(This thread is about Castles 2)

I'm getting convinced that I might be the world's most un-skilled video game addict. I've bought 2 games so far from GOG--both with endless strings of GOG members lauding them as "some of the best games ever made"--and I want my money back for both games.

The game itself doesn't seem to have any real technical problems; although the graphics & colors are all messed up (it's like trying to watch a scrambled cable pay-channel), the game seems to function in all the ways it was programed to. (Castles 1, on the other can't load at ALL.)
I don't know what it is (maybe a personal techno-curse on myself), but whenever I try any new game in which I'm pitted against other players who are computer-controlled, I have as much success as a kid shooting at a Dalek Battle-Cruiser with a potato-gun.

Difficulty mode set to "EASY." Major false advertising there.
I got myself established with like 6 territories, and a very mediocre army, and by then I was surrounded on all sides on Anjou and Burgandy. There was one neutral, unoccupied terriory right below me which I attacked unsuccessfully 3 times in a row (apparently they have Elite-Commando peasants?). I wanted to attack Burgandy (the only way I could gain any more land), but my army was 1/5 the size of his.
I'd try to make more troops, but in the time it took to train 1 archer, Sabeteurs would steal half my resources... which would leave without enough food/gold to feed/pay my army, making my hard-earned archer abandon me moments after I recruited him. (this cycle would then repeat for a couple years).
After reading through the manual I learn the only protection I have from enemy sabeteurs is "Policing the Realm", which reduces my happiness rating (and takes away my ability to train troops, as I only had 1 military taskbar). As my happiness rating was getting lower every time I performed an action, I have to compensate by doing the Happiness Task... doing which costs pretty much all the resources I have at any given time.

When a game stops being about "see how quickly you can expand & vanquish your opponents" and becomes about "see how long you can last until you're completely wiped out"... it's no longer worth playing.

Seriously I should never pay for another video game that I haven't already played & determined to be decently playable. Never before have I had so much respect for video-game DEMOS.

I do think I will be using GOG again any more.

I have barely played Castles 2 so I can't help you there but I can tell you that you're not alone.

First a question: How many really old games have you played, say released before 1995?

You see really old games are generally MUCH harder than newer games. It's very common for a player that haven't played games for so long to try them and get totally humiliated. So that's why I say you're not alone. :)

So don't give up. You do get used to the difficulty after a while. Imho it's worth it to keep trying.

This is indeed quite a difficult game, as Tarm says there are easier/more recent games on GOG that you could try ... what are your interests?

As for the game itself, try to build up a mix of resources, don't try building a (big) castle until you have the ability to do two tasks under resources & management, use policing the realm to catch enemy spies (again two task bars), build your army up slowly. Getting two task bars is essential for military and management needs.

One important part of the game is diplomacy. If you have seen the demo, you would know that keeping the pope and the people happy is at a very high priority. Fail to do so, and you'll quickly lose. I was also very frustrated by the game before knowing this.

First of all, all the specific advice that was given in the comments above about how to play this game... I'd already used those strategies, they weren't enough to get me very far. I know from experience that "really old games" tend to be hard (I have played many many of them, as far back as before my family even got our first computer in 1993). I see from your comments that Castles 2 is generally considered rather hard even by the standards of it's era... if I had known that beforehand, I would NOT have purchased it.
Game reviews on GOG mostly indicate how much people *like* specific games, and in what ways, but they don't have much to say on how easy or hard games are. Unfortunately, even though I've been a huge video-game nerd since I was a wee lad, I have virtually never managed to beat any video game without full-on CHEATING, or at least looking up the secrets/answers in books/magazines/the internet. My ***favorite*** thing about the NES was the Genie. GOG really should have a system to rank the difficulty level of games in some way(s). I can't really afford to buy games and then see if I can play them or not, even if they're only $6 (i'm poor).

