|
| Thread: How are all the games connected? |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
MrDragon
Supreme Hero
Eats people with Ketchup
|
posted January 31, 2011 01:13 PM |
|
Edited by MrDragon at 13:15, 31 Jan 2011.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Pardon me for raining on the parade, but aren't we basically rebooting a discussion from a few years ago?
A discussion that didn't have any constructive benefits back then, and probably won't this time around either?
The OP's question has been awnsered, maybe we can just let this thread die, it's borderline flamewar now.
It is pointless but still interesting to go through. As I've been a member of HC since only recently, never had the chance to discuss them.
It's not meant to be a flamewar either, unless every time someone disagrees with another, it is considered flaming.
Anyway, I did say all I wanted to say. From there on, I'll be just repeating so I kindly withdraw with only summarizing everything into one sentence: Ubisoft knows that new fans in their majority don't care about old games.
Repeatedly now, people with differing opinions have implied the other is being ignorant, or out of touch with reality or has no understanding of the situation in question.
As I said, this is BORDERLINE flaming, If the current trend continues by my prediction it is going to get ugly.
This is a hotly debated topic ever since HoMMV was in development and already strongly resembles an extremely similar story from the divide over HoMMIV.
Judging by history, whilst not imposible, the probability of this thread having any constructive merit is much smaller then it is worth to debate this again.
Even people being still civil now are starting to show signs of frustration with the people with opposite opinions.
|
|
Nelgirith
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 01:23 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Even people being still civil now are starting to show signs of frustration with the people with opposite opinions.
Well it's mostly the die-hard veterans who refuse to accept that there's a new generation who doesn't give a f**k about what happened before H5. And yet, they still manage to diss anything about H5, saying how H3 was superior even when the sales figures of H5, H5-HoF and H5-TotE are far superior to any of the previous episods 
Anyways, on a board I'm visiting from time to time, I found a discussion that happened when H6 was announced in which an old HoMM figure made his appearance : Gus Smedstad!
For those who don't know him, he was in charge of the AI in H3 and he was the lead programmer and designer in H4 and what he says is, imo, quite interesting. He's mostly talking about what happened while they were working on H4.
Quote:
Quote:
I am one of 5 people who liked IV. Can't explain why as every criticism people have had is pretty accurate. I just love going around the maps exploring and whaling on things and there was enough of that to make me happy. The A.I. challenge in the HoMM series has never been the determining factor as to why I like the games.
IV is really painful memory for me. For over a year I was doing everything but the editor, and I was spread pretty thin. We never did get a real engine / graphics programmer, which I am not. I fully intended to do the AI as I did with Heroes III, but ended up delegating it because of time pressure. That didn't go well, and I ended up having to do the tactical AI, but I never got time to visit the strategic AI. Combine that with some internal politics due to 3DO's financial woes that forced bad programmers onto the team and a premature release, and well, you know the result. Very depressing.
Quote:
Quote:
Sorry to hear that's how it went down Gus. I really did enjoy the gameplay changes and art style in IV. It really shook up the series in a good way. If it hadn't been for the complete brain-deadness of the strategic AI, I think IV would have been an excellent game.
Quote:
With HoMM 3 behind them, I think NWC were in a similar place that Firaxis is in after Civ IV. They'd already had a perfect iteration of the series with the mechanics they used in the past. They'd already put out a million scenarios and campaigns for it. With Heroes 4, the only logical place to go was to try to re-vamp with quite a few different mechanics and make it quite a different game. And I thought they succeeded admirably there. Though it is tough for me to figure out if I would have also had more criticisms about the game if the AI hadn't been braindead, because then I wouldn't have given up on the game as early as I did. And if I would have played it more, perhaps I'd agree with you on separation of heroes and armies.If it hadn't been for the complete brain-deadness of the strategic AI, I think IV would have been an excellent game.
Honestly, I think it was more than that. There were a lot of design issues as that we could have resolved if I'd had more time and been under less pressure. I just wasn't getting any time to play the game, so I ended up focusing on implementing required features rather than examining basic game play.
