|
| Thread: Games Domain Review |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · NEXT» |
|
HappyPike
Known Hero
Pikeman
|
posted April 18, 2002 05:51 PM |
|
|
Games Domain Review
Got only 3 out of 5 stars:
http://www.gamesdomain.com/gdreview/zones/reviews/pc/apr02/heroes_magic4.html
bastards! 
"HOMM4 is still a very good strategy game in many respects. What it lacks is the elegance of the original design. Yeah, there's no multiplayer - it will be released as a patch. Yeah, the graphics are awful - but that's a personal opinion. Yeah, there's no longer a tactical grid overlay - you just have to learn to estimate. Yeah, the music is fine - but I can just listen to Dead Can Dance. Yeah this and uh-huh that. That stuff doesn't matter. The bottom line is that the changes to the HOMM system have produced a game that's a lot more like a fantasy wargame than a strategy boardgame, yet the boardgame origins hold it back and become a liability. The added features of HOMM4 do add some depth to the game, but at a disproportionate cost in game flow. The synthesis to this crazy gaming dialectic is that the gameplay feels diluted. You can take that Hegelian mixed metaphor for what it's worth, because for me, the magic is gone. And the might, and the heroes, etc. "
____________
Also a Civilization fanatic:
http://www.civfanatics.com || forums
|
|
HappyPike
Known Hero
Pikeman
|
|
posted April 18, 2002 05:56 PM |
|
|
Quote:
bastards!
What!? The word "bastard" is censored?? I don't think it's that bad a word, especially when you use it jokingly. 
____________
Also a Civilization fanatic:
http://www.civfanatics.com || forums
|
|
cerebral_user
Hired Hero
|
|
posted April 21, 2002 09:02 AM |
|
|
got what it earned...
____________
|
|
mtkafka
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted April 21, 2002 12:34 PM |
|
|
This is Geryk's worst review. Since when is "Hegelian" a game review term? It screams "I am so smart! You are all dumb!" Might as well add Nietczhean and Sisyphus or some such philosphical claptrap. Seems like he played parts of the campaing here and there and a maybe a bit of this and that. He doesn't really get indepth imo.
BTW, I still dont know what he meant in terms of "board game" design. What is a board game design? Another useless term in a useless review if you ask me.
Its a bad review from a good reviewer (generally speaking).
etc
____________
|
|
Mz
Tavern Dweller
|
posted April 23, 2002 08:28 PM |
|
|
lol you are funny
Quote:
This is Geryk's worst review. Since when is "Hegelian" a game review term? It screams "I am so smart! You are all dumb!"
** Not a "smart" term for people who read some books. Look it up if you don't know it. The language allows for more then just "This rocks, or Buy game now, game good".
Might as well add Nietczhean and Sisyphus or some such philosphical claptrap. Seems like he played parts of the campaing here and there and a maybe a bit of this and that. He doesn't really get indepth imo.
** There is no in depth. The reviewer must be objective. If people like you were reviewing games then people would waste their money on worthless crap.
P.S. One can get used to the pain after a some time (Likewise for smells, books, movies, games). That's not the point. A 10/10 game should be perfect, and HOMM4 is obviously not.
BTW, I still dont know what he meant in terms of "board game" design. What is a board game design? Another useless term in a useless review if you ask me.
** Maybe you should read the whole review instead of picking out random phrases. To summarize the review: the game has changed and not for the better.
Its a bad review from a good reviewer (generally speaking).
** Yes, it's a bad review because the reviewer did not give thumbs up to a badly written game . Diablo 2 also sucks, however after playing it for a while I got used to it despite the fact that it crashes, disconnects, lags, leaks memory. I am sure you can get used to HOMM4, however if all game reviews said that "The game sucks ass, but if you play it long enough it will grow on you", then noone would bother reading the reviews because they would not be objective.
etc
____________
|
|
a100pieces
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted April 23, 2002 09:46 PM |
|
|
In relationship to the other HoMM games made, it'd get a measely 2 stars out of 5 from me.
It's inexcusable to release a game that should have been a beta-test demo.