Secondly, I immediately after making this thread a week ago, I uninstalled the games I had gotten from GOG, as I have no intention of playing them again. To be honest, the real reason I came here was so I could get games that I already own but which are no longer playable because I recently got a new computer that runs Windows7 (this includes the MAJORITY of the PC games I own). Unfortunately of all those games GOG only carries one: Master of Orion 2. There's at least a half-dozen other games that I was hoping to find here but didn't.
I suffer from a lot of medical conditions including chronic depression, and video games are my primary "antidepressants". When a game gets to be problematic that I get stressed out just trying to get it work right, then it loses its purpose, and that seems to be the case with GOG in general.

I'm sorry to hear of your troubles.

GOG is adding games all the time as it signs on new publishers, gets permission from the publishers for specific games, and then those games working right on modern systems, so check back every once in awhile. You might the find the games you were looking for added. May I ask what they are?

I have some game suggestions which as a disclaimer I have to admit I haven't had the opportunity to try myself. I've not got very many GOG games and even amongst those few I have I haven't gotten through many of them. With that caveat, you can use the game-specific forums to double check the difficulty of the games.

So it seems you like Master of Orion? (agreed on it being a fantastic game) Have you tried Master of Magic? I've not played it myself, but have heard great things and that it is extremely similar to Master of Orion 1/2 (same developer). So that might be something you'd be interested in if you were looking for Master of Orion in a fantasy setting.

It seems you like strategy in general. I bought recently and am about to try Lords of the Realm 1/2 (Royal Edition). Have you played it? It seems like a younger version of Castles 2 so it might be easier on easy difficulty settings (if it has one, again I've not tried it yet). In a few weeks, provided work and real life don't get in the way I might be able to tell you how it was.

Last game suggestion: I've also bought but haven't tried yet Evil Genius (got it and Lords of the Realm on the sale recently) which is at the $9.99 price point. My understanding is that though it sounds like quite a complex little game there are some exploits that make the game very easy to beat. The top review on GOG ("Evil will always win because Good is very, very, very dumb" - gave the game 4 stars) gives a very detailed account of the gameplay including a couple of the exploits. There are apparently walkthroughs online too.

One thing you can try is for the games you are interested in buying go to their game-specific forums and ask people how hard the game is explaining to whatever level of detail you wish why you want to know. I think most people will try to helpful. They can also tell you if the game has any known technical issues. Especially for the $9.99 priced games this might save you some money (and time).

Hope you get better and find a game or games here that you'll like. As crazy_dave said, tell us what kind of games you're interested in and we might be able to help. :) PixelPaladin
From what you've said you might want to stay clear of Master of Magic. It's one of those games that are very hard until you've learned how it works and have a really long learning curve. If you decide to try it anyway read a strategy guide or ask in the Master of Magic forum here on GOG. There are a couple of easy strategies that can give you a early win or big advantage. When you've learned them, they're not that hard, you can take your time learning the rest of the game.
It's one of the truly greats and if you do like it it have almost infinite replayability because there are so many variables you can change and ways to play it.

Lords of the Realm I agree upon. There is really only one thing you need to learn. Cows rule. :)
If you concentrate on getting cows and feed your population with dairy produce you shouldn't have much difficulty winning against the easy computer. It seems like a daunting game but really isn't.
The cows will give you a big, happy and healthy population quickly. Buy mercenaries and camp them close to a neighbouring neutral counties centre. When there's a merchant in the county take it over and immediately make sure the population get food by buying it from the merchant. Cows preferably. :) Oh and don't forget to have some sheep. Their wool sells for lots of money.
That should get you started in Lords of the Realm without much aggravation.

The weird part is that I kind of feel the same. I've been into video games since 1993 (I was a little boy back then) and I've played both Castles games in the first part of the 90's. They didn't seem difficult back then since I had all the time in the world to learn the ropes, scheme & plan.
At this point, it's not that I feel the games are more difficult. It's the fact that recent games have gotten us used to instant gratification (add that to the lack of time, and there you have it).