I knew the hero death as loss condition was a really bad idea, but the level designers kept putting it in because they were writing dialog that assumed that the main characters were alive. We needed to either get less personal with the individual heroes in the campaign story, or come up with a mechanic which side-stepped the issue. For example, at one point dead heroes didn't really die, they "fell down" and were unconscious until you got them to a town. I took that out and went with death and resurrection because that was a common mechanic in Might and Magic 3-8, at least in part because JVC didn't like the "unconscious" thing. But that led to the level designers putting in those loss conditions.
Scaling the monster stacks with difficulty worked badly. It seemed like a good idea at the time, some way to increase challenge before the player encountered other players, but it ended up hurting the AI a lot more than the player. If I'd played the game enough, I probably would have taken that feature out entirely.
In hindsight, I'm not sure there's any way we could have reasonably protected individual heroes. The line of sight rules were an attempt, but ultimately games which have successfully mixed the two (i.e. Master of Magic) have included stacking limits, so 1 hero was only replacing 5-8 monsters at most, not a potentially unlimited number. Either we needed to include stack limits - another major HOMM departure - or merge heroes with monster stacks.
Quote:
Quote:
I remember you coming into a Celestial Heavens thread (a big HoMM dedicated site) and voicing your displeasure and disappointment after the fact and after you were no longer with the company. It wasn't accusatory or sour grapes either. I really felt/feel for you. I guess a new HoMM thread can't help, but remind you.
I still respect you immeasurably for the work you did on that series.
There are some people I blame. Trip Hawkins really screwed us. And not just indirectly through the collapse of 3DO, either. There was a voice conference call where he accused us of goldbricking, drawing out development to keep our paychecks because the company was circling the drain. This at a time that we were putting in 60-80 hour weeks, and it never even occurred to me that he might fire the team when the project finished. Which did happen 3 weeks after release. Most (but not all) of the programmers got to stay, but people like David Mullich, the best producer I ever worked with, got pink slipped. In any case, that phone call is what saddled us with some really bad "emergency" programmers at the end of the project who did far more harm than good.
That said, I'm fully aware that I made some serious mistakes. I overpromised on delivery dates, and I didn't spend anywhere near enough time playtesting personally. Design mistakes are inevitable, but I could have caught more of them if I'd spent more time playing the game.
One thing I really don't like to do is rag on the strategic AI programmer. He was a smart guy, one of the better programmers on the team. He just hadn't done it before, and I guess it never gelled for him.
Quote:
Quote:
I've always wanted to see the series get back to its roots, and move away from lengthy story campaigns in favor of offering a solid selection of standalone scenarios. In fact, I'd love to see a HoMM game that dumps the campaign altogether, and puts all those development resources into making a really top-notch random map system instead. One that spits out maps that feel like they were hand-crafted, with randomly generated back-stories, etc. The individual scenarios were always my favorite part of the HoMM games, anyway. But it seems like they gradually stopped being the focus of the game after HoMM I.
I did put a lot of effort into the map generator in Armageddon's Blade, but it was never going to get much better than that one. It's a difficult problem, since programs don't recognize spacial relationships easily. If we'd put in story elements, they would have ended up feeling canned, mad-libs style. Like the semi-random scenarios in Darklands. We could have done that, since each map was heavily randomized from an abstract template specifying zone sizes, treasure levels, etc., but it didn't occur to either Greg or me.
It's somewhat ironic that IV was so story-oriented, since I didn't give a crap about that, personally. I played a ton of Heroes II before joining New World, and I always saw it as a strategy game with unimportant story elements. But the two people we had managing the level design were very story oriented, and pushing them away from stories and characters would have been a real battle.
Quote:
Quote:
H4 arranges its factions ("alignments") in a way that's clearly borrowed from MTG (Magic the Gathering) and MOM (Master of Magic). Who came up with this idea?
It's my absolute favorite thing in H4. At first sight it looks derivative, but its treatment of the alignments is in fact much smarter and subtler than MTG. For example, Order has Lord as the Might hero, and there are no Order-aligned neutral creature, while Chaos has Thief hero and Bandits, and the Chaos town is an Asylum.
I did. I was the only fan of either game; presenting the alignment system, how the theme would determine monster types and spells, and the basics of the revised hero skill system was how I got to be design lead. Greg had left, and the position was up in the air at the time.
