|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
posted November 22, 2011 08:00 PM |
|
|
Gerhart was dead from the moment they introduced him (i.e. before the release). Pretty much depicts the unpredictability and the plot flexibility of the game. At the moment I just wonder how many things I will guess correctly about the remaining 4 campaigns that I haven't played. My success rate with the Haven campaign is about 95%.
Still, Isabel is indeed hard to beat but like I've said already, almost the entire Heroes V cast has good chances against her for the "sucks to death" award.
|
|
kodial79
Promising
Supreme Hero
How'd Phi's Lov't
|
|
posted November 22, 2011 08:03 PM |
|
|
I bet you didn't see Michael's poem coming! That took you by surprise! Admit it!
|
|
Seraphim
Supreme Hero
Knowledge Reaper
|
|
posted November 22, 2011 09:43 PM |
|
|
Cmon people,Isabel is the perfect example of an "Intelligent" woman that usually portrayed in TV or movies.
Rating
Music 7/10
Gameplay 6/10
Innovation 5/10
Why this score? Well,everthing has been said already. Music is good but just a rehash.
Gameplay is a bit boring but so was H5 initial release.
Innovation is a big letdown.They should not have removed towns screens and should have put more artifacts,skills etc.
ps: Kodial is night terror or her sister. 
-Shields Online--
____________
"Science is not fun without cyanide"
|
|
Insanity
Known Hero
Brain cells killa
|
|
posted November 23, 2011 12:52 AM |
|
|
i say 8.5/10 !!!!!
love the graphics
hate there arent enough creatures and some are the same
music is nice
story is cool, nicely told not remarkable but cool, liked a few characters
enjoyed playing, would like it to be a bit harder than what hard is
liked the new innovations
didnt like townscreen
bugs are always there in every game so who cares
like the fact that champions arent untouchable anymore
needs some adjusting and with 2 expensions, townscreens fix it should be epic 
think most of the guys here are suffering from heroes 3 syndrome, it doesnt matter what game they make all some people will be able to say is that it isnt heroes 3.
rating all
heroes 1 was sweet and innocent
heroes 2 started exploring the wonderful world
heroes 3 perfected the game by marrying heroes 1+2
heroes 4 brought something new but people hate changes and it was doomed for coming after heroes 3
heroes 5 looked like a game for 5 year old kids but it came after 4 and most of the people who played it dont know other games anyways
heroes 6 brought something new, i have fun playing it, it has many issues but which game doesnt, i like it and a lot, u talked about the game for a year so its no wonders u wont like it when its out, happens when reality and fantasy(xpectation) meet each other.
good game and i'll buy the expensions too
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 23, 2011 11:35 AM |
|
|
A last note on STORY.
If you want to make the most out of the STORY, you should play the 16 campaign maps in the folloing order:
Str 1
San 1
Inf 1
Hav 1
Nec 1
Str 2
San 2
Hav 2
Nec 2
San 3
Str 3
Inf 2
Nec 3
Inf 3
San 4
Str 4
Hav 3
Nec 4
Hav 4
Inf 4
|
|
Momo
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 24, 2011 05:13 PM |
|
Edited by Momo at 17:20, 24 Nov 2011.
|
Sorry, I was away.
Quote:
So if you want me to stop bashing them, you better stop pushing me. Cause I'm always gonna respond until I get to have the last word on it.
That sounds a lot like verbal bullying, and I don't react well to that.
I think you are (deliberately) missing the core point.
You don't like Heroes 6's characters? You are entitled to. You want to warp what these character are and represent to feel more legitimate in disliking them? Well go ahead, the matter is so universally unimportant anyway that nobody will care much. You want to convince people that the incredibly ill-written characters of HoMM5 were better than this? Well, you start to look unreasonable, because HoMM5 was written so bad that it's pretty much an objective statement that everything else hardly surpass it.
