Much better - but still not good enough.
You've improved in putting some actual substance in the game (still not very much, but the first game had none at all), for instance in terms of story. You explored the concept of a world where emotion is forbidden slightly more but still barely scratched the surface.
Because of this, your game still has the same problem as the first in that it is an extremely shallow and juvenile attempt at being a serious arty game. You're making a story about love, but you have a view of love that is frankly the most laughable, superficial type of view there is. You're not exploring the concept of love or affection at all, you're staying stuck at candy-hearts, Hallmark "I WUV YOO" love, which does NOT, I'm sorry to tell you, provide any kind of emotional impact. All it does is make people roll their eyes and cringe.
Stories about love do NOT have to stay at the Harlequin romance level. There are great works of literature written about it. But you know what? The people who created those had something to SAY about love. Those stories are incredibly deep and therefore beautiful and interesting. But you don't have anything to say. You may as well have just written "LOVE" in big letters on a piece of paper, maybe with a little pink heart, and called it a day.
The exact same thing can be said of the dystopian backstory you have going. It is incredibly cliche, juvenile, and uninteresting. And it's uninteresting because all you have is some sort of oppressive regime that forbids emotion and creativity - in the background, somewhere, unexplored. The worst part is that we don't have any motive from them. They're like the villains fro ma bad comic book, just out to be evil jerks for no other reason than to be evil jerks. Which means, again, that you have an extremely SHALLOW game, which does not try and make you think about the themes it's dealing with such as stoicism, rationality, versus wild creativity and emotion. So you have a game that's like a small child looking at a thief or something and saying YOU'RE A BAD MAN. A BAAAAD MAN. No kid, see, the world isn't that simple, this is a complex issue. Here, have a lollipop and leave us grown ups alone to have intelligent conversation over here, ok? And yes, that last sentence was very much addressed to the author of this game.
To talk about something a bit more specific: the signs. Now once again, they were saying something extremely silly and cliché, but I've said that enough already in this review. I'd just like to point out that getting your message across with something external to the game itself, ie to the story, is not art. It's cheating. It's WANNABE art. It comes across as tacky. If those signs were being put down by a government agent out to stop some sort of revolution, that would have been pretty cool. THAT would have been creative.
I'd like to end this review with a simple piece of advice. Next time you set out to make a game with some sort of depth, try and think about what the word "depth" means. It means you can't be content to sit on a nice comfy tower of stereotypes and my-mommy-said-so style thinking. You have to actually THINK.
Because this is about as deep as a puddle. It's just 2 out of 5: Nothing too new or interesting.