|
|
Eriks
Adventuring Hero
I peed on Lithuania
|
posted July 06, 2009 09:46 AM |
|
|
My Heroes 6
I'm sorry - heroes 5 sucks. I guess Im just a die-hard heroes 3 fan, but even if I wasn't heroes 5 would still be horrible and here's why:
The graphics.
The graphics of the game killed it, they are way too cartoony - I guess Ubisoft was trying to make it so that it could be played by 12 year-olds. Everything looks so unreal, I just cant take any of the campaigns seriously, as everything looks liek a big joke.
I guess I want the graphics to look more real thats all, It wouldnt be too hard - just take a look back at heroes 3.
E.G The peasant of heroes 5 compared to the peasant of heroes 3, get what I'm saying?
The Factions.
Ubisoft probably thought that everyone wanted something new, maybe - maybe not. But seriously, why make such big changes to all the towns?? Maybe they were trying to combine heroes 3 with heroes 4, I have no idea - but It failed horribly. Lets start with the towns themselves - none of them have any personality, no character. Maybe its because of the whole 3D thing where you are looking at your town from like 3 miles away and can't see anything, maybe the music sucks, maybe it everything together - but when I go into my necropolis in heroes 5, I dont feel like I'm in an undead city, I feel the attempt at it - but I still dont feel a mood that the town should create.
____________
|
|
Eriks
Adventuring Hero
I peed on Lithuania
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 09:48 AM |
|
Edited by Eriks at 10:10, 06 Jul 2009.
|
*extra space*
This is also due to the joke graphics, the walking corpses for example look horrible, they dont in any way look like real zombies (again, comparing to heroes 3 zombies). Then there are the units in the town, in my opinion heroes 5 made the same big mistake that heroes 4 did with the factions. It tried to add all these new random creatues into the towns, like the raja in academy or the matriarch which I've never heard of in previous heroes games, while at the same time completely taking out previous creatures like the beholder, pegasi and cyclops (not even talking about the lizard town).
Basically what I'm asking in heroes 6t is that they take away that weird 3D thing and just make the towns look like the did in the previous heroes, that would probably make the setting of a town alot easier to comprehend. Im asking also for Ubisoft to carefully review the unit trees it puts into its towns, because Im very positive that I liked troglodytes better then the thieves of Heroes 5 dungeon.
The units.
Oh my lord, what have you done!? They have changed everything, Angels, treants, behemoths, gryphons, and so forth...Why did ubisoft do this? I liked the way everything looked before, I liked how behemoths were big hair monsters, instead of the horned-demon cyclops thingy, or the gorgoyles, I mean in heroes 5 theyre like blocks of stone (wtf). This again adds to the unseriousness of the units, how cartoony they were made. Again, compare the peasants of heroes 3 and heroes 5, and tell me that heroes 5 peasants arent a joke. Next, the upgrades, more isn't always better you know - especially when both upgrades of a creature are just recolored versions of the original. What is the difference between on upgrade or the other anyways? I always choose on over the other because its obviously better, this of course is just me.
So, change the units into something more believable, you arent starting a revolution here - and make the upgrades actually change what the creature looks like instead of just recoloring it.
|
|
Eriks
Adventuring Hero
I peed on Lithuania
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 10:12 AM |
|
Edited by Eriks at 10:23, 06 Jul 2009.
|
*extra space*
The combat system
Again, in heroes 5 Ubisoft had to change everything - so they changed the combat system, the menus, and how town upgrading works. I hate the combat of heroes 5, forgive me - but its just unbearable. Its so tiny, and the grid is ugly, and thats not even talking about the little panel on the bottom showing all the little cartoon icons of the creatures and heroes in order of turns. Why did Ubisoft do this? Was it necessary? Did it make the game better? Not really. bring the combat turns back to the way they were in previous heroes please...Ubisoft added all this uneccesary crap to a units stats, like initiative - who cares about initative? seriously. Its the lamest thing ever when I have to cast a spell to increase a units initiative, it sounds lame, and it feel lame. -.-
Bring the combat system back to the way it was please, make the fields bigger too. and please remove the freaking panel on the bottom of my screen, it makes me cry.