Keep in mind that I like the "warrior queen" characters, like Midna, Ashe or Garnet very much (or Emilia Nighthaven, in a sense). I really wanted to like Isabel, I did. I just could not. You can't say that stuff was better than these griffin brats and think no one will raise an eyebrow.
However, there is even a bigger point you are missing. If we discuss what are HoMM6's problems, we speak of a game that has... on top of my mind:
- reached a new low point in the "we-can-always-patch-it-later" philosophy, being released with a vast ensemble of bugs and four (FOUR!) factions mentioned in story and lore but missing from the un-patched game.
- erased everything good HoMM5 did or tried to do in terms of gameplay.
- removed some quite tested-and-true classical features and elements of the series (resource system, building tree, etc.)
- introduced some new features and elements, most of whom highly controversial (the unbalanced morality system, the easy and immediate access to teleporting, the stressed importance of single fights).
- unexplicably removed one of, if not THE most important graphical feature of the game which allowed players to feel the atmosphere and lore of their own factions and swapped it with "town windows" which really don't feel less complicated or costy than a nice 2D town screen would have been.
- unexplicably ignored impressions and conclusions from beta players (nerf Necro, buff Inferno! ...yeah sure) and proceeded to do the exact opposite of what testers suggested.
In all this mess on a game that has the potential to be so very very much better than it currently is, you spend 6-7 posts to complain about..... the storyline, which pretty much everyone but you agrees is OK or at list quite better than what we previously had. Once again, you can't help but look prejudiced.
And your determination to get the last word on it makes you look even more and more so each time you post.
|
|
B0rsuk
Promising
Famous Hero
DooM prophet
|
|
posted November 24, 2011 06:35 PM |
|
|
For me story is quite unimportant in Heroes of Might and Magic. I liked that Heroes 3- were strategy games in a fantasy setting. Some scenario makers added story to that, some didn't. The game was good even without it. Now they try to make Heroes rely on story, which annoys me.
____________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5um8QWWRvo RSA Animate - Smile or die
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted November 24, 2011 06:36 PM |
|
|
They try what?! 
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 24, 2011 07:38 PM |
|
|
Huh???
Quote:
- reached a new low point in the "we-can-always-patch-it-later" philosophy, being released with a vast ensemble of bugs and four (FOUR!) factions mentioned in story and lore but missing from the un-patched game.
Oh dear. Back in 1998 again, are we?
Quote:
- erased everything good HoMM5 did or tried to do in terms of gameplay.
What do you mean, "erased"? Heroes 6 is, THANKFULLY, a different game and not just the same game with different graphics.
Quote:
- removed some quite tested-and-true classical features and elements of the series (resource system, building tree, etc.)
- introduced some new features and elements, most of whom highly controversial (the unbalanced morality system, the easy and immediate access to teleporting, the stressed importance of single fights).
The classic "never drop anything and never introduce new things - just expand on everything" phenomenon.
I mean, let's face it, no Heroes game has been perfect - and none ever WILL be. However, if Homm 6's TotE is finally out, I predict that it will be the best of the lot - handsomely. Except, that no veteran of the game will EVER again experience the primal awe that came with playing either 2 or 3 in their time.
|
|
Avirosb
Promising
Legendary Hero
No longer on vacation
|
|
posted November 24, 2011 08:10 PM |
|
|
|
Vampires don't "Blah", thus H6 is literally the worst game ever.
|
|
einomida
Known Hero
|
|
posted November 24, 2011 08:26 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Vampires don't "Blah", thus H6 is literally the worst game ever.
And the liches don't wear woolen socks made by their grandmothers.
|
|
Avirosb
Promising
Legendary Hero
No longer on vacation
|
|
posted November 24, 2011 08:27 PM |
|
|
Sarcasm detected. They never did 
|
|
einomida
Known Hero
|
|
posted November 24, 2011 09:01 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Sarcasm detected. They never did
Uh, of course they did. And I'm not being sarcastic. Just look at those things. Those were the best liches.
