cottandy

Simply the best digital adaptation of a euro board game. All DLCs synergize perfectly and make the base game even better, so these are must-have. Nice tutorial. And even if you haven't ever played anything like this it will not be a problem, especially after gaining some experience in playing against AI.Speaking of which - there are enough variations of game types and opponent strength. Hardest AI is good and fun to play against. And if you are after online - at the moment there is always someone to play with and here you also have several options of game types. So, for example, if there is no suitable place in the lobby, you can always wait a little and play ranked matches. Sound design and music quality create right atmosphere, which also deserves a praise.

Overhype Studios brings something special to their games, love to details, uniqueness on pair with superior core gameplay mechanics, and all this make them incredibly addictive. And with "Menace", which shows that it is not going to lag behind, devs continue to maintain their excellent reputation.

Cyberpunk 2077, version 2.02, is not a bad game at all, but the worst part is its technical condition at the moment, and it's been 3 years since release. And I'm not saying about release version, no. Only about current state. But it's playable and has really fun combat. So, yes, it's alive, nevertheless still buggy, which can ruin your experience. Different annoying bugs are countless and they are everywhere, little and big ones. Game also still crashes from time to time. The more you play, the more often you face old and new technical problems. And it's hard to believe that all this will be fixed. Especially after statements that there will be no more major patches after 2.1 version. Quests and activities are mostly average and repeating. The same is with dialogs, most of which you want to skip almost entirely. Just read the log of the mission, complete it, move on, and that's all. The open world doesn't feel alive and it's no more than just an empty shell. But this game shines from time to time. So if all written above doesn't stop you from playing Cyberpunk 2077 and you don't feel like this is some new sort of an early access, than you can actually have fun with it. For example, combat is satisfying and you have different ways how to fight or sneak your way through opponents. And battles are core of gameplay. This game also has great graphics and not the worst optimization. Some story moments are also not of the lowest quality. Soundtrack is really nice! And the game keeps you in maybe until you become too tired of technical issues or of taking all the same quests and repeating everything all over again.

Beat-'Em-Up game with interesting mechanics, maybe even unique in a good way. But everything started not as good. Sifu lunched with critical issues, some of release problems made the game unplayable like sometimes not even launching. And bad release wasn't the only problem, because everyone who knew Sloclap Studios history wouldn't trust them any way, because their first game Absolver was abondoned and developers attitude to the games community even became a meme. So issues at release didn't make you believe in the games future. But Sifu rehabilitated itself after lots of patches and additional content. So in the end developers still managed to make Sifu a good product.

Handmade with soul. Remember "King Of Dragon Pass" and "Six Ages: Ride Like The Wind"? If you fell in love with these games, than it's happy time for you again. It's a survival turn-based strategy, where the whole story goes through dialogs and decisions. You will interact with your own people, your neighbours and enemies, spirits and even gods. But it's not just a management game about handling your people and the world around them. It's one of those really rare games with brilliant storytelling. And that's why it has crazy replayability too.

Latest Game version review with hundreds of hours played and many complete walkthroughs. This is a realistic medieval adventure, which can also be defined as a hardcore first-person action rpg with stealth. Story-rich, historically accurate and no fantasy elements at all. A dream come true for many people. Briefly. Pros: gameplay, medieval realism and aesthetics, open-world full of quests, story and character development. Cons: loading times. At release this game had many problems, but all of them were fixed with patches. In detail. This is an open-world non-linear game (except for the main quest), which lives by itself and looks beautiful. There is always a lot of options what to do and a good amount of interesting quests waiting for you here and there. You can do pretty much here, unless you die. And you will. So save often. The main great thing is a big amount of quests in the world. Plus random NPCs on the roads. So you should accept all the offers NPCs give you to fully experience the game. Combat system is great, it's doubtful at first and not easy to master, but if you spend a little time, you will find its pros. Still sometimes you can quite easily beat ordinary opponents one-on-one even without mastering combat, if you have some patience though. The problem is fighting at night as you can't see anything and your opponent doesn't care at all. Also about combat - assassination (especially whith dagger) is imbalanced. It's too powerful, mainly because of AI irresponsibility and predictability. The only bad thing is loading times everywhere - you have to wait just to speak to any NPC in the game, the same with loading textures, loading screens everywhere. Save system may be uncomfortable for some people. RPG system is old school - if you do something, you master it and level up. So if you fight a lot - you're becoming a better fighter not only because of your own experience, but your hero masters it with you. The same with speaking, bartering, cooking abilities and so on. Perfect in this.

