Interesting video, and it answered some questions but unfortunately it seems to confirm my fear that they're getting rid of most of the fantasy elements. I'm sure most of us agree that we want crazy spells like Armageddon lighting the battle field on fire. We want a huge ice snake coming out of the ground. We want the god damn grim reaper himself being able to be summoned to wreak havoc on our enemies. I don't particularly care if something is realistic tbh, and for an RPG to try to go in that direction all it can really do is limit the creativity of those who are designing the game, because now they have a narrowing realm of possibilities. I'm only being this critical because this series is in my top 3 best of all time, and I would be devastated if it seems too repetitive. Either way, I'm definitely buying the game, no question there but I'd be lying if I said I wouldn't be pissed if I'm stuck in the same area (same scenery) fighting only increasingly larger groups of peasants, archers, and pikemen

I agree with you, but the guys from 1C said they want to implement a lot of fantasy creatures an that we will see them when they are ready, so it's guaranteed we will get at least dwarves (you can spot them in many places, as I said before), elves (they talked about them a little) and very probably orcs, since the game is also inspired from the movie Warcraft. But they also said absolutely nothing about the spells (the spellbook exists, but cannot be used in the beginning of the game, or is not properly working right now) and there is no rage anymore (or it's still not implemented). Now, the worst part seems to be the fact that the game is also made for console, so the controls and menu will be extremely simple (this is also probably one of the reasons why there are no dialog options).

What bugs me right now is the fact that it seems like it is third person. I played King's bounty from the very first release back in 89-90. I am used to seeing it from the top. I love that about the game. Riding or sailing around deciding which mob to attack in order to avoid casualties.

Sadly, the developers said it's not a strategy anymore, but an RPG with tactical battles, the game being centered on the story, not looting and battles. And that's why it's 3rd person.

Yeah. I think they really missed the mark with that decision considering that there are so many games based on that. The way King's Bounty played was rather unique in that sense (if you leave out HMM). I wonder how skill trees will work, if they are even a part of the game. I really loved the achievement ingame bonuses as well as the skill trees. I hope those exist in this version as well. That's what drives you to go for no loss battles ect

I am also really concerned about the fact that they keep saying it is not a strategy game. Well, I hope they do consider different types of damage as in the original, and so on. I really like how the battles look, but I fear that they might be cutting all the fun tactical elements of king's bounty. It would suck as I've been looking forward to a sequal for years. It also makes me think the replayability of the original might be gone. A good story with strong cutscenes is all good and dandy, but if it comes at the expense of good and interesting gameplay, then it is a bad thing. I've replayed crossworlds so many many times, and I had hoped king's bounty 2 would deliver the same kind of replayability. If it is just like an RPG adventur, there really is little reason to replay the game. Using different tactics, spells, playstyles ect, is what made the previous game replayable.

I agree with you. I don't really think they removed the damage types though, since in one of the screenshots below it says "air damage" and it isn't that practical for units like dragons or mages (they shoot fire here) to not deal fire damage. But one thing they got rid of seems to be attack and defense. If you look at the screenshot with lvl 1 Archers and lvl 3 Celestial Warriors you will see that there is no defense or attack stat. Instead, the defense might be replaced by "armor", a stat showing how much armor the unit has on it (for example, Death Knights at lvl 1 have 60% armor). Still, I don't know how relevant "armor" is, since not all armors have the same durability.

Ahh. Well spottet. Good to know that they keep the different types of damage. As far as attack and defense, it is possible that some armor rating on the hero affects the armor on the units the same way defense did in the old version. I kind of think you need something like that if one of your classes is a warrior.

That's quite possible.

About replayability, the developers decided to create slightly different stories for each class and different endings and routes depending on your choices, so there's still a lot of replayability on the RPG part of the game.