|
|
Gryphs
Supreme Hero
The Clever Title
|
posted June 05, 2016 07:34 PM |
|
|
I agree with verriker. Just look at Age of Empires, it has not had a new game released in years and is still thriving. If games continue being released and continue to be bad, then the Heroes series might as well become a by word for awful games, which would be detrimental for the series as a whole.
____________
"Don't resist the force. Redirect it. Water over rock."-blizzardboy
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 08:12 PM |
|
|
It's like the Batman movies, it needs to sink so low it will die and eventually reborn from the ashes around a decade later.
____________
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 08:39 PM |
|
|
Gryphs said:
I agree with verriker. Just look at Age of Empires, it has not had a new game released in years and is still thriving. If games continue being released and continue to be bad, then the Heroes series might as well become a by word for awful games, which would be detrimental for the series as a whole.
The reason why it thrives, apart from it's legendary status, is because AoE 2 got the African Kingdoms expansion at the end of 2015, so you're not entirely correct on that one. But that just goes to show how other companies like Microsoft still give attention to long time products, something Ubisoft won't ever do because their marketing strategy is to deliver as many snowty and overpriced games they possibly can.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
LizardWarrior
Honorable
Legendary Hero
the reckoning is at hand
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 08:41 PM |
|
|
There are around 2k people playing AoE:Conquerors everyday on Voobly without the HD edition or new expansions. 
____________
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 08:43 PM |
|
|
|
Gryphs
Supreme Hero
The Clever Title
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 08:44 PM |
|
Edited by Gryphs at 20:45, 05 Jun 2016.
|
Stevie said:
The reason why it thrives, apart from it's legendary status, is because AoE 2 got the African Kingdoms expansion at the end of 2015, so you're not entirely correct on that one. But that just goes to show how other companies like Microsoft still give attention to long time products, something Ubisoft won't ever do because their marketing strategy is to deliver as many snowty and overpriced games they possibly can.
No, first it got the Forgotten Kingdoms HD expansion which was for the most part completely fan made only then did microsoft take interest to make an expansion. And before then as Liz said people had still been playing on voobly for years which is why a HD version was even envisioned.
____________
"Don't resist the force. Redirect it. Water over rock."-blizzardboy
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 08:47 PM |
|
|
|
LizardWarrior
Honorable
Legendary Hero
the reckoning is at hand
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 08:49 PM |
|
|
Well, there are also 2k active people in WCL H3 tournament alone, so heroes ain't dead either.
____________
|
|
Gryphs
Supreme Hero
The Clever Title
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 08:52 PM |
|
Edited by Gryphs at 20:57, 05 Jun 2016.
|
Stevie said:
So why the "no"?
You said that the main reason it is thriving is because of the recent expansion, which is not true as it started to thrive on steam with the Forgotten Kingdoms/HD.
____________
"Don't resist the force. Redirect it. Water over rock."-blizzardboy
|
|
LizardWarrior
Honorable
Legendary Hero
the reckoning is at hand
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 09:02 PM |
|
|
Also a lot of people migrated from voobly to steam after HD got released.
____________
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 09:21 PM |
|
|
I certainly didn't meant the main reason but part of it, with an eye on you saying that it didn't receive any games recently which is correct, but it got that expansion. That's what I meant, maybe wrong phrasing. It's in way better shape than Heroes is, I think we can agree on that.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
Gryphs
Supreme Hero
The Clever Title
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 09:35 PM |
|
Edited by Gryphs at 21:37, 05 Jun 2016.
|
Well, I do not really consider an expansion to be a new release just, expanding on what is there, I guess it is really up to interpretation. Honestly, hibernation has had a more positive effect on AoE than an Age of Empires 4 ever could. I imagine that Heroes could benefit from similar treatment, well if Erwin stays in charge anyway.
____________
"Don't resist the force. Redirect it. Water over rock."-blizzardboy
|
|
EnergyZ
Legendary Hero
President of MM Wiki
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 09:51 PM |
|
|
From the Heroes VII discussion thread:
Quote:
Leave the franchise to competent producers and devs.
I've been wondering, just who are the competent devs and publishers? Obviously they aren't Ubisoft and friends, but, which game studio is, to take the role of developing a worthy game that we have been anticipating for the last 10 years? And it is even questionable, should the Might & Magic franchise go to a worthy publisher, even to someone that had years of experience of sending out strategy games:
1. Heroes being a different strategy game than most ones today
2. it has to have some development in gameplay
3. multiplayer with simultaneous turns
4. design of creatures, heroes and towns to be unique
5. 3D-2D (?)