This game is turn-based tactics, rpg, city-builder and strategy. Even in the very early access stage it was already a really good and incredibly addictive product full of content, with nice balance and without technical or gameplay issues. So it was already a gem even before release. And after a long journey of development it became even better in every aspect.

If you are a strategy fan, it's a must play! One of the best in the genre already. And it improves with every patch too. Also it has the best AI in any 4X strategy.

Good historical strategy. Developers make it better and better with each patch and DLC. Cooperation with community helps a ton. Once a nice, but also a clumsy game transformed into a great one, and the progress continues.

Beat-'Em-Up game with interesting mechanics, maybe even unique in a good way. But everything started not as good. Sifu lunched with critical issues, some of release problems made the game unplayable like sometimes not even launching. And bad release wasn't the only problem, because everyone who knew Sloclap Studios history wouldn't trust them any way, because their first game Absolver was abondoned and developers attitude to the games community even became a meme. So issues at release didn't make you believe in the games future. But Sifu rehabilitated itself after lots of patches and additional content. So in the end developers still managed to make Sifu a good product.

One of the most addictive games ever and one of the best turn-based strategies. Unforgiving and hard. Low fantasy medieval world setting, which feels more real than most of completely non-fantasy worlds. F.e. comparable with "Game of Thrones" world setting. This is also an RPG with resource-management aspect. You really need to think about the future of your every character and their role in the company in hole - in which way to develop each of them, what perks, specialization to give and in the end whether to keep them or to replace with better and more promising ones. But sometimes or quite often if you are not careful and patient enough they will just die in battle. You should be ready for this anyway no matter how good you think you are in TBS. It's hard to master, but when you learn how to survive, it will be pure pleasure.

"The Ascent" is an isometric top-down shooter in a cyberpunk setting made by a team of 11 people. You are a mercenary in a futuristic world who does whatever job he/she gets. And what you do is kill anything that stands in your way. And if you wish also read dialogs about where you need to do this or about the world you play, which is interesting. But if you don't like reading anything you can skip this part and just destroy. Certainly devs put their soul in "the Ascent". A lot is done great, but some gameplay mechanics just leave a bitter aftertaste. So a huge plus for the whole picture, beautiful little details, music, design, etc, but also little nasty holes of negative appear here and there. Most of the time game is brilliant and fun to play. There are many pros in little details and huge visible moments. The most important is neat gameplay and nice plot. More detailed cons and controversial points: Camera - the most important, seems like a little one, but it ruins too much of the hardwork of the devs. It's uncomfortable and uncontrollable at the same time. Lacks a simple possibility to zoom out/in, nothing more. Sometimes you don't even see your enemies, but they see you. It not such a big deal to add a little zoom feature from the devs, which will fix quite a lot. Bad navigation. Both mini-map and main map are a confusing when it comes to multilevel system, which is present in the game, but doesn't show enough info about levels on maps. Not a con, but a warning. You will die often, which doesn't spoil anything. It may be a little hard for beginners on normal difficulty when you face your first enemies with gun. You will have to use game mechanics not to die too often and master the game. But from the other side game doesn't punish when you die. You start from the last checkpoint and these are literally everywhere. No matter where you die, you won't lose your progress. It's certainly good if the game crashes. And there is a possibility for it to happen. Hard to say how often, but sometimes it will in the current state of development.

"The Ascent" is an isometric top-down shooter in a cyberpunk setting made by a team of 11 people. You are a mercenary in a futuristic world who does whatever job he/she gets. And what you do is kill anything that stands in your way. And if you wish also read dialogs about where you need to do this or about the world you play, which is interesting. But if you don't like reading anything you can skip this part and just destroy. Certainly devs put their soul in "the Ascent". A lot is done great, but some gameplay mechanics just leave a bitter aftertaste. So a huge plus for the whole picture, beautiful little details, music, design, etc, but also little nasty holes of negative appear here and there. Most of the time game is brilliant and fun to play. There are many pros in little details and huge visible moments. The most important is neat gameplay and nice plot. More detailed cons and controversial points: Camera - the most important, seems like a little one, but it ruins too much of the hardwork of the devs. It's uncomfortable and uncontrollable at the same time. Lacks a simple possibility to zoom out/in, nothing more. Sometimes you don't even see your enemies, but they see you. It not such a big deal to add a little zoom feature from the devs, which will fix quite a lot. Bad navigation. Both mini-map and main map are a confusing when it comes to multilevel system, which is present in the game, but doesn't show enough info about levels on maps. Not a con, but a warning. You will die often, which doesn't spoil anything. It may be a little hard for beginners on normal difficulty when you face your first enemies with gun. You will have to use game mechanics not to die too often and master the game. But from the other side game doesn't punish when you die. You start from the last checkpoint and these are literally everywhere. No matter where you die, you won't lose your progress. It's certainly good if the game crashes. And there is a possibility for it to happen. Hard to say how often, but sometimes it will in the current state of development.