Castles II isn't about vanquishing your opponents; it's about establishing good relations with your people, the Pope, and your neighbors, and building a large enough dominion to claim the throne.

And the AI won't try to wipe you out; their goal, like yours, is to earn enough points to claim the throne. You, and they, can easily do so without vanquishing anybody. Neutral territories on Normal mode (and presumably on Easy mode) are defended by 1 Infantry and 1 Archer, so don't attack any neutral territories unless you have at least 2 Infantry and 2 Archers. If you take casualties, you must recruit replacements before attacking any other territories. Otherwise, you'll launch unsuccessful attacks that just waste your time and resources.

In any case, your starting army should be sufficient to conquer any neutral territory with no casualties on your side. I tend to suffer fewer casualties if I leave my infantry where they are and deploy my archers as far forward as possible. (Your infantry will catch up at the perfect time.) The main function of "Police Realm" is to stop saboteurs. If one of your neighbors has bad relations with you, it may be a good idea to devote a panel and a couple of Military points to policing the realm. (By the time it becomes an issue, you should have 5 military points and 2 panels.)

I agree with you but for one thing. When some cheat it's because of not enough time and energy.

Before I was like you but the older I get the less time and energy I have for games. The only time I get to really play games is on weekends and usually only for one day.
So sometimes I simply want to finish that god damned game and try a new so I cheat to get to the end. Which isn't always a bad thing. Usually I play it again after a while and this time I don't cheat. I've already finished it so that pressure is gone. Now I can start to learn to play good by, well, just playing around and having fun with it. :)

I've found that with hard games, they SEEM impossible, but you just have to keep at them and keep trying new things until you find out the secret to success!


they don't make em like they used to anymore, now adays games are so much easier in comparison. thats probably what your used to, and then a game comes along and you don't have to patience to stick with it. not that i'm being hard on you, thats fine, its a noble play style. i myself prefer quick easy games too. much better that way.

I'm under the mindset that the starter of this thread is just not really a gamer at heart.

he's a casual game player who enjoys using cheats to further his enjoyment so he can beat a game.
alright, that's fine, but it's in bad form to announce that a game is too hard if this is the only way you really play games.

I can beat this game on "Impossible" without much effort, in about an hour and ten minutes.
You just have to know a few tricks and strategies to get you going. *clears throat; polishes nails on shirt, with a smarmy grin*

Well this is interesting. I'm just logging onto GOG for the first time in about 2 years. I'd completely forgotten about this whole thing until I saw the notification that new replies have been made, even after so long.
In case anyone else finds this thread again, I'm gonna try to settle the issue & clear up some things right away. (Feel free to scroll down to the last couple paragraphs if you only want to see part that has to do with Castles 2 specifically.)

First of all, to xenxander, re: your last reply, you are wrong. I AM a gamer at heart, I'm just rather low-skilled & untalented at my favorite hobby. And I am largely into casual games these days, but it's so much a matter of preference, more like limitations on my time & ability to plan in general, and the availability of games these days which is steeply inclined towards casual games.

Second, in regards to my own habit of cheating, most of the things most of you said is right.
Maybe my dependency on cheating has resulted from doing it too often too early in life, or maybe I just have a natural, inherent lack of skill that makes less capable of succeeding than the average lifelong video-gamer. But regardless of whether it's right or wrong, it's how I am now. The irony is palpable, that I'm a video-game addict who sort of sucks at video-games. But then again I've been a highly bizarre & unusual person (though it took me until I was almost 30 to get the correct psychiatric diagnoses), and in the last few years I've developed more conditions that cause me to be mentally slower & less patient than I used to be, and have chronic anxiety with a VERY short fuse. So consider my cheating-habit to be a necessary crutch that makes me able to do as much gaming as I do (just like how I find a cane necessary to use in order to walk very long or far).

