Did anyone take the plunge and purchase? I've been reading Cornwell's Arthur Series and by god I want to play an Arthurian game.
I am holding off after reading some descriptions of the game play that I didn't really like: the game is more 'on-rails' with less of a sandbox element. I wanted just the opposite. I did love the first one.
Yeah. I started reading the KA2 forums and reviews. It's not looking good to say the least. /sigh/ Perhaps I'll just go back to the original.
^Do you have the expansions to the original? They really made the game shine.
I do actually and never played the Druids ones. So maybe that is where the fix can be found.
^Druids is very good. IIRC I think that's the one that opens up the sandbox mode.
I think so too. Guess I have an Arthur game to play afterall.
I posted this at wargamer awhile ago.
Quote
Neocore really seemed to be destined for great things after the release of King Arthur: The Role Playing Wargame. It was a little rough around the edges, but ultimately blended some exciting unique elements to make a really enjoyable game. The future looked bright.
But each game released after KA I found to be completely underwhelming. None of them really included kingdom management or the more complex RPG elements that KA introduced to the genre. For example, take The King's Crusade. I was certain this game would take elements from the original, Crusaders: They Kingdom Come, and add the more complex grand strategy elements from KA. It failed to do this and as a result, the game still felt half-baked and was unenjoyable. It last for a few weeks on my harddrive.
Now enter King Arthur II. I've been on the fence with this one and came very close to pre-ordering on a number of occassions. However, I hesitated due to lack of information and rumors of poor performance. Then I just learned that ALL of the core strategic game elements have been REMOVED. There is no more food production, no more taxes (gold is earned exclusively through scripted missions) and no more round table. Knights have no loyalty rating and there is no morality compass. These are the very components that made KA unique and interesting. They helped KA rise above its rough edges and stand out from the crowd. Without these elements, there is no sandbox feel and its just an exercise in moving from scripted mission to scripted mission.
Nevertheless, Neocore seems to be committed to destroying their future games by watering them down and turning them into "just another RTS."
No matter how pretty the screen shots look, I will not be pre-ordering.
Pretty much sums up how I feel on the matter.
Thanks JH. I think this is a pass of a game.
Im glad I read this thread I was considering the game as well.
I may get it once they realize they made some design mistakes and create DLC to change them, and put them in a discounted bundle like they did last time.
The major issue I've been reading from a gameplay stand point (seperate from piss poor optimization) is that the strategic map layer has no effect on the game. I'm not sure that is something that can be DLC added, since it was a design choice that would require I'd assume a complete rebuild of parts of the engine code.
How can it have no effect on the game at all?
It's as JH said there is really no kingdom management. No food requirements for example. So the map if I understand what I've read correctly is just means for the rail from battle to battle. Which could just as effectively be done with a story or cut scenes.
Ah. Sounds more limited than the first title. In the first game players could wander, although they would get their ass kicked if they went too far out of bounds.
James from Out of Eight (JaguarUSF) wasn't very keen on the game either:
http://www.outofeight.info/2012/02/king-arthur-ii-role-playing-wargame.html
Quote from: Gusington on February 08, 2012, 11:01:02 AM
^Do you have the expansions to the original? They really made the game shine.
Really, I didn't know that. I will have to get them.