About H6 - all non-console games are deemed to fail because developers don't want to put time and money into games that are going to get pirated. Console gaming is where the money's at and that's why you rarely see PC only games these days. TBS, some sandboxes and RTSs are the flagships of PC gaming and that's perhaps the only reason they're still made for PC, everything else is made multi-platform or worse, gets ported (Skyrim...).
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted November 24, 2011 09:29 PM |
|
Edited by Zenofex at 21:39, 24 Nov 2011.
|
Currently the PC game developers/publishers are kicking themselves in the balls with the obstructive DRMs which they are mounting atop their games just to start whining later why the PC games market is not as good as the console games market. It's simple as that - DRMs do not decrease the likelihood a certain game to be pirated in a completely playable shape at the slightest in more than 90% of the cases but certainly decrease the number of the buyers. A good game will sell well even if it is completely DRM-free. Look at The Witcher 2 - the developer disposed of the DRM almost immediately after the release and yet the game has sold more than a million copies to date.
Of course Ubisoft are yet to employ a person who will have the talent to explain this to the rest of the decision-making crew AND convince them that no DRM = more sales. Until then - enjoy the Conflux.
|
|
Dave_Jame
Promising
Legendary Hero
I'm Faceless, not Brainless.
|
|
posted November 24, 2011 10:06 PM |
|
|
They should recive an Essey on the Topic "How do I buy a game"
Step one: Download the game.
Step two: Make my opinion on the game
Step three: Look at the cost of the game
Step four: If the game is good, buy the game at that time, when the price is at an agreable hight to me in the contxt of the game itself.
|
|
Avirosb
Promising
Legendary Hero
No longer on vacation
|
|
posted November 24, 2011 10:13 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Step one: Download the demo.
< >
|
|
Pontifex
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted November 25, 2011 12:33 AM |
|
|
Quote:
For me story is quite unimportant in Heroes of Might and Magic. I liked that Heroes 3- were strategy games in a fantasy setting. Some scenario makers added story to that, some didn't. The game was good even without it. Now they try to make Heroes rely on story, which annoys me.
My thoughts exactly. They expect the fluff will make up for the flaws in the gameplay department. This Emperor has no clothes.
When you have a computer player that materializes creatures out of thin air, you know they're not even trying anymore.
|
|
Momo
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 25, 2011 05:44 PM |
|
|
@JollyJoker:
1. I don't know what you speak of. 1998, what? And besides:
Quote:
However, if Homm 6's TotE is finally out, I predict that it will be the best of the lot - handsomely.
I think the same, HoMM6 is so much more interesting and full of potential that HoMM5 was. But I still feel this philosophy of game-design - or rather, this philosophy of game publishing - is insulting to players. I liked what I got with Starcraft II even if I got to wait such an unconceivable amount of time to get it. I'm not asking Ubisoft to do the same, but let's face it: it's good when a product you purchase shines with the amount of perfection, care of details and deepness SC2 had. It makes you really feel that Blizzard loved their craft. With this game, you don't really feel like Ubisoft loved the game. Or the gamers, too.
2. sure. But I expect the sequel of a game to A) improve and expand what worked before B) erase and/or reshape things that weren't working and of course C) change and renew things that could've worked better, even making veteran fans unhappy if they feel it's needed.
They did C), by simplifying resource system and teleporting, and I never said they should not have. I merely said this will be (already is) controversial because it detracts importance on economics, map explorations and (sort of)realistic warfare problems and expands a lot (too much maybe) the importance of single skirmish and the micro-management of units. I still think they had the right to try to innovate gameplay in that direction if they feel it's a road worth taking. I DO feel it's a road worth taking.
They did B) and I am happy they did. I felt the previous spell aquisition system was contradictory to the spirit of the game. I am happy to see that gone. I am happy that heroes can now walk with 0 troops, the previous rule was entirely pointless. They definitely handled a few things that needed to be handled.
