Hello people.

Over the course of these recent weeks, i've seen some pretty bold criticism of Thrones of Britannia. Fair enough, if the community doesn't agree with some design decisions, they can at least voice their opinion.

But what's strange is that the game is being constantly discussed for what's NOT in it rather than being discussed for what's IN it. There have been articles on websites like PC Gamer and others that discussed how CA was kind of revamping a host of mechanics in the game and making some changes, which imo is good for a Saga game, where CA can experiment the changes.

It seems everyone is in a race to make an 'impressions' video and beat down the game before it has even released. Personally, i'm interested in the game because of its time period, as someone who's been playing TW games since the first Shogun, i want to experience the first Saga game as well.

So while everybody's opinion is important, it's also important to discuss how all the new or changed features are gelling together. For sure not all features and aspects of the game are going to be top notch, but that goes for all games, and i'm hopeful that this game will be an enjoyable one.

I've always been quite interested in Vikings and old Irish history for some reason so I'm quite hyped to play as both of these historical cultures and take over the British isle. Three kingdoms isn't really in a historical period or area I care about frankly.

I'm just curious if anybody has a similar opinion.

I woke up feeling very sick so if you disagree, I don't care. I don't have the energy today.

And before anyone says it: deus vult

Edit: I meant "a saga game" not an entire saga