Is The Sequel Better Than the First?

**The Unknown General** · September 16, 2013, 01:34 AM

Currently my laptop cant run Crusader Kings II so I was wondering what the difference between the first and second are, along which is better.

**absinthia** · September 20, 2013, 09:59 AM

having not played the original i can not say for sure which is better.
but i can say that CKII is worth the money spent and i am a demanding customer...

the vanilla game itself is worth it and if you can get it with DLC`s on sale, great.
i would recomend Sword of Islam, the Republic and Old Gods. all opens up new forms of government/game-play and extends replayability.
Sunset Invasion is BS, Aztecs attcking Europa. Bah!
Legacy of Rome is to limited and loopsided in scope it is only usefull(slightly) when playing Byzantium.

**cenkiss** · September 20, 2013, 10:40 AM

Crusader kings 2 demands very low specs , i dont understand how it cant run it. How old is your computer?

Also ck2 is definitely better.

**L00n** · September 22, 2013, 03:18 AM

CK II way better , but the hardcore fans still love the first one too.

**The Unknown General** · September 24, 2013, 12:12 AM

Originally Posted by cenkiss

Crusader kings 2 demands very low specs , i dont understand how it cant run it. How old is your computer?

Also ck2 is definitely better.

I could run the demo, but not efficiently.

DxDiag.txt

Processor Intel Pentium T4500 / 2.3 GHz ( Dual-Core )

Memory 3.0 GB / 6.0 GB (max)

Hard Drive 320.0 GB

Operating System Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit Edition

Display Type 15.6 in TFT active matrix

Max Resolution ( HD )

Graphics Processor Intel GMA 4500MHD Dynamic Video Memory Technology 5.0

Optical Drive DVD±RW (±R DL)

**ggggtotalwarrior** · September 24, 2013, 02:26 PM

I just stay in independent realms map mode and it stops lagging. It really only lags when on terrain mode for me, and I think my specs on my current pc kind of suck anyway.