So the one thing I found weird: Basically all the Dark Souls 1 references should have been in 2, not 3.
Because having follow-ups to the legends makes perfect sense.
It's only weird now because you have 2 in the middle without the big connections, while 3 has them more.
I found the endboss cool, and it has nothing to do with Gwyn, aside from musical theme in phase 2. Different weapons and completely different moveset, as well as looks - it's basically the DS1 and 2 protags you are fighting, NOT Gwyn. What is funny about that: Before 2 came out, there was speculation of how cool it would be to fight the protag of 1 at the end of 2. They did not do it - but in 3 they did. I found it cool.
Endings: Normal Ending seems the same as DS1 at first glance, but there are quite important differences - the flame is much weaker. I would this interpret as that this is the last cycle. The dark ending seemed hopeful in comparison - I did it, and I found it awesome.
And then there's the secret ending, which actually shows wtf a dark lord is - also the dark ending and before show what the dark ending is, while in 1 it was so vague I did not even really understand it. 1 did not even really make sense: If it is dark, how can you be lord? These are two different possibilities.
The Chaos Flame dying also fits to the "this is pretty final for now".
I would have liked Cutscenes for Yhorm and Aldrich, and a different fight than Aldrich more - he was pretty underwhelming in presentation, even though I had most trouble with fighting him.
Btw, also interesting: The gods did also fight with the dragons, not only against them - that is new.
Finding NPC questlines was also too hard imo, but DS1 was the same - I hated it there already. In fact, 3 made a lot of faults of 1 obvious: Like how underwhelming DS1 late game is - how vague some things are, which are repeated in 3 (if you like or do not like that is taste), but it explains them so much better.