So, I have recently started playing both of these. I like them both. Neither of them are terribly unique or original, but both are nice C tier Western action RPGs. War in the North might be a little too action game-y with all of the mounting turrets and game areas that are very level-ish. Kingdoms of Amalur is engrossing though.
It's too bad with what happened to the developers for Amalur. A sequel would have hopefully ironed out the kinks in the armour. Oh well, I bet Dragon Age III will be just as god as DAII...?
Dark Souls just ate away a large portion of my evening / night. I'm not sure if I like it more or less that Demon's Souls, but I enjoy it a lot. Both games for that matter. The differences are subtle, but there.
The level structure in Demon's Souls made it /almost/ straight forward where to go and the "open world" feeling in Dark Souls makes it a bit easier to get lost. Just now I made it down into "The Depths" and got to a bonfire. ...But it wouldn't light for some reason. I then die to a horde of rats and end up needing to retrace a good 30 minutes, but I wasn't sure how to get back there from the earlier bonfire. I eventually made it back and this time, I could light the fire and set my waypoint.
I also feel that the bosses are easier. Not sure yet though. I'm curious and suspicious of this due to the fact in Demon's, I played a magic using royal, but in Dark, I am using a sword wielding pyromancer. My royal could take two hits before dying, my pyromancer can take three times that many. If this is simply the difference between playing magic and melee, I'll figure it out sooner or later.