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
That’s not what he asked. I picked it up during this sale op, so far I had good impressions. It’s also a lot more “ heroic “ instead of grimderp so far unlike most 40k games
Havent played the first but allegedly it is
The games reflect the happenings of the twelfth black crusade - aka the gothic campaign, as it is written in the battlefleet gothic table top game rule book. (this is BFG:A part 1)
And the thirteenth black crusade and it's aftermath, BFG:A2
They are not dependent on each other.
But in Part 2, there are some references to what happened in part 1.
Spire remembering the inquisitor from the first game
or telling a long lost captain that he can not be alive, etc.
But you don't need the first game to understand what happens in the second.
IMO the first game is better than the second
i really prefer the ability to automate stuff on the battlefield with right clicking on certain abilities.
I agree that the first game had a better campaign. Even though the campaign in the second game has a lot more going on in the strategic layer, it actually feels like it has too much going on. This is coming from someone who plays plenty of strategy games. The first game's strategy layer was simple, but effective. The story is also simpler and more focused.
Still, I enjoyed both games' campaigns. Never tried the MP though. It's not my style.