The spells, and heroes.
The spells suck, thats pretty much all im goin to say, they are unrealistic and unbelievable, again compared to previous games (I dont care about initiative -.-). And the heroes icons are horrible, this is once again because Ubisoft was trying to change Heroes into a game for 12 year olds, and please remove the heroes ability to attack - its just one of the failed attempts to combine heroes 3 with heroes 4. Either make the hero be able to participate in combate like in heroes 4, or not.
Thats pretty much it, If ubisoft ever reads this they will have a guideline for a fine game =)
|
|
jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 11:32 AM |
|
|
Eriks, this is not a new H6 its a H5 critics, and therefore, imo, belongs into the H5 thread (temple of ashan?!)
I don't want to respond to all of your points right now, but one first:
Quote:
But seriously, why make such big changes to all the towns??
big changes? to ALL towns? defintiely not,and much lesser changes then from H3 to H4!!!
i mean at many towns there are no big changes, f.e. haven, inferno, necropolis, academy (okay, the style changed, but not too much more). Sylvan changed partly, with the removeing of pegasi, dwarves, cebntaurs and such, and made more elvish, that was unnecessary but no armageddon. Dugneon indeed changed too much and is practically a new town, as is fortress, so can'T talk bout "changes" there, and its much better than conflux imo. And finally we have stronghold, wich has indeed been changed a bit too much.
BUT, and thats the biggest pint - this was a new game in this series, why the hell should they NOT change things?!? But I guess this is the old discussion that will never be solved...
|
|
SAG
Promising
Supreme Hero
WCL owner
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 11:32 AM |
|
|
join homm3 Tournament Edition (TE) team of developers  more info HERE
|
|
Totoro
Famous Hero
in User
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 12:02 PM |
|
|
|
You are asking to make H5 exactly like H3; there is no point to make a new game if it doesn't introduce new features.
|
|
Eriks
Adventuring Hero
I peed on Lithuania
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 05:16 PM |
|
|
Why?
Heroes 1-3 didnt introduce any new features and it did just fine.
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 07:20 PM |
|
|
Heroes 2 introduced unit upgrades, new skills, new factions, etc.
Heroes 3 introduced spell schools, new skills, new factions, etc.
Heroes 5 did exactly the same - refined spell and skill system, new factions, but no more or no less dramatic changes than Heroes 2 or 3 did.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Zazu1
Adventuring Hero
Makes Sense
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 08:21 PM |
|
|
|
I agree with most of wut ur saying, except i actually like the combat system in H5 and the initiative idea. I thought that that was one a the few improvements they actually made on the game.
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 07, 2009 09:07 AM |
|
|
Quote:
You are asking to make H5 exactly like H3; there is no point to make a new game if it doesn't introduce new features.
Or rehash older, discarded ones in such a way that they appear new, or at least acceptably balanced and interesting.
|
|
LordGodric
Known Hero
The Griffin Rider
|
|
posted July 08, 2009 07:00 PM |
|
|
i also think h3 really was the best homm...
but h5's grafics are bad?! blasphemy! h5 grafics are very good! i dont think it is "cartoonish" or "childish" or something like, h5 grafics are good, amazing!... i, personaly, would prefer if would be 'truly cartoonish' [i like anime/manga grafics and design ;D, but a anime designed homm will certainly sell a little... since many people hate anime/manga like grafics (or think that is a childish thing) how colorful hairs and big eyes can be so hated? - well... does someone - except me - really like the might and magic clash of heroes (the game for nintendo DS)?] ...
