|
| Thread: Do I understand this correctly? |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · NEXT» |
|
onomastikon
Hired Hero
|
posted November 22, 2005 01:04 PM |
|
|
Do I understand this correctly?
Am I understanding this right?
From what I can gather from this excellent site and from Ubisofts own, HOMM V will be in almost all aspects identical to HOMM III except that there will only be 6 towns (perhaps for commercial reasons), some minor changes to combat speed, and superficial (in a literal sense) changes in the fact that it will be 3D.
If I am understanding things right, I find this a bit meager. Not that I dont really like HOMM3 -- it's just that there is so much opportunity to do a lot more than just make it 3D (and cut out content so that we purchase expansion packs). There will still be only 7 troops on the battlefield, the same undercomplex spell- and combat system is in place, the same number and upgrade possibilities for creatures is in place -- it all just seems too simple.
So much has happened in the world of TBS since 1999, and there are so many good examples of good ideas out there, this just seems surprising.
Am I in the vast minority of people here, is there consensus that homm5 will be just amazing?
Thanks in advance for your constructive replies.
____________
|
|
Lich_King
Honorable
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted November 22, 2005 01:32 PM |
|
|
From my experience, I also thought like that at the beggining of the Heroes V introduction, however (since it's all I can say at the moment) Heroes V will be slightly different from Homm3.
____________
|
|
JJ_The_Ripper
Adventuring Hero
addicted HOMM player
|
posted November 22, 2005 06:17 PM |
|
|
Afraid of H4 shadow?
Hi there,
Imho Ubi is afraid of having the H4 deception shadow in the new sequence of the game. 3DO rushed to launch the H4 game and introduced a lot of bugs and problems making the players around the world unhappy. To avoid this, Ubi is trying to make the game a little more like H3 (as nearly everyone think it is better) being more conservative about changes.
Although H4 had its owns flaws, there were good changes that should not be forgotten (the magic, the retaliation (first attack, shooter retaliation) system are better than the previous games imo).
I would like to see something completely new, even if this brings something I will not like...
Just my two cents,
JJ_The_Ripper
|
|
onomastikon
Hired Hero
|
|
posted November 30, 2005 05:00 PM |
|
|
|
Well I am sure it will be fine, it just seems odd to me to release a game which is functionally equivalent to a game released 7 years earlier with the only difference being a smaller scope and superficial (e.g. graphical) enhancements. As much as I would like to support the HOMM series, I just don't find that a wise, or even worthwhile, idea.
|
|
Angelspit
Famous Hero
Warrior of the Heavens
|
|
posted November 30, 2005 06:02 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I would like to see something completely new, even if this brings something I will not like...
The problem is that Ubisoft paid 1.3 million for the rights to the license, in addition to what it costs to develop the game. They cannot afford to have a commercial failure. A bad Heroes game would kill the series for good.
____________
|
|
dvader
Adventuring Hero
Dark Lord of the Sith
|
|
posted December 01, 2005 11:17 AM |
|
|
Quote:
The problem is that Ubisoft paid 1.3 million for the rights to the license, in addition to what it costs to develop the game. They cannot afford to have a commercial failure. A bad Heroes game would kill the series for good.
I agree with that because most everyone knows what happened with H4. 3DO was starting to go under at the time they were producing the game and they rushed to get it(and the expansions) out and it didn't do well critically or with fans of the series, so if Ubi doesn't do well with H5, the franchise may well be done in completely.
____________
"Wipe them out...
All of them."
|
|
onomastikon
Hired Hero
|
|
posted December 01, 2005 11:27 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
The problem is that Ubisoft paid 1.3 million for the rights to the license, in addition to what it costs to develop the game. They cannot afford to have a commercial failure. A bad Heroes game would kill the series for good.
I agree with that because most everyone knows what happened with H4. 3DO was starting to go under at the time they were producing the game and they rushed to get it(and the expansions) out and it didn't do well critically or with fans of the series, so if Ubi doesn't do well with H5, the franchise may well be done in completely.
I also wholeheartedly agree.
HOWEVER, under a "bad" game, or at least one which I would consider a commercial risk (if not failure), would be a huge investment in funds for the release of a game whose gameplay is effectively 7 years old.
Of course, I am not saying that will be the case, but IF it is the case that HommV is just basically HommIII with very nice graphics, I won't be purchasing it.
|
|
dvader
Adventuring Hero
Dark Lord of the Sith
|
|
posted December 01, 2005 11:31 AM |
|
|
From what I understand, H5 will be similar to H3, but aside from better graphics there will be other differences that will set it apart from other games in the series.