____________
|
|
brody
Known Hero
Pathetic Loser
|
|
posted April 23, 2002 10:40 PM |
|
|
Heh, I'd still say 4/5 stars. If we rate games based on their first release state (and not their potential), civ 3 would get 0 stars, D2 would have gotten 0 stars, etc. And in any case, who doesn't think heroes 4 has better music than 3? That's just nuts!
____________
|
|
Jenova
Famous Hero
|
|
posted April 24, 2002 09:51 AM |
|
|
Games are judged on their release state.. But Civ3 and D2 got good scores despite what you say because they made up for it by being very good games.
A game that is buggy is hell WILL get a bad review for it. HOMM4's release conidition luckily isn't so bad, compared to other games generally, so its score didn't suffer much from it. For games that are terrible, try Lords of Magic. THAT was a beta game, even the devs admitted it. HOMM4 is not beta. It's just got problems that went past QA. Beta is when the devs KNOW the game is not ready for release yet (but released it anyway).
____________
|
|
DonGio
Promising
Famous Hero
of Clear Water Mountain Clan
|
|
posted April 24, 2002 11:17 AM |
|
|
I think it looks like a good review from what posted here...
____________
There are 10 types of people: Those who read binary, and those who don't.
|
|
Columbus
Hired Hero
|
posted April 24, 2002 02:49 PM |
|
|
Quote:
The synthesis to this crazy gaming dialectic is that the gameplay feels diluted. You can take that Hegelian mixed metaphor for what it's worth
I think the objection to the reviewer's language is not that we don't know what Hegelian means but that he apparently doesn't
It seems he spent even less time on Hegel than he did on HoMM4
Maybe he's hoping to move on to Art or Indie music
|
|
brody
Known Hero
Pathetic Loser
|
|
posted April 24, 2002 08:31 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Games are judged on their release state.. But Civ3 and D2 got good scores despite what you say because they made up for it by being very good games.
A game that is buggy is hell WILL get a bad review for it. HOMM4's release conidition luckily isn't so bad, compared to other games generally, so its score didn't suffer much from it. For games that are terrible, try Lords of Magic. THAT was a beta game, even the devs admitted it. HOMM4 is not beta. It's just got problems that went past QA. Beta is when the devs KNOW the game is not ready for release yet (but released it anyway).
Well, D2 was really buggy on release. I wouldn't call it a beta (others have though), but definitely had some serious balance issues. Just read the 10+ patch readme files and you'll see that things just keep getting balanced, rebalanced, etc. Not a bad game, but it's score in reviews seemed a bit high given its release state and given that the game was missing a lot of story (later released as an "expansion" - How could the game have ended when we knew Baal was still around?). So while H4 doesn't deserve full marks, I think it's no worse than D2 for release bugs.
____________
|
|
Krishhh
Adventuring Hero
still learning spells
|
|
posted April 24, 2002 08:48 PM |
|
|
HOMM4 is still a very good strategy game in many respects. What it lacks is the elegance of the original design. Yeah, there's no multiplayer - it will be released as a patch. Yeah, the graphics are awful - but that's a personal opinion. Yeah, there's no longer a tactical grid overlay - you just have to learn to estimate. Yeah, the music is fine - but I can just listen to Dead Can Dance. Yeah this and uh-huh that. That stuff doesn't matter. The bottom line is that the changes to the HOMM system have produced a game that's a lot more like a fantasy wargame than a strategy boardgame, yet the boardgame origins hold it back and become a liability. The added features of HOMM4 do add some depth to the game, but at a disproportionate cost in game flow. The synthesis to this crazy gaming dialectic is that the gameplay feels diluted. You can take that Hegelian mixed metaphor for what it's worth, because for me, the magic is gone. And the might, and the heroes, etc. "
That is the most un-objective review I have ever heard!
The graphics I like much more than H3. The muic is just superb. What boardgame origins? It was a great game and in H4 they have made it even better, and is has more depth.
For me everything has came back even better! I would give it 4 1/2 stars. It is not superb but it is better than Heroes 3 which was a very good game.
