SpellForce 3 + Soul Harvest & Fallen God standalone expansions

I'd say 2 is the worst of the bunch. It's playable, but it's very bland compared to 1 and 3. I haven't finished 2 yet, but neither the gameplay nor the story is very gripping. What kept me playing Spellforce 1 to the point of finishing all of it (except that Free Game campaign mode) was the character building, exploration, and itemization. Spellforce 2 has basically none of those things. You absolutely need the speed up console command (you can speed it up up to like 20 times) in order to comfortably do it, but I discovered that command very late in my playthrough. What I think I neglected to mention in my retrospective is that the RTS part in SF1 is kind of tacked on because it doesn't offer any real gameplay. I just created the same armies and death balled to the end of the map.

Anyway, more thoughts on SF3 (spoilers):

The RTS part is more like a city-building game, like Cultures, than a "proper" RTS. Which isn't a bad decision, I dig it.

The characters needed a bit more subtlety. I knew Anselm would try to kill me at some point due to way he treated me during our training match. However, he did try to do it in a sly way. I didn't catch on that he was trying to get me to refuse a command and then use that as justification for attacking me. But I did follow the command because Sentenza taught me that I am not the one in charge (and I really am not). The way he overwrote my decision with the food thief was a great moment and I knew the game won't bow down to me at least at first. I knew that if I refused to slaughter the village, I'd either be forced to do it anyway or be branded essentially a traitor. So I didn't. Good job, game, even if it's an illusion of choice. What is less believable, though, is the trial scene. It's true that we can't really prove our innocence, but we can call the drillmistress who heard how Anselm treated me while we trained. Sentenza being a seasoned warrior would know that it's not easy or perhaps even possible to non-lethally neutralize someone who essentially ambushes you with 4 of his friends. We also have no motive. Speaking of his friends, I'm not sure why they attacked us, but oh well. I'm expecting Sentenza to help us out of jail after that, say it's a ruse and had no choice but to participate in the trial in that way.

The elves' involvement very quickly turning into "she's just crazy/desperate" was lame. I wanted more drama and politics before that. I didn't expect for them to threaten to attack us if we don't run as fast as possible, so that was good, but given how they are on human territory and trying to boss us around this couldn't have ended without bloodshed. At least at first.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing what happens next. I can usually predict a plot from the very start, but even though I have some guesses (the cult are fanatical and we are going to kill them, the blood plague is their doing, perhaps on orders of our father, the last boss is our father), I'm not 100% sure where they are going with this.

 

The base game and the first two expansions were decent. The subsequent ones were absolute trash.

 

Don't get me wrong, SF2 is decent, just not as interesting/unique as SF1 or as good as SF3.

 

I preferred the second because of its focus on rpg elements,also the best base building in any rpg lol.

 

How does the second have a focus on RPG elements? It's the most barebones of the bunch in terms of that.

 

Quick question, will I miss/spoil anything if play them out of order? Are they even connected at all in any way story-wise? I'm most interested in 3, so I'd like to start with that one first.

 

You mean the Spellforce series in general? Not really. All 3 take place in completely different time periods and have almost no setting connection to each other. In 1, you play as a rune warrior that do not exist anymore in 2. In 2, you play as a Sheikan which weren't even mentioned in 1 and they are a new thing entirely. In 3, the story takes place so many years in the past that the world map isn't recognizable anymore (in terms of story I mean) and a setting-defining event hasn't occurred yet. You will hear some names, especially of places, in all 3 games, but it's mostly a nudge, nudge, wink, wink at long-term fans than anything. I'd try Spellforce 1 first, though, it's unique enough and it goes on sale on GOG for like 90 cents quite often. On top of that, there isn't much to spoil about 1 and 2, they don't have any meaningful twists or gasp-inducing moments.

 

Yeah that's what I meant. Thanks for the info! I considered starting with 1 but I really like how 3 looks in the gameplay videos. Not that all I care about is gfx, far from it, but I like to play a modern looking game now and then. Also the 100+ hour length of SF1 put me a bit off, I don't think I want to start something that long. Generally I like games that are below 50 hours, with a few exceptions maybe once a year.

