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
I always felt that sins 1 was lesser for no campaign (though let me be clear, I loved sins 1 to death). I always wanted to see more of the story...and now, my wish has finally come true...I'll be looking forward to it
I actually loved that SoaSE didn't have any campaign. In the overall context of the game, there was no individual decisive battle that meant more than any other. Having a campaign usually implies that history has been determined, and now you can explore the outcome (or fail to explore it accurately XD)
For that reason, I dislike the format of campaigns (even when I like playing them anyway), since the fail criteria is when you don't achieve the thing that already happened.
But in Sins 1, every match you played felt like another story in an unimaginably huge war. If you lost the match, then it felt like that's the story that happened in history anyway.
I'm probably going to love the Sins 2 campaign, but I'd almost rather have it be in some dynamic format where they can give you the story and lore without it depending on what you accomplish or how you do so.