Quote:
Quote:
If you don't mind, more fan-questions I need to get off my chest:
1. Back when H1 started the series, the barbarian ("Plains") was the evil Might faction with a Goblin/Orc/Ogre/Troll lineup, and the warlock ("Mountain") was the evil Magic faction with myth creatures.
At the time of H4, the barbarian Might alignment has the myth creatures on top of Berserker and Nomad, essentially changing to one of pagan heroism and myth, while the Chaos alignment has the orcs, and to paraphrase one player, a "junk of the world" image (although that's not my interpretation of it). To some degree, they have switched places. What do you think of this switching of places?
Honestly, I never gave that a thought at all. I never really saw the HOMM 1 towns in terms of good or evil, for that matter. I did feel that HOMM 3 kind of jumbled things compared to HOMM 1 and 2, and the MtG / MoM style factions were an attempt to make the monster lineups more coherent.
Quote:
2. Were you involved in NWC's H5? I understood that NWC's H5 would combine barbarian and warlock into one "myth" faction, and add a new dragon/reptile faction. How are H5's 6 factions thematically aligned? H5 would keep H4's idea of faction-specific magic schools, so do the dragon faction have its own dragon magic?
No, I wasn't involved with the JVC-led Heroes 5 project. I have no idea where he would have gone with it, since I don't think he fundamentally got what I was shooting for with H4. I found him surprisingly difficult to talk to on game design issues, and he wasn't in the office very often.
|
|
MrDragon
Supreme Hero
Eats people with Ketchup
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 01:32 PM |
|
|
Thanks for the quotes Nelgrith, those are indeed very interesting, I guess that means I got to eat my words now on this thread's merit.
To be fair though, this could have gone into almost any thread related to the game development. 
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 01:38 PM |
|
|
Quote:
And yet, they still manage to diss anything about H5
Yeah, that's mightily open-minded and objective. If you say that part of something is bad, then you 100% certainly say that all the other parts are bad as well. That's the logic of the Internetz. 
The person who proves me that Heroes V sold well because of Ashan earns my silence on these boards for one month. Come on, anyone?
|
|
kodial79
Promising
Supreme Hero
How'd Phi's Lov't
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 01:42 PM |
|
|
Wow, that was a very interesting read. Thanks, Nelgirith, for those quotes.
Zenofex, Ashan did not boost but did not hurt the sales either. Going for a Forge though in H3 (original point of argument was the fans did right to reject it), or continuing the the "old universe's" story, would have hurt them.
____________
Signature? I don't need no stinking signature!
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 01:46 PM |
|
Edited by Zenofex at 13:52, 31 Jan 2011.
|
Quote:
or continuing the the "old universe's" story, would have hurt them
... because? I've read this several times already, but I have yet to see a single argument to back it up.
By the way, Ashan couldn't have hurt the sales, nobody knew anything about it and the people were optimistic. Just like they are now about the "excellent Map Editor" that's coming up, no matter that they don't know anything about it but Ubisoft's advertisement. People dig promises and advertisements, see.
|
|
kodial79
Promising
Supreme Hero
How'd Phi's Lov't
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 02:01 PM |
|
Edited by kodial79 at 14:05, 31 Jan 2011.
|
Quote:
Quote:
or continuing the the "old universe's" story, would have hurt them
... because? I've read this several times already, but I have yet to see a single argument to back it up.
Didn't I explain it? Let me quote myself:
"For a newcomer, the series loose their charm immediately when he just can't connect to their short lived worlds and stories. They feel lost and since its hard to get into it then they don't care either."
Wether they were short lived or not, it doesn't matter. But it's a fact that they're old games that new players will ignore even if they knew they ever existed. If they can't connect with the world, they won't become fans. If they won't become fans, they won't be sure customers. This is not the only criteria but it's one of them.
Myself included.
Why did I drop H4? Mostly because of the gameplay but the story did not help either. Since the whole story evolved alternately between HoMM and MM, I was too tired of it, to try to figure out what happened between H3 and H4. I felt they messed up, and wished Axeoth did not exist. It was very easy for me to quit it and not buy the expansions.
On the contrary, one of the main reasons I picked up the series again with H5, was because the old world was scrapped. Well, that and the race based factions.
____________
Signature? I don't need no stinking signature!
|
|
Nelgirith
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 02:12 PM |
|
|
Quote:
The person who proves me that Heroes V sold well because of Ashan earns my silence on these boards for one month. Come on, anyone?
