Brytenwalda vs Viking Conquest

[Regen7]

It's my understanding these were both made by the same team. VC being a paid mod and Brytenwalda not.

I can't help but feel a different level of quality between the two.

I feel like Brytenwalda improves on the base game alot (sieges, camp options, weapons etc) and is well made.

However when i play viking conquest, it feels underdeveloped and lacking depth. For example the camping system is very empty, you can't reinforce or anything and the towns don't have as many options.

So was VC rushed out the door or?

It sucks because Viking Conquest would be my favorite version of the game I just wish it was more fleshed out.

[Tuidjy]

Viking Conquest has a better story, and better combat balance. Brytenwalda feels richer because it incorporates a number of open source mods that would not be included in a paid DLC.

I enjoy them both, and consider the money paid for on Viking Conquest well spent.

[EmotionallyBroken]

Originally posted by Tuidjy:

Viking Conquest has a better story, and better combat balance. Brytenwalda feels richer because it incorporates a number of open source mods that would not be included in a paid DLC.

I enjoy them both, and consider the money paid for on Viking Conquest well spent.

but, shouldnt even be able to use open source projects? or is it a "cant charge profit" claus?

[Tuidjy]

Originally posted by 250RoundMags:

Originally posted by Tuidjy:

Brytenwalda feels richer because it incorporates a number of open source mods that would not be included in a paid DLC.

or is it a "cant charge profit" claus?

Yes, that is the reason.

[philippefaux]

My biggest problem with viking conquest is the character graphic. All men bodies shaped like minotaurs and faces are plain ugly. This is weird but i prefer Brytenwalda that is years older.