Now, those were my thoughts,. If would have written them on that site in the form of a review would you say that that is good review? No, because my thoughts too are un-objective, but I`m not posting them as a review.
____________
Promising student of magic.
|
|
phYscHo
Known Hero
[This space For Rent]
|
|
posted April 24, 2002 09:26 PM |
|
|
A review will almost always be biased, due to human nature, krishh seemed to get it pretty close tho he stated the facts and most of them were true, as for buggyness the fact it didn't ship with multiplayer isn't a bug, the developers knew that it wasn't going out with it, we knew that it didn't have mp when we bought the game, i myself didn't know of the multiplayer patch (coming soon i hope!)
but adding it in, wouldn't realy be fixing anything.
____________
I can Imagine a world without hate, a world that lives in total peace and harmony, then i can imagine us attacking them, cos the fools wouldn't expect it
|
|
DonGio
Promising
Famous Hero
of Clear Water Mountain Clan
|
|
posted April 24, 2002 11:12 PM |
|
|
Quote:
That is the most un-objective review I have ever heard!
Oh, I see, but you, a long time HOMM fan, will deliver an objective review... I see...
I, myself being a long time HOMM fan, found myself agreeing with most of what he (the reviewer) said in the review.
I think you're calling it an unobjective review because you disagree with it. That's sort of buttsucky, if you ask me...
And it's kind of hard to review anything without using your own personal taste and feelings. Realize it; HOMMIV is not, and probably will not be, nearly as widely acclaimed as it's predecessors. And that probably means it's not as good a game...
Play well
DonGio
____________
There are 10 types of people: Those who read binary, and those who don't.
|
|
InfernoGuy
Adventuring Hero
Enjoys eating chicken
|
|
posted April 25, 2002 01:11 AM |
|
|
A scandal surrounding gamespot and gamesdomain reviewers surfaced I think two years ago. Seems the game reviewers didnt always play the games they were reviewing. Gamesdomain especially has had some really awful reviews, this one is high on the list as well as Deus Ex. (which they hate and in my mind is the greatest game in existence)
____________
Its better to keep your mouth shut and be assumed stupid then open it and remove all doubt.
|
|
mtkafka
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted April 25, 2002 04:38 AM |
|
|
It's not the review that peeves me, but more the tone of it. You would expect reading Geryk's review that the game was terribly designed and not a true HoMM. At least that's what I got out of it. I agree with a lot of the complaints against HoMM4 such as lazy AI and crashing bugs, but nothing like 'boardgame' design turned into 'wargame' design. That type of criticism is so highly subjective it matter only so much to the reviewer himself. Such as Chick's infamous Deus Ex review which was so antagonisitc.
Anyway, I like to read both reviewers, Geryk and Chick. Both are pretty honest and say what they want. But sometimes they can come off smart alec without producing a credible review... imo.
Anyway, I'd give HoMM4 a solid 4/5 with a possible 4.5/5 if it was cleaned up. The 3/5 number rating at GD I can definitely agree with moreso the written article of the review.
etc
____________
|
|
thunderknight
Promising
Famous Hero
|
posted April 25, 2002 06:30 AM |
|
|
It's not a bad review, but.........
Well, I think it's better to see the whole review
before judge it. I agree with some of the points of the review (I've read the whole review) even I'm a long time homm fan as well.
The review has fulfilled the basic requirement of review.
State the new features and discuss their impacts. The review
also give some explanation about "board-game" vs "wargame".
And it's generally quite objective.
One thing I disagree most against the review is its concluding lines. What the heck is "Hegelian mixed metaphor" ??? Maybe next time I can derive a equation
using Kepler's Laws to describe the orbit of hero movement. 
And then he said " because for me, the magic is gone. And the might, and the heroes, etc." I find this really confusing and I myself don't understand it. Maybe just coz my English sucks. 
Anyway, I read this review AFTER I buy h4. In fact, I will buy h4 no matter what the reviews write about it. The pleasure I enjoyed in h1, h2 and h3 already gives me the best reason to buy h4.