Now, I know that some people are asking for 2D (and we got them, in form of townscreens, at least), but this is where paths diverge. You got arguments that 2D is a step backwards and 3D is the way to go, but you also got that factor that having a 2D game nowadays is a nice surprise (to some). I don't know if I should believe some of Ubi's devs' claims how "2D graphic designers are rare and expensive". Personally, I think it just depends on how it is being applied, since it is a big deal having to rotate the camera to find a treasure chest behind a tree.
Anyway, my point is that these are the issues the new dev/pub could have. Series should go forward, yet have that special something that makes the Might & Magic games special this way.
____________
Come and visit the Might and Magic Wikia!
|
|
LizardWarrior
Honorable
Legendary Hero
the reckoning is at hand
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 10:00 PM |
|
|
Anyone but Ubisoft and EA, the rest will at least ship a working game 
____________
|
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 10:40 PM |
|
|
EnergyZ said:
5. 3D-2D (?)
I seriously don't really understand the issue of 2D vs. 3D. Never have, through the many posts here on the forums.
To illustrate, 2D works for Heroes 3. The game looks nice, for the time in which it was released. Current day 2D graphics would still work, looking sharper and more clear. As it is, Heroes 3's graphics were for the most part 3D rendered objects, of which they made snapshots to turn them into 2D. We're talking about an era in which 3D was still in its infancy and going full 3D on a game like Heroes 3 would likely have pushed it beyond the upper limit of what 3D video cards were on the market back then.
However, an RTS in 3D works just as well. The most clear-cut example is Age of Wonders 3, which is full 3D, but still looks clear and uncluttered. Despite many different map objects, each is scaled in such a way that it's still easily recognisable as to what it is, yet not extend too far out of its tile, so the objects don't obscure anything that's behind them from the point of view of the player.
The only reason I think we're having this discussion in the first place is because UbiSoft and its developers have time and again failed to make a proper, symbolic strategic world map representation, across 3 games by now. Even after 3 titles, they still seem to be stuck in a knee-jerk reaction to revert to lifelike scaling. I seriously don't understand their issue, when Triumph Studios - a much smaller company - managed to hit the proverbial nail on the head.
Personally, I think 3D would look better - provided we get a symbolic strategic world map like we had in Heroes 3.
|
|
Kimarous
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 11:01 PM |
|
|
|
Hypothetically speaking, what if the series went in a direction of a 2D overworld with 3D battles and townscreens instead of 3D overworld and battles with 2D townscreens? Having recently gotten back into Heroes 5 via the 5.5 mod, the 3D overworld map is kind of a pain to deal with. There have been numerous instances where I've forgotten to pick something up simply because I didn't rotate the camera far enough to notice it. Also, picking out the right spot to dig for the "Grail" is awkward as well. Those are issues that I've never had with the 2D map of Heroes 3. 2D overworlds are probably easier to RMG anyway and most certainly cheaper on the budget. Yeah, it would take some getting used to, but I'd be fine if the hypothetical H8 went in that direction.
|
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
|
posted June 05, 2016 11:10 PM |
|
|
Kimarous said:
Hypothetically speaking, what if the series went in a direction of a 2D overworld with 3D battles and townscreens instead of 3D overworld and battles with 2D townscreens? Having recently gotten back into Heroes 5 via the 5.5 mod, the 3D overworld map is kind of a pain to deal with. There have been numerous instances where I've forgotten to pick something up simply because I didn't rotate the camera far enough to notice it. Also, picking out the right spot to dig for the "Grail" is awkward as well. Those are issues that I've never had with the 2D map of Heroes 3. 2D overworlds are probably easier to RMG anyway and most certainly cheaper on the budget. Yeah, it would take some getting used to, but I'd be fine if the hypothetical H8 went in that direction.
I disagree. Triumph Studios hit the nail on the head with a 3D world map that works, without all the issues UbiSoft and its developers introduced.
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted June 11, 2016 08:33 PM |
|
|
Maurice said:
I seriously don't really understand the issue of 2D vs. 3D. Never have, through the many posts here on the forums.
As good as AoW3 did it you still have better visibility with a 2D game and especially on the battle map (AoW3 vs HoMM3). What 3D does is that it adds a third axis into space, but why bother if there is no strategical input to use out of it? Needing to scroll and rotate shouldn't be mandatory in these type of games. What does it tactically add? No matter how hard I think, I can't see the big benefits. I can only notice I see creatures better in 2D.