A great example of brilliant realization of an idea. If you don't try it, you will surely miss numerous hours of gaming. You need to build the world from the ashes, and you either fail, succeed or need to grab your self out of it before night ends. The worst positive aspect of the game is it's too addictive because of the gameplay. Nice art and music too. Everything is fine with this game.

Outdated game in most aspects. A disappointment. Optimization at launch is not good at all too. Stronghold Crusader HD is a much better game even right now. And Stronghold: Warlords is a very bad copy of it with nothing really new, except for setting and improved UI. And controversial Warlords mechanics is bad at least.

Hope the developers will fix most of the issues, when the game comes out of the early access, but even not looking on technical issues, the game doesn't look and sound well enough to play it right now. Pros: atmosphere; 3d scanned Chernobyl territory; pleasant overall color spectrum. Cons: bugs and crashes + no manual saving = fail; bad optimization; audio quality; plot and dialogs (it is not an open world game); useless unnecessary intermediate green location; stupid AI; monotony. So if the problem was only in crashes and bugs, it could be fixed, but the game has a lot more and deep problems.

The most annoying game, I have ever played. And the controls are most uncomfortable. And at the same time, it's good. But return my nerves.

The most annoying game, I have ever played. And the controls are most uncomfortable. And at the same time, it's good. But return my nerves.

The most annoying game, I have ever played. And the controls are most uncomfortable. And at the same time, it's good. But return my nerves.

If you're a fan of both hack'n'slash and scandinavian mythology, maybe it is worth a try - only maybe. It has quite nice storytelling and good art. But that's all. The overall gameplay is below average and there is nothing special here. A few bugs and glitches, but not critical. The combat is simple and repetitive. The camera is uncontrollable and uncomfortable, which spoils already not a diamond.

Not even worth a try. And you can see that from the very beginning of the game - right after the backstory. Everything here is just clunky. The main thing is of course an awful gameplay. If it was at least normal then maybe the future patches would correct everthing else and it would become playable. But this game is not the case. The first thing you notice is not even awful graphics with lots of blur, which is also not the main thing **** is interesting, but that it somehow manages to freeze on a high-end PC. Controls often do not response. Sometimes, when you open the game menu and close it to continue by some reason to try to find something good in this game, the system mouse cursor shows up, so you can't turn your character, like, says "hello, you don't need to play it, please, stop and quit right now", which I did. Conclusion. Don't waste your time. That's not even close to a complete list of problems, including critical ones with saves, bugs and etc.

A remarkable action platformer, which brings you fun. Also devs didn't stop, when the game was already solid and brought some new content for even more replayability.

Overall a good game, recommended to everyone. Even if you're no fan to turn-based strategies, you can try it just for the beautiful art and story. Especially for the ones, who doesn't like tough fights, there's an option in the beginning of the game, where you can choose, whether to play only for the story or either for it and for TBS combat. And one can't help comparing it with its inspirer - "Banner Saga", because it's too similar practically in everything - art, gameplay, combat, etc. If you haven't played either, you should definitely start with the better "Banner Saga" and if you like it, absolutely should continue with "Ash of Gods". Nice story, music and overall gameplay, but in "Banner Saga" everything was slightly better, maybe except for the music. Though of course each can find his own pros and cons in both games. The story and characters are different of course. Storytelling is interesting and long enough, so you can definitely enjoy the game. The only thing they spoiled in "Ash of Gods" is combat, but it's also not bad. You won't just find anything new and interesting in fights here, because there are already several games with quite the same mechanics, abilities, style, etc. F.e., "Battle Brothers" is a much suoperior TBS concerning combat, "Banner Saga" is better too, "The Great Whale Road" is worse, but similar.