After the multiplayer patch, the real challenge begins coz with the current h4 game design + higher system requirement + bugs = prolonged multiplayer game time and maybe higher rate of drops during games. Can the heroes fans stand this ??????
|
|
Darion
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted April 25, 2002 06:32 AM |
|
|
Oh no! Not my precious Homm IV getting a... *gasp* BAD REVIEW! Oh no, horrible horrible peoples giving us a bad review... flames them we will. Yes, my precious... my bug-infested precious... hates the Games Domainses we does! Hates it.. foreverrr!!
____________
|
|
mtkafka
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted April 25, 2002 10:13 AM |
|
|
This is what he writes in his review about 'boardgame' conventions...
>>>>"Like the top half of the Premiership, though, the truth about the HOMM series is that while details change and some new things appear, it's pretty much the same stuff every time. Heroes of Might & Magic is never going to be a 4X fantasy strategy game like Master of Magic, because the fundamental design decisions that made the game so appealing in the first place are antithetical to the kind of open-ended game progression you find in Age of Wonders or the Warlords series. Heroes of Might & Magic is a puzzle game because it is based on simple boardgame concepts that lead to a "best fit" solution corresponding to the map on which you're playing."
First off I disagree with the description of the Heroes series as a puzzle game. Yeah, some of the campaign missions are puzzle missions, but if anybody played the scenario missions, they are as openended as any missions in AoW or Warlords. Scenarios I played in Hereos 2 (and even in Heroes 3 and 4) play differently each time. If thats puzzle based, call me stupid. And of course the Hereos games are nothing like MoM (I dont think the developers are THAT dumb to want to make that type of game since its a different game), but that doesn't mean its a puzzle game. In fact I'd consider HoMM series a more innovative and FUN game then the MoM series, which is really a souped up Civ/Moo 4x game anyway, IMO.
>>>"That said, Heroes of Might & Magic IV does change a lot about the way you play this kind of game; the changes are not minor. To the extent that the original design constraints allow, HOMM4 has a much different feel than its predecessors. But if you like the boardgame-like simplicity of HOMM2 and were hoping for a re-think that focused on that simplicity, it's not here. HOMM4 is the least boardgame-like iteration of the series, and while the changes all seem like details, they add up to a huge gameplay difference. I'm sorry I had to be the one to break it to you."
Break what to me? Are all fans wanting a conventional board game with HoMMIV? Where does he give the description of board game conventions? Frankly the game is still a Heroes game, it just adds lots of new gameplay designs. Yeah he might not like it, or think the 'changes are not minor' (ie they suck), or that they dont have whatever 'board game simplicity' he means, but its still a Heroes games. You still got heroes recruiting creatures. You still got Vampire that go 'Blah' and you still have tactical battles that resemble the other Heroes games. The change from HoMM 2/3 to HoMMIV is like HoMM to HoMM2... its not like they suddenly ripped the game apart to be called a Grognard Strategy Fantasy Wargame IV. The game is as 'simple' in its concepts as the previous heroes games. So he knocks the game for being too complex? Or not being simple enough like a boardgame? not being like Risk or Monopoly? whatever. I can see what he's trying to say, but I think hes totally wrong and his definitions are off.
His review plays like a backseat game designer in an illiterate mode. Yeah, he has his highly literate opinions with literate smart alec remarks. But please don't expect me to beleive that the game suddenly changed from being like Monopoly (boardgame) to Fantasy General (wargame).
I'm surprised he didn't mention AI bugs... odd, did he play the same game we all did? Rushed review.
BTW, I could care less if the game was given a 1/10. Just write a straight review without the damn winking of, "I'm really clever."
etc
____________
|
|
Flashman
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted April 25, 2002 10:44 AM |
|
|
Homm IV gets 4/5 on my scale.
I base this on the sole fact that I haven't played anything else since I got it.
Sure there is room for improvement (Especially a better AI and more diverse magic items and most importantly fixing the memory leak bug) but as a whole it's definately not a beta release.
I've been an avid Civ fan ever since Civ 1 was released for the amiga and I HATE the latest incarnation of that series which got about 10 hours of play time before I ditched it for good so it's not like I can't feel let down...
/Flash
|
| |
|
|
