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
You mainly create your own story as you go along, with some quest driven lore missions for epic items and other noteworthy events for certain factions and characters.
But the campaign is sandbox, although this one will be more directed than previous titles (region occupation limitations/quests).
But i still think the game will be a more sandbox, with a few scripted events.
Yeah, that part seems odd, but at least there is a mod coming out (hopefully day 1) that will address the concept of only being able to conquer certain regions. The problem is, then, will this work for multiplayer, as well? Otherwise, multiplayer almost seems redundant, if you don't pick factions that are supposed to conquer one another. I mean if I select Chaos, and my friend selects dwarves...will they ever meet? Chaos wants to conquer Bretonnia, and the Dwarves want to kick the Greenskins and Vampires out of their lands. It almost sounds like we would have to deviate heavily to be involved, either with diplomacy or punching each others' faces in.
OP: +1 on Van Horstman theory. Also, I found one of his many spectacles the other day.