I've played battlecry long time ago but what I remember is that the game had lots of fun unbalanced stuff like overleveling, excessive quest use and item generation :) While battlecry 3 is way more polished than the first it has become much more balanced and boring. Also I find the campaign of the first one more engaging, than the lack of campaign in the third. Another point would be why it was not bundled with battlecry 3 but...
Now I've played the original King's Bounty for DOS and all installments of HoMM so I can say that this game actually does resemble the feel of the old King's Bounty game and the similarities with HoMM are mostly in the looks. The game is challenging. You need to plan your adventures. The game is fun! I play the "old way" by not reading the manual and it's a lot of fun, when you learn by doing.
This game initially looks like a mix between DeusEx and Dark Messiah of Might and Magic. Problem is it's linear, with messy interface, with nearly no choice of what to do and no character development and the fighting plainly sucks. You just click attack and that's it. No control of the actual way to place a strike. Even Oblivion is more flexible than this! The graphics are pretty good that's the star I gave it for. The story is kind of interesting, but not worth a second star. mixing future with middle ages is s stupid idea. The physics "engine" is actually inferior to Dark Messiah of Might and Magic, which is an much older game of the same company! In short I'm disappointed with this game. Maybe others will think differently, but for me this game misses the "game" part.
