|
| Thread: Scary H5 poll results |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · «PREV |
|
gravity
Hired Hero
|
posted November 13, 2004 07:09 AM |
|
|
They should obviously focus on single player since Heroes is hardly a major multiplayer game, thanks to the high length and low player-interactivity of the games. I'm not saying that Heroes multiplayer can't be fun, but the number of people who have played more than one or two complete multiplayer games of heroes is probably tiny compared to the number of people who just play single player.
Even if they do focus on single-player though, it would still be nice for the towns to be balanced, since that maps one-off maps more fun too.
|
|
rychenroller
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted November 13, 2004 07:45 AM |
|
|
I dont get why it is so obvious? If you want a single player game, you need to have a good AI...the only time the AI actually made you think a bit in a heroes game was heroesII.
Given that they cant make the AI think like a human...what challenge is there? Once you know what the AI is going to do in a given situation....its a no brainer and no challenge. But playing another human? now theres the ultimate variable.
Of course I started playing heroes single player....but you can only beat the same random over and over again with 7 AI players on 200% difficulty so many times. New maps dont keep the game fresh for me, new opponents do though. I'd kill to see a showcased multiplayer heroes 5, something which heroes 4 was the antithesis of...it was almost like an insulting afterthought. But I'm an online gamer, I dont play maps or campaigns...sheerly for the pleasure of beating the AI, what have you achieved?
Having said all that, theres absolutely no reason why it cant be both....if Ubisoft are prepared to go to the lengths they need to go to, to produce the complete package.
____________
Myctteakyshd
|
|
JagoBC
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted November 13, 2004 08:38 AM |
|
|
Ah, Heroes 2 was a great game... But Heroes 3 had opera! And H4 gave us the ability to have our heroes take on megadragons 1 on 1. I think they have to concentrate on making a great singleplayer game first and foremost. Heroes multiplayer is basically just offering a setting, a chessboard if you will, for your game. So certainly if they make a great single player game it will only enhance the multiplayer aspect. No?
____________
|
|
Polaris
Promising
Known Hero
|
|
posted November 14, 2004 01:32 AM |
|
|
As I've said all along most players of the HOMM games play it single player. However, I'm surprised there is a place on the net that has such a strong single-player bias since the net is an inherently multiplayer crowd. *shrug*
As long as multiplayer games have such a long duration (especially for new players), I don't see how this overall preference can change. Games that are popular for multiplayer are very interruptable- that is they have no clear stopping point, or very frequent stopping points. Heroes doesn't usually work that way, especially for players new to multiplayer where the games are much longer.
As for concerns about balance, I don't think they will neglect it just because the game is going to be mainly single player. Strategic games *HAVE* to be fairly well balanced in order for them to be fun single-player, muli-player, or otherwise. I can't think of any long-term popular games (strategy games or even multiplayer games in general) that lacked balance much more than the Heroes games (not saying the Heroes games are poorly balanced, just that other popular games tend to be balanced better) so I doubt fears over H5 balance are justified. Ubisoft is a strong multiplayer company anyway, and you don't get that way by putting unbalanced drivel out the door.
|
|
B0rsuk
Promising
Famous Hero
DooM prophet
|
|
posted November 15, 2004 11:22 AM |
|
|
Quote:
It's not like you had to choose a Sorceress for your main. Sheesh.
Yees, yes. Wait with expansion until you get right hero in tavern, or pay k times 2500 to quicken the process.
|
|
B0rsuk
Promising
Famous Hero
DooM prophet
|
|
posted November 15, 2004 11:32 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
b] Hardly anyone plays vanilla Half-Life.
I do. It's better than any of the mods and expansions to it.
Have you seen Natural Selection mod ? For me it's great. It's team based game, but it's fairly unique. Not only one team is marines and other aliens - various species/weapons have no equivalents on the other side ! The map is assymetric, you fight for and capture resource nodes, etc. Alien resources are distributed evenly, while marine team has one commander (with tactical map and no direct participation), one resource pool.
I think it's amazing - it's a RTS game, actually. Even the maps are assymetric and still, balance is really good.
|
|
Narcissus_X
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted November 15, 2004 02:52 PM |
|
|
The single player game is very important, it's just that the waiting in a multiplayer game gets very tedious in these turn-based strategy types. The best alternative I've found for multiplayer are the PBEM (Play-by-E-mail). While the games do take awhile to play through, you play better because you aren't rushing to beat a timer. It's really great when you are in multiple PBEM games, most of the excitement is in anticipating your turn. I used to shun these types of games (PBEM), but once I played one, I was hooked. I hope they include it in Heroes V and a PBEM ladder is established.
____________
Howe's Law: Every man has a scheme that will not work.
|
|
gravity
Hired Hero
|
|
posted November 16, 2004 12:50 AM |
|
|
I definitely agree that PBEM should be included, it makes multiplayer on large maps with more than 2 players a lot more practical, though it probably wouldn't be as fun as Alpha Centauri PBEM because there aren't as many strategic or diplomatic options.
