Differences between FTK1 and FTK2

[Stiltskins]

I just finished the first level of the campaign, and I found myself thinking that the game seems to be almost exactly the same as FTK1. The only difference I noticed was the combat grid and updated graphics. Is my memory failing me or is everything almost exactly the same as the first game?

[ajfusch]

You have secondary actions, so you can heal AND atack in the same turn. Or throw bombs and attack in the same turn.
You also have followers. You choose additional traits for your chars at the start of a game. (Once you've unlocked some). Also buy additional equipment at the start. There are new classes.
And of course, you have a party of 4. Important difference for a group of 4 who want to play together.

For the similiarities ... no sequel of a game is ever completely different from the first game. Most even use the very same engine/mechanics/graphics and just slap a new story/campaign on it.

[Athloner]

Better gameplay, graphics, content but the game runs a lot worse

[Gilmoy]

Most things are identical.
If you know and love FtK I, you will almost surely love FtK II.
That's $$$$ to the devs' ears. They're ultimately in it to earn their houses.

Some things are subtly different.

+ 4 heroes is a logical progression. The game engine can, the devs can, the players can.
Probably what they discovered was the mayhem of 4 live humans, over the Internet,
voting to go different ways, and it still works as a fun evening. There's magic in it.

+ More room to flex their story writing skills.
It's not merely a sequence of disjoint combats, as in Darkest Dungeon (which is also fun).

++ To me, the deepest changes are what isn't in FtK II.
FtK I had naive combinations of abusable tricks, each OK taken alone,
but which combine into game-clowning firepower. Then that's optimal play.
But devs balanced the game without noticing those combos, and it topples their balance.

Off the top of my head:
+ Reset-locking. Fix: Reset isn't in FtK II. (FtK II flaw: Pull-recur )

+ Restore Focus. Focus is a nuisance until you find the 1st lute or wand.
Then it becomes a non-issue for the rest of the game.
Stram (= strum + spam) your Focus back in every fight. Pick fights for that sole purpose.

In Heroes of a Broken Land, we promote to L4 Bishop for Energize.
Thereafter, post-fight, press Space for ~20 seconds to regen 100% mana.
Program your G2 gaming key to do that, tap twice, mana's a non-issue.
Then every game has the Mana's An Issue Epoch, Energize, Mana's Free Epoch.
That is optimal play, and everybody does it. (Now you know how to play HoBL.)

In FtK I, Focus is a non-issue. Minstrel, lute, you're in the Focus Is Free Epoch on turn 8.
Devs thought we had to actually carefully manage Focus, and make hard choices?
Stram, done, FtK I's solved. Newbie, Journeyman, kill Frost Dragon, that were (too) easy.
Looking back on it now, FtK I is a tad silly because there's never any epic struggle.

Obviously, you use all that free +Focus to spam -1 Focus on Reset

So in FtK II, no Restore Focus (and no lutes ). Now Focus matters again!
Even having done all that in FtK I, I find II enthralling.
The Chaos clock has me on edge.
I really do agonize over hoarding Focus. The struggle is real!
Players here brag about Alchemist with every (fair) +Focus trick in the game.

+ In FtK I, HP Regen procs per dungeon step. In II, it doesn't. (Passives still do proc in II.)
I happily abused that in FtK I, and amassed more than 2 full sets of HP Regen gear.
1 hero can wear only 1 set at a time, so overland I regen only +12 HP per turn, per hero.
Underground, all 4 heroes proc concurrently, per step.
Gear on, +28 HP across 4 heroes, gear off for the next fight.
But it eventually clowns Caves with HP profit. Then Party Heal is a waste.
It's hard to balance the game when L6s see L6 Cave as a source of free healing.

Do that a few times, and you're L8s in L6 Caves, already a bit bored with the game.
Yes, it's fun to do these things once each, but I wouldn't go back just to run up the score.
It's all a bit too easy.

Surely what happened is that devs play their own game, and found all of these tricks, too.
And they wince and say, If we ever make a sequel, let's not do this again.

And so it is. FtK II "adds by subtracting" to close some of FtK I's worst loopholes.
I think it works. I've played II for about as long as I ever played I, and I can't abuse II (yet).
It makes it a far more gripping and challenging game, with epic struggle and worthy wins.

Superficially, they look very much like the same game.
But under the hood, FtK II is a far superior game, with a better experience.
Go earn your win through hard labor, it is not handed to you here.

[ajfusch]

I don't quite agree with the focus thing.
1. you have an insane amount of max focus compared to FtK, and that's without equipment or wishing wells.
2. I never used a lute to regain focus, to do so reliably you had to use focus in the first place and maybe I missed something but I never found it worthwhile.
3. you still have the refocus trait and items that give you that trait, also leveling up and sanctuaries, meditating etc.

Summed up: lack of focus isn't a thing that you have to deal with often in FtK 2, either.

I also don't agree with difficulty, at least not on apprentice. The first 2 campaigns were way easier than in FtK. Mostly because they nerfed the game shortly after launch due to ridiculous complaints, I guess.

Anyway, yes, it is different in lots of small ways, and that's part of the fun, you're totally right there.

[NegativeZero]

Originally posted by ajfusch:

For the similiarities ... no sequel of a game is ever completely different from the first game. Most even use the very same engine/mechanics/graphics and just slap a new story/campaign on it.

There's a huge gap between being "completely different" and very minimally different like FtK 2 is compared to FtK 1.

As for your claim that "most" sequels are mostly the same, let me compare to sequels that came out even just only this year that I've played or am familiar with:

· Darkest Dungeon 2 - So very different from DD1. Unfortunately, the differences are often not quite so much for the better

· Trine 5 - Probably the most similar to its predecessors of all the sequels I've played this year, but I still felt like it has more profound and significant changes than I feel with the difference in FtK games. I say this because the new abilities they introduce in Trine 5 dramatically change up the core gameplay.

· Baldur's Gate 3 - obviously insanely more improved and different than its predecessors

· Street Fighter 6 - also way more different and overall quite good evolution in the series (though I still think 4 was stronger overall)

· Tears of the Kingdom - does suffer from being a lot like a BotW 1.5, but the innovation it does offer is incredible and very unique in all of gaming to this date

· Phantom Liberty - not a sequel, just an expansion, but even the FREE 2.0 update changes the game a whole lot more than the changes even from Ftk 1 to FtK 2. Meanwhile in FtK 2 each chapter feels like it's more or less in the same map. The maps feel way too similar to each other. Variety of skills, abilities, gameplay, tactics, locations, characters, and etc. feel lacking and uninspired.

· Diablo 4 - Considerably different I'd say, unfortunately many of the changes were in the wrong direction for a lot (most?) people

[NegativeZero]

Oh, and Fire Emblem Engage also came out this year. Yet another example going against your assertion that most sequels are mostly the same.

[ajfusch]

Okay, you got me there, I extrapolated from the games I played. BG3 isn't a direct sequel, imho, since it's been way too long since BG2 . It's more a new game set in the same universe. The same goes for the Fallout Games after Fallout 2. FtK howver has come out pretty soon after the first game.
My point was that it was to be expected that they only changed small things. And to me, that's fine.

[FireGryph]

What were you expecting? Did you think FTK2 was gonna be a souls-like adventure RPG with a deck-building system?