|
| Thread: Changes can be scary |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 · NEXT» |
|
admira
Promising
Famous Hero
|
posted November 23, 2010 08:26 AM |
bonus applied by alcibiades on 26 Nov 2010. |
|
Changes can be scary
After reading a lot of diversity comments on Failbook's hot release on Breeder, it is clear that the words "Changes can be scary" applied well here.
I am very interested to write about this since most of them (complainers) again and again compares the series with the ol' Heroes 3, yes I know the legendary ones.
Why bother writing all these?
Why not? I am awaiting some data warehouse ETL processing that took hours, this is no longer my shift  anyway.
It is very funny to always compare the new game with the successful old one (read: Compare H6 with the old H3). Some confidently said "Heroes 3 has the best gameplay, this one suck as hell" is it true? is it just merely exaggerated?
Let's look on several examples outside Heroes series. Some of these series gained a major overhaul, means a lot of changes on the series. Some are simply re-done everything.
The Command and Conquer 3 --> The Command and Conquer 4
If you are not familiar of the series. These 2 are RTS games. The first 3 of the series are the classic Base Build and Conquer with specific resources need to harvested, similar to Warcraft (RTS) and Starcraft series. However, in the 4th installment, the series get major overhaul. Yes the base building is terminated, the harvesting part is terminated, they "simplify" the game into spawning units and micro-manage the considered unit without any worries of resources. Not to mention the need of online every time and the broken ranking system, lame single player Campaign and the list is go on and on.
As you may predict, purist of the series went rampage. The game while some support the changes, most are against them but It is obvious, the game is less successful than the previous series. When talking about the relation to heroes series. We know that "simplify" also part of the changes and the new Heroes 6 now offers many changes. Will this also the sign of major failure like C&C did? Will it experience the same failure as C&C did?
Starcraft --> Starcraft 2
12 Years of waiting for the new game, and guess what? I got an exactly same game. the old Starcraft re-skinned with modern 3D technology which offer something almost literally the same as its predecessors with 1/3 campaign and a bit of change on its faction line-ups. Yeah, I know, don't lecture me about how difficult it is to balance an RTS game. But seriously? 12 years? And that is the best they can do? OK, so the Hero system didn't or won't work well with Starcraft but what about the campaign? at least they can put Heroes system of Warcraft 3 to the campaign, make it more interesting.
In spite of how do I feel about Starcraft 2, it sold well. Just like Heroes, should we only re-skinned Heroes 3? Starcraft 2 sold well without any major changes, not even a single new race. It should worked well on Heroes as well, we know that Heroes 3 is the best game of the series.
The Conclusion
The changes in Heroes 6, reduced Resources type, RPG-based Skill management, Boss battle, New town system, new creature tier system, the area of control and of course the new line-up. That is a lot to be called a small changes that the Starcaft did to Starcraft 2 and maybe as much as how they changes stuff on C&C 4.
Before we go to a major conclusion let's flashback on C&C 4 and Starcraft 2 and comparing them with MM:H6.
C&C 4 changes vs MM:H6 changes
C&C 4, "new" system is not actually new, it is used by 2006's popular and maybe the RTS of that Year: Company of Heroes. There are actually more clones like: Dawn of War II (yes the Dawn of War I is the classic RTS Style) tried to capture the "magic" behind the series. But most of them are ended up in a bitter failure. So what cause the failure? The keyword is "Core" they change the core of the old game completely if they renamed it into something like "C&C: The Kane Story" rather than "C&C 4" I can guess that it will not be as catastrophic as what happened to the now "C&C 4" it is like making "Might and Magic: Clash of Heroes" renaming it into "Might and Magic: Heroes 6"
They reduced the number of resources in Heroes 6, yes, it is true but they don't completely terminate them. The new Tier system might be taken from Clash of Heroes but they still stick with upgradeable creature, 7 type of creature and castle build. Hell, they still stick with creature stacking which is the core of this game.
But they changed the creature line-up like hell! Yes, but Heroes 3 did so as well, you know Rampart vs Sorceress with no Phoenix, or Hydra became the Champ.. I mean level 7 Tier of new faction, they have new beholder, efreet and so many new ones. They downgrade Crusader to 4th level creature and get angel as new champ.. I mean level 7 Creature (god, I need to stop dreaming about Heroes 6). Or should I also mentioned they downgrade Cyclops and get Behemoth as top level creature? It is proven the Line-up changes is not the cause of failure. Not in Heroes 3, anyway. But are you seriously ignore the fact that the new Tier-system and the new line-ups are so interesting? I mean a creature that can change shape (Weaver), Creature that spit up another unit at occasions (Breeder) and only god, VIP member and developer what other creatures can do in battle and people still consider to compare that with Heroes 3? That's lame, as if Heroes 3 didn't do the same.
