It's not, I play through 1 way more than I play 2. But it's still a good game and defenitely worth it getting the complete edition for $9.99.

Do the GOG editions have encryption on the files? It is important to know, since that influences whether or not modders can do their thing.

I can't verify, but I don't think GOG has ever had encrypted executables, not even steam does that.

Only lame DD vendors like DIrect2Drive and Gamestop do that.

Is Majesty 1 better than Majesty 2?

Yes ! A thousand times better !

Majesty 2 is more of an RTS-type of game, while the 1st Majesty focused on simulating a D&D esque world. This pretty much meant that the original game had a lot more personality in the actions of the AI - rogues actively sought out chests, priests wanted to heal people, and so forth. The AI in the second game was watered down so that the player would have more control over the actions of the heroes - which missed the point. When it comes to what made Majesty unique, it was the interaction of the NPCs.

That said, there were nice things about Majesty 2:

*Heroes can be placed into parties. (It would have been even better if they did this themselves and socialized)

*When completing a mission, you can choose a hero to become a champion. That hero can be summoned in other missions. Too bad it caps out at only three summoned heroes per mission.

*The Monster Kingdom expansion let you use monsters as your servants.

*Modding capability. With caveats and limitations, because many files are encrypted. This includes the Monster Kingdom expansion. (assuming that this wasn't changed for the GOG release.)

In conclusion: If you want an RTS game, there are many better options than Majesty 2. If you desire a simulation strategy game, Majesty HD is one of the few choices available.

Basically everyone says so. Majesty 1 was a blast though, so even a step down from that should still be a good game.

I love Majesty 1. It's aged very well graphically and is a lot of fun to play. It's also easy to pick up, so multiplayer games are possible even if others haven't played it before, unlike a lot of strategy games where players need to learn the game before multiplayer is fun.

But that's the thing. Some missions require hours. I don't want to think how many hours I've spent on Legendary Heroes quest :-P. I agree that unpredictability can be a part of the fun, but not when balance gets seriously damaged in the process. Some missions can be impossible simply because of randomness - like you get attacked before you get a chance to build anything.

GOG has encrypted the installers. It was discovered by modders and Linux fans when they were trying to unpack the installers without actually running them. GOG reversed it basically as soon as people complained, so it's not a big problem anymore, but late last year people were upset.

So is it like a game where you give a couple of commands and then the game AI just does everything for you? Or is there more interaction?

I see your point. But if someone is sitting down to a Legendary Heroes quest, they know they're in for a long session or saving and coming back. My point was more that Majesty isn't like Alpha Centauri or Age of Wonders, where every game session is going to be long because that's how the game is designed.

You start the scenario with a goal, and then have to build buildings, recruit heroes, manage taxes, etc. Settlements attract enemies like rats and need guard towers and a good setup while heroes are doing their thing.

The big difference is that you can't control any NPC directly. You can create incentives to do things, or select heroes that will do what you want naturally.

Every type of hero has a distinct personality. It's really a lot like managing a group of people, who aren't always going to agree that your wishes are in their best interests. And they comment on what they're doing. Warriors are cowards at low levels - they have really funny lines every time they decide to flee. Rangers are always serious. Paladins are cheerfully bloodthirsty. Barbarians have a wide range of grunts and roars. Healers are patient and surprisingly brave. Death priestesses are fatalistic. Etc, etc.

Random Example:
The scenario goal is find the MacGuffin and bring it back to your base. So I build Rangers first, because Rangers explore naturally, and then Warriors to be the backup muscle to Rangers. 1 Thief building to let heroes poison their weapons, and in case I need a bunch of easily bribable mooks. Explore bounties set up on different parts of the map to encourage heroes to get out there. Then I start building guard towers and other settlement buildings to fend off incoming rats while my heroes explore and go on quests.

But I can't force the Rangers to go, and if the Warriors want to hang out in their building I can't force them out - they generally don't, but it can happen.


Here's a random stream I found if you want video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyvUYVjNXj8

Your Majesty, the kingdom's royal purse is at your command. By placing bounties throughout the land of Ardania, you would entice heroes to pursue collecting them. These capable individuals have tendencies that reflect their profession - the rogues value gold only second to their lives, but have no dedication to protecting the Kingdom. Warriors enjoy fighting, and so prefer the (paid) pursuit of monsters. Rangers simply wish to wander the world, and the promise of coin does much to facilitate this. Healers, paladins, and other altruistic people often go out of their way to serve the greater good. Unfortunately, their lack of appreciation for wealth makes it expensive to get their attention.

While you cannot directly control these heroes, you can fund the improvement of their guilds. By doing so, you will stack the odds in favor of particular types of heroes, and eventually give even amateur heroes a decent shot at becoming more than a nameless footnote. Sire, it is up to you to determine how to spend the royal purse, be it on infrastructure or bounties.


TLDR: Every NPC has different personalities, though they often conform to what a class prefers to do. Rogues gamble and pursue the redlight district, monks meditate in gardens, and dwarves repair buildings. By setting bounties and putting gold towards them, you can convince heroes to drop their activities and do things for you. This can get expensive, especially when considering that you want to improve your buildings.

No. You have absolutely no direct control over your realm with the exception of placing buildings. You can't even fully control what your peasants will work on first (or make them run from marauding monsters slaughtering them!). You place buildings that improve your kingdom somehow by allowing more support units, attract heroes or offer upgrades for the heroes to buy.

You can also persuade the heroes to drop their normal routine (which depends on the hero type, some heroes explore, some hunt monsters on their own and some just pursue their own carnal needs) by placing bounties on areas you want explored or monsters/buildings you want attacked.

If anything, this game has less direct control than Populous!

Too bad Paradox refuses to commission the development of a true successor and keeps getting sidetracked with spinoffs like Warlock and Defenders of Ardania.