Prove me H3 sold well solely because of its universe
Quote:
Quote:
or continuing the the "old universe's" story, would have hurt them
... because? I've read this several times already, but I have yet to see a single argument to back it up.
Because of people who like nitpicking
No matter what choice Ubisoft had made, people would have complained either because they threw away the old universe or because they made too many mistakes in a wobbly universe full of anachronisms.
Also noone in the Ubi H5 team belonged to the team that worked on the previous episod. It's kinda hard to ask people to get in the shoes of their predecessors and do as well as they did. Imo, only JVC, Fulton or Smedstad could have created a Heroes 5 that would have been a real sequel.
Erwan even admitted that they abandonned this universe because it was too complicated and confusing for newcomers, but also that they didn't want to alter in a bad way a universe that the die-hard veterans cherished.
My main gripe with H5 is that they should have started from scratch since day 1, rather than trying to start something with Axeoth and then find out they couldn't.
That's exactly what Erwan said, before H5 release :
Quote:
Why did Ubisoft decide to revamp the M&M universe?
There are several reasons for this.
1/ The world used as a background for the Might & Magic games has often changed from one title to the next (Varn, Cron, Terra, Xeen and then Axeoth with Enroth, Erathia, Jadame, Cheh'dian, etc.) As a result the consistency between all the M&M games was a little weak and the overall background was vague, if not flat-out confusing at times. We want to have a single, deep world that’s consistent across the board and has layers of story and content that players can just dive into.
2/ There was just so much information in the world that it was difficult for new players to really embrace everything that was there. The mass of backstory and continuity was almost intimidating, and we wanted to create a world that new players could enjoy as well.
3/ As much as we enjoyed the original M&M worlds, they had a certain science fiction undertone, while we really wanted to focus on the fantasy aspects – the “might” and “magic”, as it were. Those games were also “lighter” in tone than what we had in mind for the new generation of M&M games.
Again, we really loved what was done in the past, so it simply made sense to respect that and build our world from the ground up, focusing on capturing the core essence of what drew as all back to Axeoth over and over, rather than try to modify things that people really loved and enjoyed.
Tbh, if I had been in their shoes, I would have nuked Axeoth too.
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 02:39 PM |
|
Edited by Zenofex at 14:42, 31 Jan 2011.
|
Quote:
Wether they were short lived or not, it doesn't matter. But it's a fact that they're old games that new players will ignore even if they knew they ever existed. If they can't connect with the world, they won't become fans. If they won't become fans, they won't be sure customers. This is not the only criteria but it's one of them.
Well, this makes no sense at all. You are saying that Ubisoft would've failed to attract new players just because they could've decided to stick to the old universe? Seriously, here on Earth we don't think like that. Ask a random newbie exactly this question "Would you buy Heroes V if it wasn't staged on Ashan but on Axeoth?". Actually ask more than one, ask at least ten. Or one hundred. Or as many as you want. Then bring me a summary of their answers. I suspect that a not-so-small part of them will be "What the hell are you talking about - I saw this cool screenshot on site X, when I searched it appeared that this is about some old and tested stuff and I decided to buy it." You may get some "Who the hell is Ashan? And who's Axeoth?" But the "No" answers - if there are any - will be very few. Trust me, I can see the future.
Quote:
Prove me H3 sold well solely because of its universe
That's not what I'm trying to prove, but it appears that some people are linking the commercial success of Heroes V with Ashan.
Quote:
No matter what choice Ubisoft had made, people would have complained either because they threw away the old universe or because they made too many mistakes in a wobbly universe full of anachronisms.
We've been through that already, but let me repeat myself one more time - if Ashan was worth anything, the complaints about the abandonment of the old universe would have been far fewer. So far it's worthless, that's all.
Ubisoft's ignorance on the matter can not be an excuse. The piece of text that you quoted just shows how big this ignorance actually is and that they didn't want to put much effort into understanding what's this Might & Magic thing they've just bought. The background of all the HoMM and M&M games is one and the same and the storylines can be delimited easily. M&M I-V are the first part, then M&M VI-VIII + all the Heroes before Heroes IV follow and finally there are M&M IX and Heroes IV itself. And again, this is one and the same universe.