Heroes 6 vs Starcarft 2
Why not sticking with successful formula like Starcraft 2 did?
I know, some will consider this option but the answer is NO. I don't want to play a hell of the exactly same game re-skinned in beautiful 3D. I want innovation, I want to have this surprising feels when exploring the new features. Yes, I want something to explore when buying a new game. I believe the original Starcraft (the great one) is built based on crazy innovation idea, like "Hey let's make them 3 instead of 2" or "Hey, let's give each race something different to play".
When innovation worked out, flawlessly done they create a legendary game. Heroes 3 and Starcraft are the example how changes based on good innovation and executed flawlessly may create a long-lived-legendary game.
As for Starcraft 2? While it is commercially successful, IMHO can't be compared to Legendary-Class game that are its predecessor or Heroes 3. For me, it is only generic RTS-Sport-Paranoid-Lack-Innovation-1/3 campaign-fanboy-only game that is flawlessly done by the developers.
Major Conclusion
Heroes 6 is far from C&C 4, C&C 4 tried to capture the magic of other game and failed to do it. Heroes 6 however stick with the Core and tried to add more features that hopefully based on Innovation and some crazy stuff that makes a game is a Legendary-Class ones.
No, I don't want a re-skinned game of the old game. If you want it, fine just install Heroes 3, it will run on your grandparent's PC well I believe. I want something new, something I can explore when the first time I install the game on my PC. I want to have the game evolved in a good way. Just like they did when creating Heroes 3 out of Heroes 2 Core.
Of course, Changes ARE scary. But changes based on great Innovation and done flawlessly are the ones give birth to Legendary-Class game up to now.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 09:26 AM |
|
|
From what I've seen, there is no H6. It's more like "standalone expansion to H5 with a few small influences from H4". It looks exactly the same as far as art style and graphics go,, the game mechanics are just like H5, etc. A few alignment changes and a reduction in the number of tiers (and towns) - and that's it. Calling this "something new" is no more accurate than pretending the H5 Dungeon was new to HoMM.
Not that this is a bad thing - H5 is quite playable, apart from its camera issues.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
bixie
Promising
Legendary Hero
my common sense is tingling!
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 09:28 AM |
|
|
despite my... reaction to the breader, i would say that Blackhole are doing a great job with introducing more original and new creatures in the universe.
I think my problem with H5 is that it tried too hard to appeal to the old fan-base, and we were smart enough to say "not working". currently, the developers are going "You know what, lets do come cool creatures that fit in the universe. screw harkening back, the fans will like it or not."
____________
Love, Laugh, Learn, Live.
|
|
mytheroes
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 09:48 AM |
|
|
Quote:
From what I've seen, there is no H6. It's more like "standalone expansion to H5 with a few small influences from H4". It looks exactly the same as far as art style and graphics go,, the game mechanics are just like H5, etc. A few alignment changes and a reduction in the number of tiers (and towns) - and that's it.
I disagree. Art style is obviously different. Game mechanics for battle is sort of H3+H5, not to mention new additions like area of control, boss, town conversion, creature pool, dual form creature, etc etc. For a "standalone expansion" they sure pack in so much.
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 09:51 AM |
|
|
Quote:
From what I've seen, there is no H6. It's more like "standalone expansion to H5 with a few small influences from H4". It looks exactly the same as far as art style and graphics go,, the game mechanics are just like H5, etc. A few alignment changes and a reduction in the number of tiers (and towns) - and that's it. Calling this "something new" is no more accurate than pretending the H5 Dungeon was new to HoMM.
Are you sure that you know anything about MMH:VI? Expansion to H5? Game mechanics the same?  People are complaining that this is a totally different game with the same name for Baa's sake! And they have many reasons to do so.
About the topic - I wouldn't accept a "new" game to be just the old game with reworked skin. This is exactly what SC2 is - absolutely the same game as SC1 with new graphics. New elements are obligatory. The core of the game however has to remain intact, otherwise it's not a new game from the same series, it's a new game altogether. I'm still not sure what MMH:VI is.
|
|
admira
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 09:58 AM |
|
|
Quote:
From what I've seen, there is no H6. It's more like "standalone expansion to H5 with a few small influences from H4". It looks exactly the same as far as art style and graphics go,, the game mechanics are just like H5, etc. A few alignment changes and a reduction in the number of tiers (and towns) - and that's it. Calling this "something new" is no more accurate than pretending the H5 Dungeon was new to HoMM.
