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
There is no “superior game”, just “games person X enjoys more”.
Personally I much prefer game 3, bigger maps, more factions and a thousand other details.
But if you like game 2, cool, keep playing it.
To each their own
Moving on...
(Also, don't forget to instead write this into your game review, where it actually belongs to)
It's true, that's what most fans think.
Okay boomer...
The QoL changes are the only reason I stay for III. Anyone who thinks 3 is the better (keyword:) strategy game, hasn't played II in a long while or just likes winning easily.