Third, I'm reiterating that video-games are my primary form of antidepression "medication". I need them in order to have fun, to counter the negative feelings of stress & depression & such. When I play a game, the fun comes from the experience of playing, the progress made through a game, and the gratification of eventually beating it. Completing a big task/project such as a video-game is gratifying in itself; even if it isn't particularly "well-done," it still means something to me that it's "done." I don't get a significant amount of pleasure from the *challenge* of it, so beating a difficult game isn't necessarily more satisfying than beating an easy game. But that's just me, I know I don't represent the norm.

Lastly, regarding the original purpose of this thread: Castles 2.
Main reason I made this thread to complain and even wanted a refund, wasn't just that the game is "too hard for me." It's because I bought the game without knowing that it's difficult. I bought it because I thought it would be fun, because that's what all the reviews told me it was. None of them mentioned the difficulty of it.
Some games have a reputation for being difficult. One of the most notorious examples is Oregon Trail; if you were to describe it to someone who didn't know anything about it already, I'm pretty sure you'd tell them about how it's nearly-impossible to beat. Similar is Contra on NES; it's difficulty level is it's 2nd most famous aspect, after the Konami Code of course. And really, most games on the NES are notably difficult compared to modern games, even the super-popular & highest-rated ones.
Castles 2 isn't as extreme as an example, but still it's a somewhat tough game, and given the feedback I've read since I tried it 2 years ago, it seems like most fans are well aware of it. If only some of them had thought to mention this in their reviews, that would have made all the difference. *IF* people had talked about how "this game is quite challenging, but still one of the best games of its time", then I would not have bought it. But they only talked about how "this is one of the best games of its time", and to my mind that implied that is wasn't particularly hard. Maybe people just assumed that everyone else who knew about the game was aware of its difficulty & thought it goes without saying, or they assume that any newcomer to it will automatically assume that all games from that era are hard. Or maybe no one thought it would be worth mentioning the difficulty in reviews unless the difficulty was extreme (like Contra or Oregon Trail, which this game isn't even close to, but it's still a far cry from "easy").

So in the end what happened was A) I found this game because it's of a particular genre that I love & was shopping for at the time, B) I read the game reviews to get an idea what it was like, C) based on the reviews, I thought it would be fun & easy, D) I bought it & played it, E) I discovered it is not easy after all.
I bought it under false pretenses (it was advertised, figuratively speaking, as something other than what it really was), so I wanted a refund because "this is not what I was trying to buy."

But it's a moot point now. I never touched the game again, and I learned a valuable lesson about not spending money on games that I haven't first tried out for myself. And hey, look on the bright side; at least I learned the lesson with a $6 game rather than a $30 game!

I am not a great strategist either, but to prevent further tragedies like this from occurring I'll go ahead and offer some "crutches" people can use to beat Castles 2. This is a pretty good game and worth the effort, but some jankiness is warranted.


1. "One-Man Army" - prior to starting a battle, position every soldier you have on the same pixel. This turns your army into a single, super-champion gladiator that slaughters anything he engages almost instantly.

2. Merchant non-existent commodities - blatant exploit, great for getting through the learning curve - merchant tasks don't seem to check your available resources. You can send a Merchant to a rival offering, say, Timber for Gold, and if you have zero Timber in your stockpile, you effectively get free Gold if the trade goes through.

3. Seasons - farm and chop wood Apr-Sep, mine iron and gold Oct-Mar (if feasible). The tasks run faster.

4. Specialize - if iron is plentiful, start out only building Infantry; otherwise, only build Archers, who are more versatile at least until castles start popping up everywhere. Taking a castle with just Archers is tricky.

5. Your best way to win a defensive action is to position the aforementioned One-Man Army as far from the enemy line as possible at the start, and order him to move further back even from there. Many of the attackers will actually lose "aggro" and the enemy force can be slowly, carefully picked off.

6. A successful defense is huge! +1 happiness in your empire, and one of your rivals just got his army fried.