But anyway, this reminds me that they promised "deep" and "darker" world (the second is also a result of ignorance - like the previous Heroes games were very "light" or "naive" or whatever). Well, the result is some insert_LOL_here at best.
|
|
Wckey
Famous Hero
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 02:40 PM |
|
|
No matter what game we are talking about, fans will always be skeptical when a new company bought the rights of a game from an old company.
If H6 stayed with the old universe, fans would say that the new company will ruin the universe they loved. It doesn't matter if in the end the company had done a great job or not continuing with the old universe, the skepticism of the fans would have some negative influence on the sales.
____________
Come back soon, Elvin!
|
|
foxxxer
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 02:54 PM |
|
Edited by foxxxer at 14:57, 31 Jan 2011.
|
Quote:
No matter what game we are talking about, fans will always be skeptical when a new company bought the rights of a game from an old company.
If H6 stayed with the old universe, fans would say that the new company will ruin the universe they loved. It doesn't matter if in the end the company had done a great job or not continuing with the old universe, the skepticism of the fans would have some negative influence on the sales.
That's true. The new series are under the shadow of heroes 3 yet.
|
|
kodial79
Promising
Supreme Hero
How'd Phi's Lov't
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 03:38 PM |
|
|
@Zenofex
They would have bought H5, but many of them would not have cared for its expansions.
Quote:
We've been through that already, but let me repeat myself one more time - if Ashan was worth anything, the complaints about the abandonment of the old universe would have been far fewer. So far it's worthless, that's all.
Says you. No matter how poorly written it is, it's still much more prefferable than a world of chattering skeletons, goblins with lazer cannons, shapechanging orcs and ufo piloting devils.
____________
Signature? I don't need no stinking signature!
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 05:31 PM |
|
Edited by Zenofex at 17:34, 31 Jan 2011.
|
Quote:
They would have bought H5, but many of them would not have cared for its expansions.
You're getting desperate. Why wouldn't they buy the expansions - because the story of the original game is connected to the story of some games that precede it? Even if there are several people on this world who think that this is very important, will they ignore the entire gameplay part because they don't fully understand the lore? This is not a book, as it's been said even by you proponents of the transition to Ashan, many people don't care at all about the lore, but about the gameplay.
Quote:
Says you. No matter how poorly written it is, it's still much more prefferable than a world of chattering skeletons, goblins with lazer cannons, shapechanging orcs and ufo piloting devils.
Says me. You can copy your statement and use it every time someone tells you that the old world had far better lore than the new one. It will prolong the life of your keyboard, believe me (except maybe the Ctrl and V keys).
|
|
Cepheus
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Far-flung Keeper
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 06:03 PM |
|
|
Fellas, this argument is lapsing into the point of redundancy. There is just no point in arguing for the return of the old universe any more, simple as that
____________
"Those who forget their history are inevitably doomed to repeat it." —Proverb, Might and Magic VIII
|
|
yasmiel
Supreme Hero
Former Chessmaster
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 06:15 PM |
|
|
Wise words. Whats done is done. We should strive to make best with what we have.
At this points I'm more interested in en-richening Ashan Lore, and providing more layers to the story - than about crying about old one. Several charismatic characters is what would help at this point. Hopefully H6 will introduce some.
Hopefully map editor will enable some more lore oriented maps this time as well. (be it textboxes or other means).
Anyhow..... replay of Might and Magic 1-5 while waiting for heroes 6...... sounds tempting now. Argg....BRB
____________
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 06:43 PM |
|
|
|
Bah, you just don't understand - there's a principle involved.
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 06:52 PM |
|
|
Quite a lot of new, off-topic, subjects that got started in this thread. Anyway here's my opinion on each of the subjects:
On the matter of stolen creatures. These creatures are, as far as I know, not something one can copyright and as such they're up for grasp, further, any links does not really provide evidence of a source, as the link could have had the same source as the heroes games. Further more, I really like a lot of the creatures of the HoMM series, I honestly don't care if they're stolen or thought up, I want the best possible, not the "honest" possible, this game is for my entertainment.
About the importance of the story. As I see it there are two groups, those who're interested in the story and those who aren't.
As a much younger player I was in no way interested in the story and as such, the story were not important for me back then.
