It's the same shit as the first two with a few more added niggles that don't actually mean much. The game is bad because the core is shit, not because it adds a few (pointlessly irritating) points of no return.
How is it, compared to first two?
That's not true. Me wanting to fuck Sveta had nothing to do with enjoying the game to a degree. Speaking of the characters, I also think Matt's design is awesome and prefer it a lot more to Isaac's.
He's just Isaac with slightly different clothes.
Exactly. Better, adventure-er clothes.
This, easily the worst part of the game. There are 2 or 3 PONR, pissed me off so much to find out I had to replay the whole fucking game again to get all the djinni.
Also the game just bathes you in exp and was way too easy as a result. I wasn't even done grinding for the best armor/weapon drops and I hit the level cap on several characters.
>It's pretty good. Better than GS1 but worse than GS2
No. Its got lots of issues. Too much hand-holding, multiple points of no return, pacing issues, bloated cast and underdeveloped characters, far too easy, less equipment and fewer weapons with most being returning items from the previous games, it took a step back in many areas in favor of its presentation and accessibility. Its still an okay game though.
I'd prefer seeing the real changes brought about by bringing alchemy back, which requires a time skip. The immediate aftermath isn't going ot be anything impressive because you don't suddenly learn alchemy or build technology based on it. It's just people losing their shit because a ton of them now have magic they don't know how to use.
Did it sell like shit, or why was the sequel never made?
Fans hated it, so no sequel ever. Camelot is in Mario sports hell.
It still surprises me how many people act like Dark Dawn is garbage and way below the rest of the games when 1 was just as bad in pretty much every area.