Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Joan of Arc
Most games that are gender-locked have both female and male alternatives (like Heroes of Might and Magic campaigns, where the lead hero is gender locked although you can recruit secondary heroes of both sexes). There's people that enjoy customizing their character and this has been proven not only not to be detrimental to the story but also offering branching possibilities (like Dragon Age: Origins, where your character customization decissions will translate into the story).
Strategy games are getting lazier instead of more innovative and that's dangerous for a struggling genre. I've read that the sequel also focuses on a more human centric army with less monsters.
Is this a freudian slip? Because I don't like short characters like dwarfs or halflings and it's not because of insecurity about my height. It's just preference.
The sorceress ist - after all- still an interesting choice. But pally is in this game dead for me.. which is sad, was normally my first choice in KB games.