 

They are connected with a story as much as divinity games. They have common world and may hear about things that happened in the other games,but the games are fine to be played out of order.

 

Thanks bro, that's what I wanted to hear!

 

Just started, is there any reason not to minmax your guy?

 

There aren't any skill checks, so the attributes are purely mechanical. Here's a tip - if you aren't planning on using mage gear or abilities that use intelligence as a modifier, dumping intelligence to 1 is a very easy call to make even if it destroys your focus regeneration. There is a spell in the white magic tree that transfers up to 10 focus from the one casting it to another party member. It has a short enough cooldown that it can effectively be spammed. A companion can be a white mage if you build them that way. Put the two together.

 

https://store.steampowered.com/newshub/app/1154040/view/4695524966245663798

 

Just finished Spellforce 3 for the first time. About to start with Soul Harvest. This game may be a buggy mess but god damn this is one of the better games I've played this year and I can attribute that mostly to the terrific voice acting (not just Geralt) and the writing. While the story is not necessarily extraordinarily, all of the characters and villains were great to talk to, especially the protagonist. I made a fem Tahar and was positively surprised with the voice acting. They absolutely succeeded at creating a beliavable fantasy world, even playing around with the usual tropes in subtle ways. Some of the characters had meh moments but mostly it was stellar for me.

I think the people who get really into this series are the ones who also loved the Durotar campaign in Frozen Throne. To me that was one of the better parts of W3 and I wish Blizzard had done something more with it over time. There is something very satisfying about playing with a group of hacky slashy heroes in RTS mode in a giant maps full of secrets, quests and powerful mobs, breaking the game slowly with absurdly powerful characters over time. The RTSlite maps are nice for breaking up the game play a bit, but don't really feel like those are the strength of the game.

Game is playable on Hard, but I found the RTS maps absolutely obnoxious, getting attacked on three fronts by 20+ troops before you even had wood production started properly. Balance is all over the place but again the writing and the story kept me going to the end staying up to 3 AM. Echoing some of the thoughts on this thread, it is quite surprising the game is not talked about more.

 

https://store.steampowered.com/newshub/app/1154040/view/2948128849693943579

 

I really wish they would stop focusing on the multiplayer so much but if it brings more players to the game, so be it.

 

Does it though? Lacrymas, since you're our self-appointed Spellforce guy, got any statistics about multiplayer trends on Steam and what not?

 

It is a singleplayer franchise,nobody really cares about multi in this one. Tho maybe some weird germans.

 

No, I never cared about multiplayer because the RTS sections aren't appropriate for it. I'd say that includes Spellforce 3. The armies are still kinda clunky and needlessly tough to control, and you don't have the micro potential like in, say, Starcraft or AoE. The units are samey and are just differentiated by tiers. There is some attempt at a rock, paper, scissors thing, but it's very rudimentary and tacked-on. If it were a good RTS game, the fans would've naturally sprung up. I've read some YouTube comments once or twice about people mentioning playing Spellforce 1's multiplayer, but I'd say it's mostly a curiosity thing and nothing else. It's kinda surprising the devs are going through all this trouble to provide matchmaking and official servers for multiplayer. I have no doubt *someone* will play it for a bit, but I'd be really, really surprised if it catches on for something more.

 

I’d be more interested in a multiplayer Co-op mode. Multiplayer comp stomps was good fun as a casual rts player

 

If they provide some kind of co-op missions where you and a buddy build up bases against some kind of AI scenario (like scripted enemy waves). There are such co-op maps in Starcraft 2, I don't remember what they are called. Or dungeon maps where you two only control heroes. Something that isn't a typical base building vs base building RTS gameplay.

 

Don't really care for multiplayer either way, co-op or not. Single player was always the strong point for the series.

 

I am curious, so I'm definitely going to try it once I get the expansion (do you need it?), but I doubt it will blow my mind or anything.