Doom (2016) is beyond doubt the best pure FPS in recent years. It has everything an FPS must have +it's own Doom history as a bonus and nostalgia. It's super fun and, while it's hardcore, you don't feel like a victim here, because of atmosphere the game creates. Conversely your enemies are the ones who should fear as a protagonist is a brutal hard person which wants to destroy all evil and nothing else. The game is not easy, you just get this feeling while playing it and it's good. The gameplay is excellent and pros compensate cons of the game. The bad things are: - No GPS. Adding it would definitely make the game even better. Its absense quite often forces you to go here and there in a search of the right way. It's not hard to find, but simply wastes some of your time. It's a perfect shooter, so making this particular aspect of the game a bit more friendly to the player would have been nice of devs. - No manual saves. Saves/loads/checkpoints are also unfriendly to the player. - Some bugs still in 2017/2018. F.e., a critical one - finishing opponents sometimes makes you stuck in textures. - More than 50% of weapon and armor upgrades are inappreciable. It also would have been nice if there were more different weapons and bosses in the game. And of course single player compaign could have been longer than it is right now. No replayability when you finish the game on normal difficulty. But, as written above it's still a perfect pure FPS: perfect shooter gameplay, excellent soundtrack, nice graphics, optimisation and the story doesn't distract you from killing everything in sight, but also keeps you going on.

Are you afraid of rise of the machines or what? All the changes make sense only in multiplayer, while if you're playing VS. AI, it's still all the same and worse, because the main and fatal problem remains unfixed - weak AI. Can't understand, why developers don't spend more time on making it more competitive. AI, is everything OK with you? AI, please don't die so young! Also because of new features the game becomes even more complex for AI to handle it. An average player adapts to such changes very quickly, while it seems that AI struggles more and more with every single new feature. Of course in the end you can't make a perfect AI (or can you?), which plays better than an experinced strategist. But it doesn't mean that you should make it so stupid and forget about making it better step by step. Good features and Greedy developers. Speaking of new features - it's not worth the current price, but it makes the game better and more interesting - once more only if you're playing with friends. Remember, AI is not your friend! And still, while there's not a few features, they don't make it a new game at all, again - the price says the opposite, don't believe it. Draw conclusions. Also I'm sure not everyone will think that new in "Rise and Fall" equals good. And finally not everything that developers represent as new actually is. The main example is the Golden Age. Really? You don't know about it only if you haven't played any previous Civilization. Yes, it differs, but the point is that it could have been present in Civ6 from it's very start without these "Rise and Falls" for the price of Civ7. ... Greed already ruined EA reputation. Don't be as stupid as your AI, don't ruin yours.

A good game, but it became one only after a dozen of patches. After release it just didn't work as it should have had. Sadly it happens all the time. Why releasing an unfinished work? And still a good game right now.

This is the review on the latest version of the game after tons of patches - a year after release. Right after release it was simply unplayable, now it just has big problems. Still, the optimisation is very bad. Strong PC, which runs all the latest games on ultra can't handle the game with past decades graphics? It gotta be kidding! Becomes a little better with patches, but after a few hours of play (especially on the biggest maps) you quickly become friends with the same old crashes, freezes and many more different unpleasant issues. All this just ruin the hole experience. Good ideas make it a better overall game than its predecessor, which was not bad at all byitself. But a game that can't be played - isn't a good one in any way.

"Empire Divided" feels more like an unfinished amateur mod than an actual DLC from a professional game development studio, which promised a lot more than that. A waste of time and resources. "Creative Assembly"'d better start learning from modders at some point, because they do this work a lot better than the studio and with interest.

A good game, recommended to every Action RPG and rogue killing fans. Beautiful start, great/good middle of the game, long, boring, sometimes even horrible and badly done ending - especially sieges. MASSIVE FIGHTS AND SIEGES ARE TRASH. Combat system and control feedback are bad, esperially in said above massive fights and sieges. But also the skill set for rogue play and how you can you use it is beautiful. Until the 4th act it's a great action RPG with an interesting storytelling. Like any action it can become repetitive, but it's not pure hack and slash, because half of the game you can be a rogue, which is the best part of gameplay. Also the creators did nice job in making your enemies more lively for you not to get tired of killing them again and again. Until some point of course when you have already killed hundreds of them. P.S. About mini-transactions: They don't really effect the gameplay if you don't use them until the 4th act. Yes, there is a lot of grime in the end, but the worst part about it are not mini-transactions, but horrible siege gameplay and too badly done massive fights, also it all becomes too similar and repetitive, besides being badly done. A lot of people give this game 0 rating because of it, which is dumb. Yes, the game became much worse because of the 4th act, but until that point everything was great. Multiplayer is also not worth even trying, because it's siege.