!
and i completly dont agree with you said about heroes and spells!
heroes attacking was the best solution! heroes are commanders, general, they should say to theirs troops what to do, almost all the time, they couldnt do it if they are all the time fightin enemys! but if a magic hero can, sometimes, take part on the frey casting spells, the migth heroes certain can do the same, but slashing enemys with a huge two handed sword! but tuning back soon to say again to their troops wath to do!
and the spells are very good, no more a lot of spells of diferent schools that do the same thing! h5 magic system is more easy and useful. the most important spells from previous heroes are here.
the faction are good too... ok, h3's were best...
of couse there are some things i dont like:
-centaurs are half-demon-orcs!? its ridiculous! centaurs should be with elves!
-h5 arabian wizards. they should back to snow
-minotaurs as slaves! they was the ruling elite among dungeon, but in ashan they are created by wizards to be slaves, runned away, and be enslaverded by dark elves?!
i think h5 wasnt the best homm (was the second best =P) but is a excelent game!
ok, everyone have it own 'likes', and all i said is just my opinion...
|
|
lumpor
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted July 08, 2009 10:52 PM |
|
Edited by lumpor at 23:14, 08 Jul 2009.
|
Ok man, I understand not wanting big changes. Heroes 3 was the first heroes game I ever played, I have lots of memories from it. I got heroes 5 years later, so heroes 3 is still like the "base" game for me
I don't think looking back on the old days and restricting big changes is wrong. It's annoying when the next generation won't have experienced some things that you experienced.
But I do think you're being a bit too conservative. The atb bar (panel at the bottom at battles) is fantastic. It helps ALOT. Needing to look at the creatures speed all the time to predict when their move comes was annoying. It was also annoying if two creatures had the same speed, and you didn't know which one would go first.
The initiative system is also great. How often a creature acts is now separated from how far it can go. It sounds reasonable too.
And the hero getting it's own turn is a godsend. Come on, wasn't it annoying in H3 when the hero with the fastest unit was the one who got to act first? It shouldn't depend on that. Before it was some dude who casted a spell while it was the creatures turn. Now it feels more alive.
Also, now when you hold your mouse over a creature, it will be displayed how far it can go. Now you don't need to count how far they need to go to reach you anymore.
However I do agree with you on town views and town music. Man, I loved being in necropolis. The great music, seeing the town growing bigger etc. In the new 3d view I hardly see a difference between a fully developed town, and a new one. also, I agree all the music in H5 sucks.
I bought heroes complete edition, so I got a book about the developers and how they designed the game. It said that in the beginning they were going to keep the town view in the same way as before, but changed it later. I saw a picture of the isometric view of H5 necropolis, and it did look great.
But i gotta say that if the battles and maps are 3D, then town views would feel out of place if they weren't 3D either.
The 3d adventure map... Nah, I don't know. The H3 one feels much smoother, but it would feel weird with a 2d game in 2007 (or whenever it was released). I mean, some people may like the old 2D final fantasies more, but they can't really make more 2d games nowadays, if you know what I mean.
about the comical part. Well, it has never really bothered me. I'm not saying it's funny, but it's still kinda relaxed y'know :/
I understand your concerns about H5, but give it a try (I don't think you've played it that much since you haven't complained about the renewed skill system). Maybe the art and the looks aren't as great, but there sure are alot of conveniencies compared to H3 (alot)
Oh, and about factions being different, they are very similar. I like to imagine the new creatures for H6, and they are very different from the currect ones. For example, my imaginary tier 7 inferno creature has an "overheat" ability, which, at each of the creatures turns, deals 3 fire damage to all enemy creatures each turn for each creature in the inferno creature stack. I miss the swamp, but the new creatures are cool too (the wyverns and hydras still live on, although the wyverns are in H5 one of my least favorite creatures since they're so extremely boring there)
I don't want to judge you, but I do think that anything different to H3 or a strengthening of something that already exists in H3 is negative for you, whatever it is.
Of course you're bound to old stuff, but give new things a try.