Not that this is a bad thing - H5 is quite playable, apart from its camera issues.
Agree with mytheroes. New Tier system with new growth pooling based, area of control, Unique 2/4 choice of racial building, Advance Heroes Class, RPG-like skills of choice, Advance Hero's unique skills, we are not talking about a mere line-ups here. If these feature is not enough to be called "New" heroes game, then Heroes 3 is basically a Heroes 2 standalone expansion then.
|
|
MrDragon
Supreme Hero
Eats people with Ketchup
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 10:44 AM |
|
Edited by MrDragon at 10:47, 23 Nov 2010.
|
Admira, excellent post, you really nailed the general idea of what's wrong and right about innovating.
However, call me a fanboy all you want, but as a hardcore Starcraft and Starcraft II player, I'd say calling it a reskin is a bit of a stretch.
It would be like calling HoMMIII or V a reskinned version of HoMMI.
1/3rd of the campaign is utter bullcrap, The campaign of Wings of Liberty might just feature the Terrans (and yes that sucks ass) but it is 29 missions long, as opposed to Starcraft's 30 missions, that's 1 mission less, not 20.
They are planning two expansions, if they continue with the same trend Starcraft II will end at over 85 missions. (And they confirmed they are not going full price on the xpacs) which will be more then Broodwar added.
As a gold league player (so average, still 2 leagues above me), I can tell you, the multiplayer is VERY different from how it used to be, tons of new units, loss of some old ones, new faction mechanics, new map features and a series of quite good tutorials (called "Challenges") to teach you the basics.
Not to mention the most powerful map editing tool, or should I say GAME EDITING TOOL, EVER to be included as a FEATURE of the game.
Have you SEEN what kind of stuff people are doing with the map editor of SCII? Try going to http://www.sc2mapster.com/ and tell me that's not ridiculous.
Battle.net 2.0 (though it sucks and they'd better fix it) is flooded with thousands of custom games that would make even many triple A titles look weak and poorly developed in comparison.
I'm not saying you can't dislike Stracraft II, but don't say it hasn't had any major changes when it's I dare say, even more advanced from it predecessor then Warcraft III was despite it's two new factions and hero system.
The Zerg have never been better, the Protoss are brandishing a wide array of new psionic techniques and technologies and the Terran haven't dropped behind in upping their arsenal.
The Campaign, while 1 mission shorter then Stracraft's is a more cohesive sequence of missions where everything impacts your options for the next missions.
It scored really god damned well everywhere not because it's the same game as the previous one was (which also scored damn well) but it scored damn well because it's an excellent and highly innovative RTS that still managed to hang on to the core high paced micromanaging gameplay of the original.
Once again, call me a fanboy all you want, but the facts are these:
It's been in development for 8 years not 12 and they still made other games during that time period.
29 missions as opposed to 30, with an overall longer play duration, multiple difficulty levels and bonus objectives that do effect subsequent missions, it's partially non-linear and mission sequence greatly effects your tactics.
(30 if you count the "lost viking" which technically speaking is a map, but as it's a completely optional minigame so lets leave it out.)
24 brand new units, not counting temporary summoned ones or structures.
CBA to count em all brand new abilities including a truckload for existing units that stayed.
New faction mechanics including Warp-In which is a massive game changing mechanic for the Protoss or the new choice based addon system for Terran structures as opposed to straight upgrades which allows them to quickly change tactics on the fly for an experienced player or the Zerg's brand new Nydus system which allows them to deploy much faster and almost anywhere on the map, the old one was a fixed tunnel system which only served to connect various zerg bases.
The most powerful map editing tool since Warcraft III, which has already spawned more brand new content and diverse gameplay alone then the old game could have ever hoped to match.
Feel free to hate it for any other reason, but not for being a "reskin".
Blizzard has gotten MASSIVE quantities of grief from the community during development for changing so bloody damn much.
Complaints which eclipse the HoMMIII fanbase which begged for an "update" or "reskin".
Facts don't lie, Starcraft =/= Starcraft II, not in a million years.
(though both are great games)
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 10:46 AM |
|
|
Mvass is scary.
Nice topic btw.
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 11:44 AM |
|
Edited by Zenofex at 11:45, 23 Nov 2010.
|
Quote:
I'm not saying you can't dislike Stracraft II, but don't say it hasn't had any major changes when it's I dare say, even more advanced from it predecessor then Warcraft III was despite it's two new factions and hero system.
