Historic vs. Fun

[Vytis]

So what kind of KoH you'd rather have : historic simulation or simply fun ?

Historic = real countries, monarchs, units, etc., more strategy than action.
Fun = real-life stuff doesn't matter, action first: build as many units as possible and conquer all.

[Henrik]

I voted "Historic" coz if i just wanted to play a normal "braindead" RTS game i wouldn't spend so much time here in waiting for the KOH game - i would just go out and buy a "normal" RTS and have fun with that one !

[Bora]

i votedt 4 historic, too!
but i am not angryy if its in some "corners" a bit unrealsitic to improve the fun

[Jorghan]

Hey well, I think KOH will take in as much historic accuracy as it can, but it won't sacrifice the fun for it. I think that is fine. Personally I want both types of games, or even better, a game that incorporates both.

[Emhyr var Emreis]

I voted history, but I hope it won't be against fun.

Gues which scenarios I made for myself in AoK. Historical Europe, crusaders' Middle east, Bohemia and countries around, but I hated that limit of 75 units...

PS: Correct historical nations with true historical personalities IS fun-to change it :D

[Lord Sandman]

Well, I prefer historic simulation than fantasy (but I like fantasy medieval games like Lords of Magic for example or Age of Wonders series)... Few years ago was huge medieval game - BRAVEHEART...But battles in this tittle was horrible. But besides Lords2 this game was real medieval simulation ( in turn based of course;)).
Fortunatelly games like Europa Universalis shows us that RTS can be very interesting strategy too. I hope KoH will be great game too:go: Keep good work!

[Elewyn]

I voted history. Accuratness is very important for me.. I know sometimes you must use fantasy (I study history and we don't know everythinh about this age, so we sometimes have to imagine how it can be), especialy when you are game creator.

[Stanceland]

I voted history ;)

But a bit fun ist ok

[Darius]

I voted Historie, the reasons are pretty much the same as you guys...

[Angryminer]

I didn't vote.

I don't want KoH to be exact but boring, neither fun but unrealistic.
Anyway, it's far too late to change the gameplay...

Angryminer

[Dankish]

I don't think this thread has been named properly because for some people (like me) the history-based games ("historic simulations") are the real fun. That's why I am so excited about KoH (well, I'm big Age of Empires' fan as well, but who's not ?:)
Actually that game will gather many history fans at one place and one of these fans is me :).

[Angryminer]

From the FAQ:

Will KoH be historically accurate?
Although the game is set in medieval Europe and features a lot of history, the fun factor always wins out if there is a conflict.

Angryminer

[Vytis]

Although the game is set in medieval Europe and features a lot of history, the fun factor always wins out if there is a conflict.
Exactly the reason I put this poll here.
I'm pleasantly surprised by the results so far. Apparently there are more people like me who enjoy historic simulations. Just a friendly reminder to developers not to go too far with that 'fun factor'. There are plenty of 'mindless fun' games already. KoH simply looks too good to became a mediocre clone.
:king:

[Jebal]

I would have voted for both if there was an option, but as it is, I went for historic.
It's important to me that we get a good historic-based game such as Knights of Honor (I love the name). Making a pure fantasy game enters this into competition with games like Warcraft III, and that one's already come close to perfecting the fantasy RTS genre. Better to reap and sow in the field that needs more nurturing, and pretty much always has.

[Siautas]

Originally posted by Lord Sandman
...Fortunatelly games like Europa Universalis shows us that RTS can be very interesting strategy too. I hope KoH will be great game too:go: Keep good work!

I prefer historic simulation too but what medieval strategy game is historical? Even new product of Paradox Knights of the Cross will be just fiction of historical strategy game. KOH seems for me much more realistic historical RTS than any other already realysed game :cheers:

[Lord Sandman]

Originally posted by Siautas
I prefer historic simulation too but what medieval strategy game is historical? Even new product of Paradox Knights of the Cross will be just fiction of historical strategy game. KOH seems for me much more realistic historical RTS than any other already realysed game :cheers:

Do you mean Crusader Kings?? In begining, when I read an advirtesements, I though that this will be great game...Maybye it be, but have you seen srenshots? In my opinion CK graphically hasn't any chance with KoH, even that both of games are in 2D... But we will see, maybye CK will have many options and possibilities to win the game than KoH?? But at this moment I prefer KoH. IMO it's one right game which has chance to beat EUII...( in RTS category of course;))

[Siautas]

Originally posted by Lord Sandman
Do you mean Crusader Kings?? In begining, when I read an advirtesements, I though that this will be great game...Maybye it be, but have you seen srenshots? In my opinion CK graphically hasn't any chance with KoH, even that both of games are in 2D... But we will see, maybye CK will have many options and possibilities to win the game than KoH?? But at this moment I prefer KoH. IMO it's one right game which has chance to beat EUII...( in RTS category of course;))

Yes I'm talking about Crusader Kings :). I saw screenshots... nothing special... The biggest disadvantage of this game that you can play just for "Christian" dynasties and for Grand Duchy of Lithuania - not. I was reading that forum since last summer.

Yes U are right - KOH graphic looks very promising and much better than in others games.

[King Yngvar]

For me, historical means fun. So the question should rather be, just historical or fantasy. That is why I am a little confused by reading this:

Will KoH be historically accurate?
Although the game is set in medieval Europe and features a lot of history, the fun factor always wins out if there is a conflict.

So fantasy will win over history?

[Elewyn]

So fantasy will win over history?
Here "fantasy" is not meant as fantasy like Warcraft or mr. Tolkien's books, but imagination of the devs.

Some cases of mediaeval Europe are a bit too complicated to fe fully in the game, so they must make it easier for gameplay by using their imagination, not by involving dragons and mags.

I think that hisory itself is fun, but I know that in some cases must be sacryfised:(

:cheers:

[Angryminer]

"...the fun factor always wins out if there is a conflict." doesn't mean that there'll be any fantasy-parts in it.
If there is a historical fact that really fuc*s up the gameplay and makes the game boring/worse, it will be removed. In any other case historical accuracy and fun don't interfere, and the devs will stick with the historical accuracy.

Angryminer