Y'know before I was baking creme brulee, and I searched the net for recipes, and there was a link to a youtube recipe video. I was "whoah, recipe videos, are cookbooks going to die?". But I used it, and it is so much easier when you see what you're supposed to do.
Oh, and the peasant of H3 was also kind of a joke. It was meant to look as pathetic as possible (and their stats made them completely unusable, they were solely there for laughs).
Just so you know, not a single upgrade or alternate upgrade is a recolor of another unit. I tihnk alternate upgrades are quite good. More units, no complaints here.
I don't think they should make the field bigger. Ranged units quite much dominated in H3.
I definitely agree that hero portraits looked better in H3. Some looked cool, some looked super-wierd (or actually alot of them) and some looked funny (Ajit from dungeon lol. A middle-aged man in a costume screaming). I loved those portraits because all the heroes looked so... Inhuman, it really felt like a different faction. And also, the portraits in H5 look too cartoony, I agree. The heroes represent great honor and leadership, they have to look cool.
The spell icons in H5 are kinda lame, but so were the ones in H3. The men in the spell icons in H3 looked quite humurous (forgetfullness for example), and they all had these wierd metallic hoods, that was supposed to resemble a helmet but looked more like a latex suit.
____________
|
|
grokkalot
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted July 10, 2009 05:41 PM |
|
|
Super Dual Mode Idea
Here is an idea for how to combine and improve some of the most strategically interesting aspects of existing heroes games into an improved dual mode that would almost be like a new stand-alone game, especially for tournaments. The idea is somewhat based on a method some fantasy sports leagues use to assign teams using an auction system.
Before the start of a tournament - a host administrator decides how much "gold" each player gets and how much everything costs - e.g. cost to purchase an empty Dungeon town, cost to build specific buildings in the town, cost to purchase different heroes with different stats/abilities, cost to purchase different creatures, etc. They also put limits on the total available number of each town type, creature type, etc. The costs would all be fixed by default, but allowing a host to assign them means balance could be made "perfect" relative to any given theory of balance. The host would also specify something about distribution of battle terrains - e.g. how big do they tend to be, do they have a lot of obstacles, etc.
Then the buying/bidding starts in turns. The auction could either be "secret" - where players can't see what others bid/buy - or open - where every bid and purchase is made known to all other players. It could involve everyone bidding on the same towns/races, or going in some order, either pre-assigned or by random draw. The auction ends when all players have spent all their "gold". Then battles take place in dual mode, round robin fashion. I'm thinking that each army gets reset to full strength after each battle, but it might be interesting to try it the other way as well.
The advantages of the proposal above are as follows:
1) combines the most interesting aspects of tactics and empire building in a faster paced game with less boilerplate creeping against weak, neutral armies;
2) emphasizes pure skill of the participants over the luck aspects in current games regarding resource disposition and map layout;
3) very easy for the developers to program this - they could put left over focus in making the AI strategically better at things AIs are good at (the calcs and heuristics to make an AI good at this share some similarities to building a chess engine);
4) would allow exciting battles between large evenly matched armies without playing long game to build those armies or just leaving balance of the armies up to luck.
5) multi-player tournaments could involve a lot more scissors-stone-paper type strategy for picking armies;
6) interesting games could be played in less than 1 hour.
____________
|
|
Warlord
Famous Hero
Lord of Image Spam
|
|
posted July 01, 2010 06:55 PM |
|
|
I disagree completely. In my opinion, the graphics are much better in Heroes 5 than in 3, I like the combat system, the creatures are creative, etc. Also, what's wrong with change? Can't you abide it? Also, it seems to me that you're just asking for another Heroes 3. What would be the point of that?