On a 2D battlefield creature designs are shining, and you can admire every subtle detail while crushing your opponent (or getting crushed yourself ), contributing to immersion. This is precisely why battle cinematics made their appearance in 3D games, to give some of this immersion back. I don't mind the 3D if it's done properly, but I don't understand its reason of being for HoMM and even similar games in the first place. Better graphics? Check out games from Amanita Design in example to see how gorgeous 2D environment can be. Better immersion? For an RPG I would agree 3D can be more immersive, but for a TBS... Can't see the gain. Better performance? Not so sure either, I'd be more leaning to think 2D graphics require less performances to run smooth and fast and optimization should have to deal with less parameters (but hands down to AoW3 generating random medium size high quality map in 3-5 secs). More strategy? Not, even needs to make adjustments (angle, scale, perspective) and find workarounds (battle cinematics, right-clic and scroll excessive use) to retrieve small yet not unimportant things lost in the process (immersion and readability).
So while I agree AoW3 shows a good use of 3D I am not convinced by its necessity in these types of games.
Probably Ubisoft goes 3D for two main reasons, budget and targeting young audience. It is although quite an argument whether which one is cheaper or the way to go in terms of profitability, but that's another topic and the important matter to me is which one serves the game better.
Personally I've always advocated something like Trine 2 (I take this example because I just find the art gorgeous), with 3D graphics restricted to a 2D plane, for battles I am firmly convinced it would be the best solution. As for the adventure map, be it in Civ5 or AoW3 when I want to have a clear overview of strategic locations I always toggle to the 2D map (Civ5), or zoom out to enter the "handwritten map" to see the icons (AoW3). I don't find the 3D perspective that satisfying, even when done right.
____________
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted June 11, 2016 08:40 PM |
|
|
Galaad said:
Amanita Design
Wow, a feast.
About 3D, I think is more about visual encumbrance, which hardly occurs in 2D. Then resource usage, slower battles, slower moves, everything is slower. I remember I read in ToH turns for H5 were set to 20 min each (if my memory doesn't fail). The turns for H2-H3 were between 2-4 minutes max. And basically for same moves.
I like Civ6 graphics, I think they would fit very well to Heroes, especially the mountains.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
yogi
Promising
Famous Hero
of picnics
|
|
posted June 12, 2016 01:15 AM |
|
|
Galaad said:
As good as AoW3 did it you still have better visibility with a 2D game and especially on the battle map (AoW3 vs HoMM3). What 3D does is that it adds a third axis into space, but why bother if there is no strategical input to use out of it? Needing to scroll and rotate shouldn't be mandatory in these type of games. What does it tactically add? No matter how hard I think, I can't see the big benefits. I can only notice I see creatures better in 2D.
On a 2D battlefield creature designs are shining, and you can admire every subtle detail while crushing your opponent (or getting crushed yourself ), contributing to immersion. This is precisely why battle cinematics made their appearance in 3D games, to give some of this immersion back. I don't mind the 3D if it's done properly, but I don't understand its reason of being for HoMM and even similar games in the first place. Better graphics? Check out games from Amanita Design in example to see how gorgeous 2D environment can be. Better immersion? For an RPG I would agree 3D can be more immersive, but for a TBS... Can't see the gain. Better performance? Not so sure either, I'd be more leaning to think 2D graphics require less performances to run smooth and fast and optimization should have to deal with less parameters (but hands down to AoW3 generating random medium size high quality map in 3-5 secs). More strategy? Not, even needs to make adjustments (angle, scale, perspective) and find workarounds (battle cinematics, right-clic and scroll excessive use) to retrieve small yet not unimportant things lost in the process (immersion and readability).
So while I agree AoW3 shows a good use of 3D I am not convinced by its necessity in these types of games.
Probably Ubisoft goes 3D for two main reasons, budget and targeting young audience. It is although quite an argument whether which one is cheaper or the way to go in terms of profitability, but that's another topic and the important matter to me is which one serves the game better.
Personally I've always advocated something like Trine 2 (I take this example because I just find the art gorgeous), with 3D graphics restricted to a 2D plane, for battles I am firmly convinced it would be the best solution. As for the adventure map, be it in Civ5 or AoW3 when I want to have a clear overview of strategic locations I always toggle to the 2D map (Civ5), or zoom out to enter the "handwritten map" to see the icons (AoW3). I don't find the 3D perspective that satisfying, even when done right.
great post Galaad, i agree completely.
 http://heroescommunity.com/viewthread.php3?TID=42337
____________
yogi - class: monk | status: healthy
"Lol we are HC'ers.. The same tribe.. Guy!" ~Ghost
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
