, so I'm fine with that, although I think Zelda had better dungeon design.

The thing is that I played both Zelda and God of War on console, but Darksiders on PC, and the port to PC is a little bit of a pain, but it's manageable.

My case as well. Besides, most of what could be found in the original game were a few easter eggs and a few caves. Darksiders 2 has entire hidden dungeons.

So if I am more an open world RPG guy and not really a God of War guy should I skip right to 2?

Well the combat is still very God of War - ish, and story of the second game ties in nicely with the first. On the other hand, combat is easier than in Darksiders 1, sooo... you'd definitely like the second game much better. If you already have the first, however, I would recommend playing at least the beginning so you have a better idea of what's going on.

Well, finished. The ending was more linear, but it basically passed on the strengths of Darksiders II and took up those from the first game, so I can hardly complain. All it all, it was fantastic, far better than the first game. Now I'm only sorry we probably won't see a sequel, since the door to it is open.

Get it! GET IT NAO!

NAO!