It's not a new game, no more than a graphics mod without any changes for a new price like for a full game we have never seen before. You will find here nothing new. They promised that graphics will become better. Not good even in this aspect. Nothing. Maybe some little story changes? No. Rename it as a mod please! These so-called Special Editions, DLCs have already becomen an easy way just to take money from the fans. If there was something new, it would have been an another story, but what we see here is just the same old game for which developers want some additional money like for a competely new one.

Simply the best Action RPG, though the main thing in "The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt" is not even its perfect gameplay, but the story itself. You should try it even if you don't like the genre, because maybe you will like it after playing this.

I see just a raw version of Civ 5 right now. That's what the 6th is. Spent a great amount of time playing every previous Civ... but this time it made me sad after a few hours of game. Without doubt, the predecessor was just the best and it was way too difficult to outperform it! But what was the point of spending years to make the same old game with minor changes, which made it worse than it was? It's almost like the history with annual FIFA games. AI is poor! No, in previous versions it wasn't the best, but this time once again it's the worst ever. Even the graphics are better in the 5th than in 6th. Civ 6 is full of good ideas, but they didn't shape them up. Hope they will fix everything with patches and make it a better game. But right now it's not worth spending money. It's better to play Civ 5, because it's a finished fine game.

This game is for the ones, who don't like sleeping at night. If you like it, you will spend many hours exploring a postapocalyptic world, based on slavic folklore. It's bot only a turn-based strategy, it's a fine mix of different genres. For example, these are micro-management, crafting, random events decision making and a little bit of other elements. And finally It has it's own original good storytelling, fine art and differs a little from every game, you've ever played before. While saving the world for the first time, you may find this game being beauty. And this process may continue for a very long time, which is good. But right after finishing the first story, the game loses its replayability, because you will have to do the exact same things over and over again in a new one.

It's surely a must play it if you liked the predecessor, but it's becoming not as interesting as it had been before... The first part of "The Banner Saga" was a great complete game and it had enourmous replayability. But even in the middle of the second one, I already started to have mixed feelings. No, you will still want to know how it all ends. It becomes more reading a good story, rather than playing it yourself, not saying about having any impact on it, because you haven't any! Also the story this time seems to be a bit short. An interesting end awaits you, but except this, there's nothing new. No new interesting art, no new characters that you don't want to lose during your adventure, etc. Nothing really new. The battles are upgraded. These were brilliant in the first one, but, yes, they became even better. Still you will find nothing really new and special here. Surely the story continues and I just hope it will become better.

Not a very good game, but the best football management simulator, comparing to the other ones. Introduction to the review: Let's start from the main thing. Keep in mind - everything that is poorly executed in this game is executed even worse in every other game of the genre. Too bad there are not a lot of the games like that. So the only reason for not a bad score is that you won't find anything better. After playing another game of Football Manager series, you realise that FIFAManager wasn't that bad. The review: One major exception for it not being a really good game is one of the main things in gameplay. It is an insanely bad ingame simulation system. But one good thing about it is a quick result option, which in 90% gives you more realistic results, than a very very bad 3D match watch option. So if you don't care about watching matches and correcting the tactics in the middle of the match, than it's not really a con for you... but of course you care! Why even playing a game like that if you don't! So it's a shame for EA, that their game has this problem. Of course it's not the only thing you need from it, but it's too major. Overall they chose a path of making the game unrealistic, which makes it easier to play, not spending time on learning the mechanics, etc., which is a mistake, because the main thing in sport management is realism. For example, adding to what is written above, it has an unrealistic transfer system, but better than in the other football manager simulators, as had been also written before. Repeatable conversations with players, which works in a wrong way. Very little dependancy of tactics/result, so you practically have no need of setting the right tactics, depending on the next opponent. You can play 10 straight seasons with just one formation. A tactic of buying the best players, strengthening your rating, plus keeping your players fit and not bad training standarts means you're the champion... And many other negative things, that you notice after playing a while. Little dependancy on individual stats, practically none. Everything depends on an overall rating of the team. So too little interest for the tactics and other things like that in the game, if you know about what is written above. The good thing is other management aspects, which however lack depth. No realism, as have been written before. These are financial, building, event management, training, etc. So these are not bad at all! You will like to play the game because of this. Also if you prefer not to do something in the game, because you're not interested in wasting time on it, you can just hire as many assistants as you want and make them do their job. BUT, AI won't ever make the job better than you, even if it's the best specialist in the game, but, however, the better the specialists the more positive impact they have on players individually, on the team, which is the main thing in the game, and on the organisation itself, which gives prosperity and good results, if you're making things right by yourself of course. So! THE BETTER YOU DO, THE BETTER THE TEAMS RESULT. You have a major impact on your teams results, which is the main reason for you to play FIFAManager. The sum: 7 out of 10. P.S. Too bad that FIFAM12, 13 and 14 are just the same - copies of each other (14 was a legacy game - nothing more have been expected). The changes are so minor, you won't even notice them. Some even make the game worse after changing some mechanics. FIFAM13 is the best of the series in my opinion. Too bad, that FIFAM14 is the last in the series. I'm sure they could make the game better, but they just stopped and made FM the only playable game of the genre now. Sadly there is little hope for another FIFAM game.