Now I like a good lore that creates a "deeper" world and as such, had I been a H5 gamer, I'd probably really dislike that they abbandoned the old story all together. Really it's not hard at all to implement the past story in an obvious way, no matter how complex it may seem.
This is also the reason that ubisoft can follow the story from any point they wish and re-write from there, changing whatever they wish by simply making a story for it, really it's not hard to imagine.
Am I completely wrong here, or is the planet not named colony? Enroth is just a continent isn't it?
Besides, I'm quite confident that the story never evolved alternately between the heroes series and the might and magic series. Heroes was on colony, later axeoth, might and magic was on colony and a single episode, which came out after HoMMIV was on axeoth (though I really don't know much about Might and Magic IX).
There was never any need to buy dozen of games to get the idea behind the story of the forge, really you only needed for have might and magic 7 which explained the required background very well.
Further more, we don't know if the background would not have been explained (which it probably would) in the AB game itself had the forge been included, once again it's really easy to include such an explanation without it seeming complex.
On the matter of the forge itself. Many will like - and many will dislike the concept, but no one can know if they'd have liked the game unless they tried it and as far as I know, no one did. So really there's no one who can know if the forge was a good idea or not, it's all a matter of personal opinion.
About the sales, I'm not surprised that HoMMV may have sold better than any previous game of the series, in these "modern" ages, computer games are much more accepted in the average home where it earlier only were a lot less who'd engage in computer games.
Of course this is different from country to country.
|
|
yasmiel
Supreme Hero
Former Chessmaster
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 08:31 PM |
|
Edited by yasmiel at 20:35, 31 Jan 2011.
|
Well, Colony name is debatable.
Some prefer calling the planet Colony (I can't pinpoint the origin of that, but i know Cepheus prefers that name, and he is pretty much the encyclopedia of M&M.).
Others prefer to call the planet Enroth, and are not troubled by continent sharing the same name.
(similar thing can be found in Warcraft where Azeroth used to be a continent/kingdom, but now refers to planet).
I guess part of the charm was that not everything was set in stone and was open to player interpretation .
Regarding to larger sharing of story and characters between M&M rpg and heroes, it only happened between M&M6 + Heroes 2 vanilla. And M&M7 + Heroes 3.
____________
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 08:55 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Like I said, you can find substitutes for these manuals on-line if you want.
'You can find it online' is NOT a viable argument. If it's important enough that you need to know it to make sense of the game, it has to get include with the game, either as an in-game story, a manual, or a PDF.
Quote:
You mean I like the current situation more than, say, a potential failed attempt to continue the old story? No damn it - the root of the failure of Ashan's story is the same as the root of Ubisoft's unwillingness to continue the old story - they just put next to no work in the development of this element. Meaning that if they did care, Ashan would have been a nice world and I wouldn't miss the old one so much; or, on the other hand, they could have continued the old storyline well if they really wanted.
No, the root of the problem is their unwillingness to spend the time to put together a good story, not the fact that they invented a new world.
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted January 31, 2011 09:35 PM |
|
Edited by Zenofex at 21:36, 31 Jan 2011.
|
Quote:
'You can find it online' is NOT a viable argument. If it's important enough that you need to know it to make sense of the game, it has to get include with the game, either as an in-game story, a manual, or a PDF.
Man, you want it all and you want it now. That's not how it works with whatever long series you want. You can find pretty good summaries of the old games' stories on-line, heck there is a Might & Magic wiki out there too - go check it out, it has most of the basics you need. If you don't want to browse and insist that all should be served to you on a silver plate, then you are not interested in the lore that much, end of story. And since when people are so eager to disregard something just because they don't know its background? You and kodial are exaggerating this to the point of absurdity.
Quote:
No, the root of the problem is their unwillingness to spend the time to put together a good story, not the fact that they invented a new world.
I think I said pretty much the same thing. Continuing the story of the old world or coming with a good story for a new world both require dedication. If it takes roughly the same amount of work to come up with a good story for the new world or to revive the old one, it doesn't matter which one will you pick. If you haven't noticed, the complaints are much more about Ashan's shallowness than about the nuking of Axeoth/Enroth/the old world in general. I don't want to rephrase this again, I think I said it more than enough times already.
|
| |
|
|