Off-topic: It hasn't and this is a fact.  The core multi-player gameplay is 100% the same as in SC1, there are some additions to the campaign (which is less than 1% of the game - nobody or at most almost nobody buys StarCraft to play the campaign) and some new units which are used exactly as the old units and that's it. The game mechanics are totally unchanged. I've been playing StarCraft since I've been playing Heroes III, so believe me, I know what I'm talking about. Plus I happen to know some pro-players and their opinion is exactly the same - this is not a new game. A new game belonging to some series enjoys a healthy balance between innovation and tradition. Thus Command and Conquer 4 - which is the opposite extreme - is just a skin for a random non-Command and Conquer game. That's why I hope that MMH:VI will be a game belonging to the Heroes series and not just some RPG/TBS hybrid with the name of a successful brand.
|
|
admira
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 11:58 AM |
|
|
@MrDragon: Blizzard Fanboy 
|
|
MrDragon
Supreme Hero
Eats people with Ketchup
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 12:08 PM |
|
Edited by MrDragon at 12:15, 23 Nov 2010.
|
Quote:
It hasn't and this is a fact. The core multi-player gameplay is 100% the same as in SC1
Except that is not a fact as it has new units with different roles from their predecessors, example:
Terran early game has changed dramatically due to the lack of Medics and Firebats but the presence of the Merauder.
Merauders are a unit best suited to countering small numbers of melee infantry or heavy armor.
A core Terran strategy, the Marine + Medic early push, no longer exists, instead you now have a different unit in your early repertoire specifically aimed at combating totally different units.
Don't say it's a fact without giving a reason for it.
The exclusion of many old units, and thus tactics they provided and the implementation of new DIFFERENT units with different functions completely changed gameplay on a tactical level.
For a complete synopsis visit
http://ezinearticles.com/?Starcraft-2-Vs-Starcraft-1---Whats-Different?&id=3885787
which provides FACTUAL information, objectively.
Now lets end this (off-topic) topic here, just read that article and let that be that.
Admittedly, on C&C I can't be the judge, I lost my faith in C&C after C&C RA3 came out and wasn't to enthused by C&C 3 either.
But there are many other games that have gone belly up over sweeping changes, but also a few that have survived this and become better as a whole.
The Heroes franchise is fortunate to have two games which the fanbase is largely divided over, namely IV and V which both are rife with things that were arguably great and things that arguably weren't.
If HoMMVI can draw from the last three games in a constructive and well thought out manner as well as providing some of it's own innovation, it has the potential to be the best in the series.
But that is only potential so anything can happen.
@Admira: Yep I'm a Blizzard fan, because I think they make great games, though they aren't infallible, Battle.Net 2.0 and several RETARDED decisions in WoW:WotLK made that ABUNDANTLY clear.
Overall, I think I am still rational enough to look at it objectively though, possibly because I'm also a fan of many other game developers, like HoMM (who keep juggling developers), Squaresoft/SquareENIX (of which the several of the last few sucked horribly imho), Westwood, Nintendo, Nippon Ichi and several other developers.
I'm a fanboy, a blizzard fanboy, but also a fanboy of a lot of other games and developers.
EditII: I rage, because I care, I want the best of both this brand, and all the others I care about.
So far, most of HoMMVI has my support. (most not all)
|
|
mytheroes
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 12:12 PM |
|
|
|
Blizzard map editor is too powerful imo. People begin making their own games with different gameplay mechanics while the original game rot in hell. Warcraft 3 is a clear example of this. When you see people playing Warcraft 3 nowadays, they're not even playing RTS anymore.
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 12:31 PM |
|
Edited by Zenofex at 12:32, 23 Nov 2010.
|
Quote:
Now lets end this (off-topic) topic here, just read that article and let that be that.
Articles won't change my opinion, I've played both of the games. You are talking about tactics, etc., I am talking about game mechanics. There are next to no changes in the mechanics of SC2 and that's it. I am not willing to argue about something so obvious and among other things - almost universally acknoweldged. Blizzard are know for stealing and re-working other people's ideas to make them more profitable (and they are damn good at this, except that I don't really care about their mainstream approach any more), not for their creativity - which is completely non-existent. SC2 is SC1 with new skin, but nobody cares about that for obvious reasons. And actually nobody expected it NOT to be the same game and the vast majority just wanted more of the same.
Anyway, my point was that a true sequel shouldn't be anything like this. But also it shouldn't be something completely different. Finding the middle ground could be tricky. What I wonder is whether Ubihole are aiming at this middle ground or deliberately want to change many or the core elements.
|
|
Agent_00_BLeRD
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 01:09 PM |
|
|
@Zenofex:
For example, how would you have envisioned Starcraft 2 so that it landed in the safe area in the middle of "more of the same old stuff" and "so new it's own mother wouldn't recognize it"? What sort of changes would there be for it to be justified as the second installment of a great game?