They, however, utterly failed to do A). HoMM5 tried to fix some of the best ideas from HoMM4 (alternate creatures, heroes partecipating to the battle) and to fill some spaces where HoMM4 clearly lacked (making single heroes unique with special abilities and different skills). Whoever worked on HoMM6 shows no recognition or interest in such features, which are mostly gone. It almost looks like they worked using HoMM3 as their model of reference, in terms of gameplay.
So (to answer to your point 3) no, I'm not all in favor of expanding the existent and avoid change. But I don't think the choices they made have been undisputable. Not at all.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 25, 2011 07:52 PM |
|
|
Quote:
But I still feel this philosophy of game-design - or rather, this philosophy of game publishing - is insulting to players. I liked what I got with Starcraft II even if I got to wait such an unconceivable amount of time to get it. I'm not asking Ubisoft to do the same, but let's face it: it's good when a product you purchase shines with the amount of perfection, care of details and deepness SC2 had. It makes you really feel that Blizzard loved their craft. With this game, you don't really feel like Ubisoft loved the game. Or the gamers, too.
Well, the thing here is, that Blizzard is in a very comfortable situation.
With H6 we have a developer - BH - and a publisher - Ubisoft. BH would certainly wait, but BH doesn't call the shots, because it's Ubi who's paying. Upfront, mind you. There was a schedule for the game. That schedule has been expanded by over half a year, and Ubi had to pay for that. Now Ubi wants to see a revenue, and that's fair.
So something went wrong along the line of development - but I think it's not such a big deal. It's one less faction than with 5, and it's 5 years later, we have to live with it.
H5 was clearly in a worse shape on release and got really good with TotE only.
Quote:
I expect the sequel of a game to A) improve and expand what worked before B) erase and/or reshape things that weren't working and of course C) change and renew things that could've worked better, even making veteran fans unhappy if they feel it's needed.
...
But I don't think the choices they made have been undisputable. Not at all.
No choice in this regard is ever undisputable, and "waht worked before", "what didn't work" and "what could have worked better" are disputable as well.
I don't think that it's so clear-cut. Heroes 3 has a lot of features that definitely do NOT work or could at least have worked better, while Heroes 4 had a lot of features that did work well - still, if you look at the complete package a majority would agree that 3 is the better game as a whole.
For example, I would have said, that IF something in H5 was really good it was the system of skills and abilities. STILL, they changed that completely.
On the other hand, and it's again ME who's saying that, what I wanted in 5 and didn't get it and in 6 and didn't get it, is FACTION SPECIFIC UNIT DWELLING STRUCTURES, combining the systems, of 2, 3 and 4 (basically expanding the system of individual town structures in 2 with the unit numbers of 3 and the possibility of alternatives (at every stange of the building tree) of 4.
I may add, that - again I - think, that the TIER system introduced in 6 would NOT profit from the alternative upgrades like in ToTE, but from one additional crteature per town and tier plus the skill Reserves I-III as known from King's Bounty.
In the end, coming full circle, you have to create a game, not a mosaic of parts. And in the end, it seems we agree that the outlook is pretty encouraging, even though we may not get what we actually want.
At this time I think the only problem is the amount of SMALL bugs, that is, things not working as they should. But that's just annoying.
|
|
Momo
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 27, 2011 09:54 AM |
|
|
Quote:
No choice in this regard is ever undisputable, and "waht worked before", "what didn't work" and "what could have worked better" are disputable as well.
Sure, that's why I did not say that the game is a total screw-up, I only said it's controversial.
Still, some things are, if not undisputable, quite solid. The story is not a pain to see as before, for instance. And they failed to balance Inferno and Necro again, to make another example. These are not undisputable facts, but I feel they are well grounded opinions.
The balance thing in particular annoys me. Why can't I play my Necropolis on multiplayer (without looking like a cheater)? And I'm sure that's someone out there who would love to play Inferno, too. Seriously, they had YEARS to work on this. I already said I understand how Necro is inherently hard to balance, but they could at least have worked better on Inferno.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