I'm not writing about the first version of "Mount & Blade: Warband - Viking Conquest", which, without doubt, was raw. What I'll be writing about is the complete version - "Reforged Edition". It's not just an another mod of M&B, it's something bigger. This game once more shows that it has no limits, by developing VC. I found no cons in it. It's beautiful. Even if you've already spent hundreds and thousands of hours, playing any other mod or an original version of the game, you will have already a new experience here. If you thought that this game couldn't become better, it became! Also if you're a fan of Vikings and their age, it will be an another bonus especially for you. But even if're not, the game will still have lots of new in it. One another good thing about this is that it never stops becoming better and better.

If you like "Total War", you can't walk past it. There were great times and not so great for the "Total War" games, but "Total War: Rome II" and "Total War: ATTILA - Age of Charlemagne" show that they still can do good games. Not as good as the first Rome, but still. Only if they made the games work properly right from the start, not after a year after release. The main con is a weak AI. But where can you find better ones? Only in mods. Hope some day they will realise that if modders can make AI stronger, they can do too. Also the work with the game is not completely finished. But even this unfinished one is a good one. Shame on them, that they stopped working on it. Still the one important thing, one of the most - atmosphere of Age of Charlemagne is present in the game.

Maybe the best role-playing game ever made. It may sound strange, but the main reason for it being such a brilliant is an uncountable number of of fan-made mods, which makes the game better every day. Gamers are telling myths that even now, while you are reading something, for example, this review, a new mod is being released. The fact that you can always find something new in the game, made many years ago, makes it really special. Or you can make your own by your self if you want! You really can do your own universe from it! Too much good to say about it. You should just try it if you haven't yet. Hope the Bannerlord will be even better. The first trailers and reviews are telling that it is so. After playing this numerous mods of M&B you can say that it's possible.

An overall great game with brilliant gameplay, storytelling, art, combat mechanics. I found no cons in this game, though I made it through several times. Yes! One time is not enough for this one. Once you start, the game will **** you into it like a quagmire in a good way you know. And even though there is the second part "The Banner Saga 2", this game feels complete byitself, so does the story. And still you want to know what will happen afterwards. This great the story is!

Not a bad game by itself, but practically no fixes in patches for the main problem - gameplay. Yes, it has something new in it at the start, that's why you start playing it. But when you realise that after finishing the training and the first map, you find nothing new, the game upsets you. You continue playing, hoping that maybe it's not over, maybe the game didn't show all of it's potential yet, but no. And then you just delete it. The worst thing is that you also hope that with new maps comes new story, but again no, all the same.

When writing about this game, you can't but say about "Legends of Eisenwald", because practically nothing has changed. Yes, it's a new story, but there's nothing new in it. It's not interesting at all and you have to do everything you had done before many times. So let's start . The predecessor was really something original and interesting at the start. It was a nice game and surely was one worth experiencing, but unfortunately not for very long. It had lots of problems, mainly with gameplay, practically all of which remained in "Eisenwald: Blood of November". Yes, there were patches, but they didn't fix even a half of what should have been. And not only it inherited all the problems, but minimum a new one appeared - bad optimisation. They said, that graphics became better, but I didn't notice anything like that and what I did is that the game became slower! It's not a new game, it's just a bad copy of "Legends of Eisenwald". 6 for it and no more than 2 for the new one.