Kingdoms vs Medieval Dynasty

[alexa]

As the title says , this topic is only for those who own both the games, if possible

Would be nice to know the differences and plans between the two and which one is more polished thus far

[Mirtillosecco]

They are two different things. Medieval Dynasty focuses on the development of settlement through resources and on creating its own family dynasty; absent the part of the war and the fighting except the addition of bandits. It is developed by a team which allows greater ease in producing content, patches and changes to the graphics. Kingdoms compared to Medieval Dinasty has a less complex and simpler graphics engine, it also focuses on the introduction of wars.

[GDomo]

Medieval Fantasy has better graphics and is more polished overall, in part due to having more devs and being built on newer tech. I think Kingdoms has more ambition though, with a very active dev and open dev, and a large scope for the game.

[zantariz]

I own both. I play both. They are similar in theme / genre, but they are different in many ways. I enjoy them both. Medieval Dynasty have greater visual appeal and program functionality is more polished as previous poster mentioned, but it's a lot more restrictive, slower paces, and resource demanding.

[agmay101]

hi all ive played over 200hrs at both games and agree with your comments --i MD i can make my village neat and tidy --you start with streets and build houses along them i also have fruit trees along the streets as well so villages can use them --it has a fishing hut-- but i cant fish --some thing i like doing in games--but to me there heading in the wrong way there getting bandits and wars which im not into --other players like that stuff but its not for me--in kingdoms Cy has done that stuff and to me has an exciting future a head --his road map looks good for the stile of game i like--he said he doing some thing with the ruins -fishing --hope i can fish as well as the settlers --and if he gets a story line in the game as well --it looks very interesting and now going in a good direction--happy gaming all

[zantariz]

Originally posted by agmay101:

hi all ive played over 200hrs at both games and agree with your comments --i MD i can make my village neat and tidy --you start with streets and build houses along them i also have fruit trees along the streets as well so villages can use them --it has a fishing hut-- but i cant fish --some thing i like doing in games--but to me there heading in the wrong way there getting bandits and wars which im not into --other players like that stuff but its not for me--in kingdoms Cy has done that stuff and to me has an exciting future a head --his road map looks good for the stile of game i like--he said he doing some thing with the ruins -fishing --hope i can fish as well as the settlers --and if he gets a story line in the game as well --it looks very interesting and now going in a good direction--happy gaming all

Introducing a story line scares me. Generally that means having to control the way you play. One of the biggest draws to this game is that the game doesn't control how you play. As long as the game continues to allow the player to turn features on and off or to avoid them entirely, I don't mind new features being added.

[agmay101]

hi Zantariz--the story line i mention- be only about the ruins -a way of useing them -there just a waste at the moment--the ones with chest in- the graphics in them are cool--and you can mine ore there as well --so with hidden wall that lead to tunnels with wall drawings about the past history maybe gems in them as well--its endless what Cy can do --the games got a great future i think--- good gaming

[NerevarineGMSV]

Kingdoms is a much more "accessible" game, especially, for casual players to jump into and start enjoying right away. Everything is rather straight-forward. You gain XP from doing almost anything and can spend it on increasing skills simliar to Skyrim "perk point" system, but made simple. Want to be able to build more things from wood? Add a point to that skill to unlock a bunch of stuff. There's just several levels of each of the several skills anyways so it's easy to understand.

In contrast, Medieval Dynasty is a semi-linear game requiring the player do boring time-consuming quests with hidden rewards that if not endeavored on are game-breaking, with being able to be one-shotted by a wild pigs bent on chasing down and attacking the player like an MMO "hostile" would, and progression, skill, and "technology" systems so grossly broken and still gated behind overly complicated, grindy, redundant, illogical design. You can build a house before you can build a wooden bucket essential for many other areas for crafting, to where you have to clear acres of empty fields just to obtain the "tech level" to unlock the ability to spend money on unlocking a skill that lets you make a bucket. I'm not joking (I have the receipts). It's really aweful. It has NOWHERE near the freedom Kingdoms gives the player. Medieval Dynasty has better graphics but the world is small and static whereas Kingdoms, it grows on its own, the NPCs do things on their own without need for the player to hold their hand. MD seems designed to hassle the player than give them something to enjoy. Whereas Kingdoms, feels all about freedom and enjoyment.

[Quickhand69er]

I would go with Kingdoms as it has new and unique mechanics and game play. As Medieval Dynasty adds nothing new to the genre. Everything in that game has been done before.

[AyyEffM]

Yep, have both, if I had to choose, would probably pick Kingdoms. Not knowing anything about either, I could see why people would go with MD, as it looks pretty nice, but Kingdoms gameplay and entire premise is a better experience.

[alexa]

Originally posted by AyyEffM:

Yep, have both, if I had to choose, would probably pick Kingdoms. Not knowing anything about either, I could see why people would go with MD, as it looks pretty nice, but Kingdoms gameplay and entire premise is a better experience.

kingdoms right now is still as rough as i remembered , characters often walk below the foundation of the houses

[g0815krieger]

I was very enthusistic about MD when it started, but Devs heading in completely wrong direction listening to the kids in the comunity who want to get gifted everything in no time.
Devs removed every challange that existed in MD.
My latest play I managed to build all available buildings within 5 ingame years, was married and had a hire. Boredom starts at that point, as you simply have nothing more to do than running the same boring missions again and again, untill your hire is old enough to take over.

Kingdoms is much more fun play as you are completely free in your decissions where you want to go to. If you reached a goal, simple set yourself another goal and try to accomplish that, which might be very challanging.

[Father Damien]

I don't see myself replaying Medieval Dynasty but Kingdoms for me has more replayability. I love the economic system and the game feels more like a gem.

[alexa]

Originally posted by g0815krieger:

I was very enthusistic about MD when it started, but Devs heading in completely wrong direction listening to the kids in the comunity who want to get gifted everything in no time.
Devs removed every challange that existed in MD.
My latest play I managed to build all available buildings within 5 ingame years, was married and had a hire. Boredom starts at that point, as you simply have nothing more to do than running the same boring missions again and again, untill your hire is old enough to take over.

Kingdoms is much more fun play as you are completely free in your decissions where you want to go to. If you reached a goal, simple set yourself another goal and try to accomplish that, which might be very challanging.

i dont mind really, grindy game days for me are over. MD is a very polished product where as Kingdoms has more freedom and i hope it gets polished nicely at the end

[Dragon]

I don't own Medieval Dynasty but, all these comparisons got me sort of interested. Are they really comparable?

I always viewed the Dynasty games (Farmer's Dynasty, Medieval Dynasty, Lumberjack's Dynasty, Wild West Dynasty - you can buy them all in a bundle) as farming/labour sims, whilst Kingdoms is more akin to realtime grand strategy and kingdom building.

How many cities develop on MD's map compared to Kingdoms? What's NPC settlement building like? Can you raise an army and go to war? Or some guards to defend your town at least? Do other settlements actually attack you/each other? Do you also have the settlement management, professions, blacksmithing etc? What's wall building/fortification and sieges like in MD?

There seems to be zero information on it's store page about these features that would actually make it comparable with Kingdoms. Do these features actually exist in MD?

[zantariz]

They are very generally comparable for the genre, but as many have mentioned, they vary in many ways. MD does not have that AI war aspect. In fact they are just now in the process of adding Bandits to the game.

Although Kingdoms does have the AI war option, it seems a bit clunky still. I'm not a big fan of having war enabled in my games. I don't like spending a lot of time building to have somebody knock it all down. Anyway, I did have a war campaign in my last game and it seems a bit glitchy and unrefined. However, I've read that several improvements have been made, so I can't speak to the current state of things.