____________
"Wipe them out...
All of them."
|
|
onomastikon
Hired Hero
|
|
posted December 01, 2005 12:33 PM |
|
|
Quote:
From what I understand, H5 will be similar to H3, but aside from better graphics there will be other differences that will set it apart from other games in the series.
OK, well that seems good, we shall see. Hard to see from the Teaser site.
What I really would embrace is a slightly more complicated system which allowed for more balances and counters, more strategic and tactical thinking.
As the system stands now, mosty units can be clearly seen as "better" or "worse" than others, since there are so few variables (attack, defense, HP); some is good, more is better. There are no differing armor or attack types, for instance.
This boils down to Me-Get-Good-Stuff-And-Beat-The-Snot-Outta-Them, with little room for recon to determine weakness and plan counters.
I would have liked a slight change in this as well as the magic system (there seem to be no real spellcasters (or having a stack of 100 spellcasters has the same effect as having a stack of 1) and perhaps the leadership system (I would like the skill Leadership or Command which enables Heroes to lead a stack with more than say 75 units at basic level, 150 at advanced, and 250 at expert). I would also have liked the battles to be more epic in nature, so that the battlefield would be MUCH larger and one could split up one's stacks into more discrete numbers depending on Tactics skill).
|
|
JJ_The_Ripper
Adventuring Hero
addicted HOMM player
|
|
posted December 01, 2005 03:46 PM |
|
|
What I am afraid of is that Ubi release only a "better looking" version the the game. I remember I used to play Dune II very often (good old times) and when they announced Dune 2000 I got excited. When I got the game, it was just a remodeled version of the Dune II (which I think was way better).
That's why I said I want new things. But I know that, as with any changes, there will be people saying that this is better, that is bad, ....
I hope at leat they keep the good things from H4 (line of sight was one of them).
JJ_The_Ripper
|
|
jondifool
Promising
Adventuring Hero
extinct but alive!
|
|
posted December 01, 2005 05:24 PM |
|
|
Its actual very difficult to predict the quality of a game base on the infos released before! As Homm4 was a very good eksample off.
I don't find it disapointing that Homm5 leans up the Homm3/homm2 consept in itself.
Also i think that the development so far had pointed at some very important changes, or improvement. Not counting 3D as thats just wrappings and therefore not important for a Coregamer like me 
Primary all the different Multiplayer options! Thats had been so much needed all the time, and personaly i newer got why H3 or expansions didn't came with some of them.
sekundary
I think that with the minor changes in battle its good that they are in fact MINOR, as I find it very important that battles are H3 chess like without to much luck in it. And not like the rock/sisser/paper luck that some games use! the game have to stay in the Homm tradition as well.
And third
the special abillitys of the towns. This is where i think the game might improve the most or fail most. As the challenge to give each town a different play feeling and style is big, but also something that brings something new to the game!
This also means that if ekspanisons brings new towns to the game, that they actual would give more to the game as well.
And if each town is indeed really different to play than the others , i would say Homm5 had done something big to get on from H3.
____________
The Oxe is slow, but earth have patience
|
|
bjorn190
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Jebus maker
|
posted December 01, 2005 05:35 PM |
|
|
Everyone know h3 is the best game. Good move to make it like h3. Should be more like h3 actually 
lol
I hope I get a qp for this post 
|
|
ratmonky
Famous Hero
Abu Hur Ibn Rashka
|
|
posted December 01, 2005 08:28 PM |
|
|
one thing disappoints me the most... they decided to stick to h1-h3 retaliation system!
H4 retaliation system was a perfection! Even King's Bounty had a simultaneous retaliation!
____________
Dies illa, dies irae,
Calamitatis et miseriae.
Requiem aeternum
Dona eis, dona eis Domine.
|
|
onomastikon
Hired Hero
|
|
posted December 02, 2005 08:53 PM |
|
|
Most of that seems fair enough.
I disagree with the (perhaps common?) analogy to chess, however. Despite the superficial similarities in the tactical battle screen and a chessboard, there is almost nothing in common between Homm and chess. In fact, I find the analogy misleading, and because the tactical field simply looks like it could be a chess context, it could deter from game development if people wanted to keep it like that because of (functional) similarities to chess. Is anyone here good at chess? I'm pretty poor (I learned from my grandfather, who was a Master (but not a Grandmaster), and only beat him once in my life), but it seems to me that chess is all about controlling lines of force. Homm tactical battles resemble chess only in the way that chopping down trees resembles forestry. (Don't get me wrong, I actually find Homm much more fun than chess!) That is why I would have enjoyed seeing some innovations (just a few keywords of which I tried to sketch above).
|
|
polaris
Promising
Known Hero
|
|
posted December 03, 2005 01:05 AM |
|
|
I, for one, agree that H5 appears to be too similar to H3 at this point.