Also, I'm not saying that they should neglect the multiplayer game, but they shouldn't do anything that would make the single player worse just to make the multiplayer better, given that relatively few people play the multiplayer.
____________
|
|
Osti
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted November 16, 2004 04:24 PM |
|
|
I think that the Hotseat is the most important multiplayer option, if there would be no hotseat, I donīt know if I would buy the game
____________
Wer das hier versteht, kriegt nen Keks^^
|
|
Narcissus_X
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted November 16, 2004 06:55 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I think that the Hotseat is the most important multiplayer option, if there would be no hotseat, I donīt know if I would buy the game
Hotseat is when two people share the same computer, right???
I challenge you to play a PBEM game sometime and still see if you feel this way (unless of course you've already played a PBEM game before).
|
|
demogorgon
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted November 27, 2004 05:18 PM |
|
|
You can play a HOMM game multiplayer as long as the game supports it... I am mostly a single player player (as well as a LAN player).. What I know is, some mapmakers around there "strictly" creates ridiciluous maps which do not please your eyes... Maps that are so empty, almost symetric...Exactly same creatures blocking roads for each player. Exact same number of mines and artifacts... Exact same events... All because of a fair MP game.. why just ignore the Adventure map. Give each player a hero with same amounth of creatures and at end of 3rd turn there will be a winner..Ok I undertand MP is about defeating your opponents. But enchancing one's ego should not be the aim of a game.... It is a game! I'd play online chess if I'd be interested in nothing but defeating my opponents... It really wouldn't add anything to my life if I'd defeat 10000 MP players and have my name written in the MP history of HOMM unless I enjoy the game more than the "idea" defeating my opponents!...
We usually play HOMM3 2 or 3 players together on LAN. And we perefer L-XL maps with at least 3 Computer opponents. Why? Because it is no fun for us playing a map with just 3 players..And it takes forever playing a map with 7H opponents. We also prefer maps that are not so symetric. It tastes good when one gold mine is guarded by a throng of champions while other is guarded by lots of imps granted that the map is rich (more of everything)... Also, AI really plays quick and occasionally suprises you. For instance, it is really nice seeing an AI hero capturing an artifact you think you'd get... Adds an extra fun to the game. If AI could play more reasonably then the muiltiPlayer games could get better..Besides,it could add more fun and challange to the Single Player as well.
Thats just my opinion of course.
____________
|
|
The-Filth
Very dead
|
|
posted November 28, 2004 01:26 AM |
|
|
Isnt there a Homm online game in the making? There u internet players get exactly what u want. Homm 5 should be focused on singleplayer, story and balance. From what i understand of the cryptic messages from Fabrice there is going to be a hotseat. And online playing is from what i read going to be more efficient to give a better experience etc.
So why does a good singleplayer option mean the multiplayer isnt going to be any good? It doesnt seem like they are rushing this game...this might mean that they are doing some good work and not neglecting anything.
____________
I Think. Therefore I'm Damned
|
|
TheRealDeal
Promising
Supreme Hero
Foobum* of Justice!
|
|
posted November 28, 2004 02:16 AM |
|
|
Long time no see mr filth 
____________
*We all know the that Foobum is the class of all that is Cake.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 30, 2004 04:21 AM |
|
|
Now, you may be shocked, but, in H5, I want to see a bad AI. I want to take advantage of it easily. I want it to beat its head on its Peasant (and die). Also, (prepare for another shocker), I don't want balance. I want all towns to be different.
Why? Ubi needs to work on putting in a lot of towns and creatures (and buildings and adventure objects and artifacts).
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
rychenroller
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted November 30, 2004 04:46 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Isnt there a Homm online game in the making? There u internet players get exactly what u want. Homm 5 should be focused on singleplayer, story and balance. From what i understand of the cryptic messages from Fabrice there is going to be a hotseat. And online playing is from what i read going to be more efficient to give a better experience etc.
So why does a good singleplayer option mean the multiplayer isnt going to be any good? It doesnt seem like they are rushing this game...this might mean that they are doing some good work and not neglecting anything.
Uninformed.....
The turn based strategy genre for multiplayer is completely stagnant. For every 100 real time games released.....theres 1 trun based games released. For every 200 real time fantasy set games released...theres 1 turn based. A huge group of turn based gamers are screaming for a good multiplayer heroes release, and they cant get a fix elsewhere. Last turn based game that came out in the fanatsy genre and was any good, was AoW shadow magic, and thats nearly 18 months old.
Dont give me this mmorpg crap, gimme a good heroes multiplayer I can lose myself in against another HUMAN, we are starved of games that combine turns and strategy.
And an easy AI? well just lol to that.
Moderator's note:This topic has been closed, as it refers to an older version of the game. To discuss Heroes 3, please go to Library Of Enlightenment, to discuss Heroes 4, please go to War Room Of Axeoth, to discuss Heroes 5, go to Temple Of Ashan.
____________
Myctteakyshd
|
|
|
|