____________
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 01, 2010 07:41 PM |
|
|
|
The scale of the map graphics in H5 is off, instead of feeling like you're travelling over miles of wilderness you feel like you're just taking a walk down the lane. I'll also complain about the size of the battlefield, it's much smaller than in previous iterations, the old H3 map was 15*11, and large creatures were only 1 space wide, whereas we're now stuck with a normal field size of 12*10, and large creatures are 2 spaces wide
|
|
Moonlith
Bad-mannered
Supreme Hero
If all else fails, use Fiyah!
|
|
posted July 03, 2010 09:33 PM |
|
|
I'm not sure if you can actually compare Heroes 5's Graphics with Heroes 3's graphics.
Personally I always prefer the more cartoony bright-coloured graphics over snow-brown "realism" colours. If I wanted realism I'd go out the door.
heroes 3 did something unique though. The unit graphics at least seem more video-like in movement, patched with regular graphics... I'm not sure what -exactly- they did but the effect was really good. I wouldn't mind seeing Heroes 6 return to those graphics, but honestly, no more realistic than that. By tradition Heroes of Might and Magic has been a lovely, brightly coloured game and I'd say they should stick to that. It's a fantasy-game, and realistic graphics in fantasy-medieval games just look like, literally, snow. Heroes and unit portraits were best in Heroes 3 as well. The little backgrounds behind them are a tiny little detail which adds a great deal of atmosphere, again something which lacked in Heroes 5.
I wouldn't go too berserk on Heroes 5's graphics though. Most of the units actually look good; Angels and Archangels have never looked better, although I did like the H3 Archangels as well. And Pit Lords just utterly rock.
Of course, they did *** up on many others.... Gargoyles, Vampires (srsly?), Dragons, etc. But overal the units look decent.
I agree though they messed up some lineups where they shouldn't have. For one they completely overhauled and destroyed Dungeon, ruining its entire tradition. I wouldn't have minded the inclusion of some dark elves, if they actually HAD BEEN dark, and wouldn't have taken up 4 of the units. But the destruction runs deeper than that.
Dungeon is a classic town for me. The name itself is a reference to the dungeons a party of heroes in Dungeons and Dragons game enters, and its lineup was filled with the monsters that party might encounter in those dungeons, with the Warlock hero obviously being the classic "Dungeon Master". In that regard it was a unique monster town which Heroes 3 properly re-implemented, and Heroes 5 completely ruined. And yeah... Minotaurs as tier 3 slaves?! It's as if Ubisoft wanted to give them a kick after when they were already on the floor. At the very least Minotaurs should be tier 4 and capable of taking on tier 5 units.
And don't get me started on the orcs.... God, how I hate the H5 concept of stronghold...
There are more ways in which Heroes 5 messed up though. I mainly dispise the hero racials which make it near-impossible to mix various faction armies like you could in Heroes 3, where you only had the morale penalty. Orcs are the best example; they only function under a stronghold hero, and a stronghold hero doesn't function without stronghold troops.
The worst part is that the racials could have just been incorperated into the towns or units themselves to begin with.
Take Inferno for example; what stopped them from giving the demonunits the simple gating ability, regardless under which hero they are? Why does there need to be a Haven hero in town with the counterstrike skill before you can upgrade haven troops into higher tier troops, considering you need a building in the town for that regardless?
I preferred the Heroes 3 way where every hero could function under any town with any kind of army. It made it more clear the heroes were individual mercenaries who served under anyone who simply paid them for it, rather than being faction-loyal and faction-exclusive.
I don't care about the inclusion of Initiative either. Well, it might be useful in a way, if it were just a stat which determined turn-order, but as it is, initiative is way too powerful a stat, and severely unbalancing with the inclusion of initiative artifacts, and Haste.
Alternative upgrades... Is silly. For SOME units it is actually valid, for most units it creates pointless atrocities. Heck, for some units, even having an upgrade is pointless (Zombies).
And srsly, no reptiles?!!!!!
Buuuut, yeah, you know how it is  Whatever ubisoft produces is always inferior to the perfect concept every one of us has in his head.
____________
|
| |
|
|