For instance, several of the factions in H5 are clearly copies of H3 factions- not just stylistically (which would be ok), but actual copies of the H3 factions.
Good ideas that H4 not only implemented but implemented well (like simultaneous retaliation or caravans) are even being abandoned.
While some people think it's safe to go down a road that succeeded before, I don't think that's always true. Pacman-like games, text adventures (even graphical adventures), rail shooters, sidescrollers, AD&D RPGs (as in 2nd ed.) were all big business at one time, but almost nothing is made in these styles anymore. Because we made other things that are better, and sell better too.
|
|
Sebastian
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted December 04, 2005 08:44 AM |
|
|
Quote:
one thing disappoints me the most... they decided to stick to h1-h3 retaliation system!
H4 retaliation system was a perfection! Even King's Bounty had a simultaneous retaliation!
I hated the H4 retaliation system. Every time a unit attacked, I didn't know what the hell was going on. The animations were too fast and I didn't feel any satisfaction of seeing my unit slice the enemy unit. And on top of that, there was no event log (I think, don’t quote me on that). What the frack is up with that. I hope they'll have it in H5. Oh and the graphical aspect of the game is actually very important to me. I'm not talking only about the move to 3D, but the actual art quality and direction. I loved H3's graphics. They were detailed, they had a fantasy feel and the animations were amazing, for a 2d game. H4's visual was the main reason I disliked that game. When a friend of mine got it, I went over to see it. After 15 min of play time, my friend and I were laughing close to tears after seeing the idiotic unit animations and looks. Every melee unit moved like they had something impaled up their behind. I mean come on, they even changed the majestic phoenix into a fried turkey. They made the bone dragon fly like a retard; they changed the mighty minotaur (one of my fav h3 units) into a penniless peasant and the diabolic devil into a crash landing victim. Hmm what else, ah yess the female hero who did those hilarious back-flips. Darn, I didn't know they had Olympic players around.
Sure I didn't dislike everything about H4:
- I liked how the angel looked, (lol, the only unit)
- The spell system was a breeze of fresh air.
- The world map was nice.
- Some of the music was great
- First strike
- Ranged retaliation idea (although I didn't like it for every unit. It took out the uniqueness of it. H5 uses it with the succubus only, I hope)
But all of these minor changes (except maybe for the spell system) were not enough to win me over, especially since everything else was low quality.
Compared to H4, H5 looks to be a better game. This does not mean that it will be, since a lot of factors are not yet known (bugs, comp specs, unrevealed possibly frustrating gameplay aspects, crappy sound, crappy unit animations[i doubt this one though]), however, in my opinion I believe H5 will be an ok game. Not necessarily great, but ok. It's hard to outdo an amazing game like H3.
|
|
zsa
Famous Hero
|
|
posted December 05, 2005 01:23 AM |
|
|
I hope they hit as close to the core of HIII as possible (with some specific add-ons like the special abilities stuff).
Heroes 3 was a great game whereas Heroes 4 was mediocre at best. So I think it's a smart decision from the Ubisoft guys to focus more on Heroes 3.
Yeah, the truth is, heroes III was never balanced. Otherwise, we wouldn't have 3242 rules when playing the game. What made the Heroes series great was the depth of the game and the multitude of options a player was offered.
I don't believe they will be able to balance Heroes V properly - especially with all the special abilities each race has (I do expect it to be more balanced than the Heroes III-IV).
It is extremely hard to balance such a variety of elements as we saw from other games. For example, Warcraft III expansion had an open beta with a lot of feedback; and still, after the game came out, it still took the guys 18 patches over two years to balance the game out (and even now there's issues).
What I'm trying to say is, don't expect a good balanced game because you will most probably be disappointed.
|
|
onomastikon
Hired Hero
|
|
posted December 05, 2005 02:34 PM |
|
|
Well, although I am obviously a "fan" of the series, I disagree that there is no great progress which can be made.