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 01:27 PM |
|
|
|
None of my concern, I never wanted SC2 to be different from SC1. About Heroes however - a copy-paste approach is inexcusable. Just my point of view.
|
|
MrDragon
Supreme Hero
Eats people with Ketchup
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 02:27 PM |
|
|
You know, I spent 20 minutes on this post and keep flying into a nerd rage and then calming down and deleting my argumentation again, and I came to the following conclusion:
There are people who disagree with you and you're basically saying they are wrong when they took the same facts and drew a different but equally valid opinion from them.
(note: I'm not saying there does not exist such a thing as an invalid opinion.)
We both believe we're right and the other is wrong.
Right, now that's out of my system , I can go back to talking about Heroes and only Heroes on these boards.
In fact, lets all stop dragging games we like or hate (other then Heroes 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5) into the equation because opinions will clash.
I myself am quite an offender as well, I'll try and better myself.
|
|
SwampLord
Supreme Hero
Lord of the Swamp
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 05:29 PM |
|
|
Couple things:
The graphical style in 6 is actually a bit different than the style of 5, in my opinion. It's not as cartoony or Warcraft-y as 5 was, and this is especially noticeable in Haven's units.
I do think that the changes, while drastic, are not nearly as drastic as the (horrible) changes they made to C&C 4. C&C 4's changes were even more drastic than those of H4; they changed literally everything about what defined the series, and made it terrible in the process.
Likewise, Starcraft 2 actually has a lot of change, but you have to play the game a while to notice it; the different units make the way you play it completely different from 1. The changes are subtle and take a lot longer to notice, but they're there.
H6's changes have me a little nervous, but not excessively so; I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, although the new tiers system probably concerns me the most.
____________
They can take my swamp, they can take my town, but they will never take my FREEDOM!
|
|
MrDragon
Supreme Hero
Eats people with Ketchup
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 05:49 PM |
|
|
Actually what concerns me the most is town management.
With the removal of mage guilds and the market place in a state of flux due to the resource changes (which I'm also, whilst optimistic, not entirely confident about) will we have enough stuff to build? and choices to make when building.
Fortunately, we're supposedly getting 4 faction unique structures which you're only allowed to have two of in a specific town.
Still, I'm antsy about the speed at which we might completely buy out the town.
Anybody else worried about that?
And whilst I agree with you swamp, lets stop dragging other games into the matter at hand.
Actually considering the opening post, that might be hard in this specific topic....
|
|
vitorsly
Known Hero
Joker!
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 06:06 PM |
|
|
I think That H6 made to reach a midlle ground.
Heroes 2 added upgrades and 2 factions so but is realy like 1 in gameplay.
Heroes 3 added one tier, more upgrades, 2 more factions and more but still the core is the same.
Heroes 4 was not even comparable to 3 and I (personally) dont like it.
As Heroes 4 is out of comparition Heroes 5 changed really litle about H3.
Heroes 6 is like a perfect mix of H3 H4 and H5 together with his own things like gameplay from 3 Graphics with realism and visuals of 3 and 5 and advanced classes that were in 3 but more visible in 5. Now he adds a lot of new cretures, tier system and even more advanced classes.
H6 =Epic Win for me.
|
|
jabanoss
Promising
Legendary Hero
Property of Nightterror™
|
|
posted November 23, 2010 08:01 PM |
|
Edited by jabanoss at 08:58, 24 Nov 2010.
|
Quote:
Actually what concerns me the most is town management.
With the removal of mage guilds and the market place in a state of flux due to the resource changes (which I'm also, whilst optimistic, not entirely confident about) will we have enough stuff to build? and choices to make when building.
Fortunately, we're supposedly getting 4 faction unique structures which you're only allowed to have two of in a specific town.
Still, I'm antsy about the speed at which we might completely buy out the town.
Anybody else worried about that?
And whilst I agree with you swamp, lets stop dragging other games into the matter at hand.
Actually considering the opening post, that might be hard in this specific topic....
Thank you MrDragon for defending Starcraft 2
and yeah I feel similar when i comes to less resources types and the loss of buildings in the town. I reminds me of age of empire 2 => age of mythology => Age of empires 3 were they removed the stone-resource  It might not have changes much but it's o boring. Imagine playing H6 with only 3 resource to gather, but I hope they will turn it good anyway... :/
I also hope they will have more buildings in the towns that everyone can build, so that it will be a lot to choose from
Quote:
H6 =Epic Win for me.
me too 
Quote:
the breader
I loled
____________
"You turn me on Jaba"
- Meroe
|
| |
|
|