I think that HommIII (and IV) still suffer from what, to me, appears to be limitations due to original, ancient design hamperings. There are so many aspects of Homm that play like a simple board game -- many of which are very good, of course, but many of which seem just like some old luggage carried around which could be made much better. Here are some examples of suboptimalities I mean:
- Binary temporality or Turn Is Lowest Common Denominator: Things either take 1 turn or they don't. On the tactical field, you can either move or not; you can attack or not; you can cast a spell or not, you can defend or not, but you can never move a little bit and then defend, or move a bit and attack, etc. The idea of Action Points in TBS could help a lot here; think of Jagged Alliance 2 or the Fallout series as simple solutions. Outside of tactics, in the Strategy Screens, you can build 1 building per turn, and each building takes exactly 1 turn. If we were playing a board game, I would keep things as they are for simplicity's sake, but we aren't.
- Stack As Lowest Common Denominator: If we were playing a board game, I would make sure a Stack was the unit which one could control -- but we aren't. It seems limiting to me that a stack cannot be split into more discrete units, so that a variation in tactical planning may be enabled. Specifically, I find this exceptionally suboptimal when it comes to the "special abilities" of stacks: The "special effect" of 1 Zombie or 1 Dread Knight is identical to the effect of 1000 zombies or 1000 DNs; having 1 unit cast Bloodlust is identical to having 1000 units cast it. If this isn't changed, I will be exceptionally dissapointed.
- Small Degree of Tactical Computation: Makes sense for early computer generations, but I think that HommV could profit from a more robust combat mechanism, one, for example, which calculated to-hit chances, precision and dodging abilities, etc. This would have the corollary effect of enhancing the Spellcasting system, which I find underdeveloped; I would like to see Heroes casting more global spells which affect the entire battlefield (such as spells which enhance, say, all ranged units' abilities to hit targets, or which make archery on the battlefield much more difficult, etc. etc.), while individual unit spellcasters would cast spells affecting only single stacks or units.
- Oversimplified Building Structure: I think that Towns could profit from a much more diversified and dynamic building structure system -- simple examples would be "weapon depots" or something by which a player must CHOOSE between different types of enhancements: EITHER, say, something which upgrades attacks vs. Retaliations +1 or, say, a polearm enhancement which does +4 damage vs. charges, so that there may be different types of troops with unidentical traits.
This, I think, is the greatest weakness of the Homm series in its entirety: The no-brainers. In many contexts, there are no real serious choices between equally viable options but instead simply a "better" upgrade. Anything which increases viable player choices enhances the funness of the game, since it allows players not only to develop different strategies (which could be fun) but also makes performing actions in the game less mechanical.
But perhaps this is better put into a different thread?
|
|
Miru
Supreme Hero
A leaf in the river of time
|
posted December 22, 2005 10:06 PM |
|
Edited by Miru on 22 Dec 2005
|
I think remaking HoMM 3 will kill the series, which I know no one here wants. The reason HoMM 4 was bad was because they put in too much new stuff at once, and took out too much old stuff. HoMM 4 had some very good things in it, but taking them back out won't solve the problem, takng out only the bad stuff would. I think that because they didn't ask anyone what the good was and what the bad was, and they just took it all out, it is going to fail.
My personal opinoin on what killed HoMM 4:
Screwing up the creature system.
Taking out demons.
The order town. (this is just my opinion )
No more catapults.
No more capitols.
This is what I think they shouldn't have taken out (in HoMM 5):
Heroes in combat.
No, I'm not a demon-fanatic.
Don't turn this thread into a "what I think killed HoMM 4" thread.
I hope this isn't the end of the HoMM series, it would be a horrible way to go.
|
|
lord_crusader
Promising
Supreme Hero
UHU!! supreme!
|
|
posted December 23, 2005 12:03 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I think remaking HoMM 3 will kill the series, which I know no one here wants. The reason HoMM 4 was bad was because they put in too much new stuff at once, and took out too much old stuff. HoMM 4 had some very good things in it, but taking them back out won't solve the problem, takng out only the bad stuff would. I think that because they didn't ask anyone what the good was and what the bad was, and they just took it all out, it is going to fail.
My personal opinoin on what killed HoMM 4:
Screwing up the creature system.
Taking out demons.
The order town. (this is just my opinion )
No more catapults.
No more capitols.
This is what I think they shouldn't have taken out (in HoMM 5):
Heroes in combat.
No, I'm not a demon-fanatic.
Don't turn this thread into a "what I think killed HoMM 4" thread.
I hope this isn't the end of the HoMM series, it would be a horrible way to go.
I think the reason that kills heroes 4 was the first buggy version... and the no random map generator at least in the expasions... I think they will take the best part of each previous games and put some new stuff... son I'm optimistic Heroes V will be a great game
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.
____________
Dig Out Your Soul
|
| |
|
|
