|
| Thread: My humble opinion on Heroes games, What's yours? | |
|
Herry
Bad-mannered
Famous Hero
100% Devil
|
posted March 19, 2014 11:24 AM |
|
|
My humble opinion on Heroes games, What's yours?
I just want to say my opinion and discuss it with other people about ALL heroes games i know, and as far as i can say, the 4th game through the 6th lack the look of the old heroes games. when i look at heroes 5 and 6 they sound like completely different games. it's true they add new features and stuff but they are nothing like the first 3 games, they don't have that feel of addiction... instead of, like heroes 3 is an improved version and a continuation of heroes 2, you feel that heroes 4 is EXTREMELY different. i haven't played it much but it disapointed me from the first look, i don't know what was the problem but i just felt that it lacked something, something very important, through i don't know exactly what is it. i would imagine it being A LOT better if it was based on Heroes III. i'm ok with Heroes II as long as they improve the graphics a bit and make the resolution just like Heroes III. and by the way, to me, Heroes V looks like it's not a strategy game, at least not a GOG(good old game), i don't care about 3D(in fact i don't like the grahics of heroes in 3D), i just care about good and balanced gameplay, not bad graphics(they should take HOMM III graphics as an example) and good and interesting storyline, like that of Heroes II and Heroes III(didn't play Heroes 1 so i don't really know about it), Heroes 6 doesn't have that feel of interest and addiction when you dive into the gameplay, well i know it has a giant pack of new features but if the style goes to HOMM III style i would difinetly play it. it's useless if you just put 3D graphics if someone isn't going to play it, they think that a game's QUALITY is having good modern graphics, a ton of new features and a completely NEW engine, but in my opinion, that is never the point, the point of a game's REAL QUALITY isn't some bull as graphics or the look from outside, it's the storyline, that interesting storyline that pushes me to play the game, the game play that steals someone addiction.... not graphics. in fact you are NOT FORCED to improve a game in each sequel, all i demand is an engine based on the previous game and the continuation of the storyline, that is all. don't you think so?
SIDE NOTE: i've posted this in the library cause i found nowhere to post this thread, furthermore it talks about ALL heroes games. post your opinions and discuss below.
____________
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted March 19, 2014 12:59 PM |
|
|
One interesting question is where is the line between an expansion and a new game?
From the words themselves, one could imagine expansions means extra material, while a new game could be a different engine, and at least something is different, like graphics.
I recall how after I'd played captain comic, might & magic 7, diablo 2 or doom 2, I looked forward for the new game in the series, expecting it to be even better, but still the same. I thought I'd travel space in CC 2 and Might & Magic 8.. while in Doom I think I just wanted more cool (non-plain like what came in Doom 3) monsters and awesome weapons. For diablo, I'm currently not sure.
But for me, it wasn't still the same game for either of the examples. Might and Magic 8 even uses the same engine, yet it seems like it lacks something very powerful version 7 had, I'm not sure what it is, because the idea of playing as non-standard races was something I was thrilled about before playing.
I didn't even bother with CC2 or diablo 3, to me they were entirely different games based on the little I saw, not a real continuation of the series, like too much had changed. I found Heroes 4 to be a better continuation, but again, like you say, it's like something was missing that was part of what had defined the heroes series. What that was, I don't know. Maybe it felt a little like the entire past history of heroes 2-3, which you'd been a part of now simply was irrelevant, something we maybe weren't prepared for. Finally for doom when I saw the new game, to me it's more like half life than doom, and that wasn't what I was expecting. Maybe I rather wanted an expansion, I tried the official ones and I tried mods, I liked mods the best, but that's because they introduced doom from new angles with new monsters and new weapons, so maybe it's an expansion like from Diablo 2 -> Diablo 2 LOD I wanted, and maybe the same is true for the other games in my example as well? I don't know.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Herry
Bad-mannered
Famous Hero
100% Devil
|
|
posted March 19, 2014 03:42 PM |
|
|
NOTE: HOLY ****! i spent about 10 minutes writing my thoughts, i accidently close the page and HERE WE ARE! **** THIS UNIVERSE!
i didn't mean all games, in Heroes, even after you complete all the campaigns you add mods and play maps and ****, right? then when a new game gets released in the series you have an EXTREMELY HARD time getting used to the new engine and the system. and i really have to say this, Heroes 6 disappointed me quite a lot, i've been expecting something A LOT better. on a side note, i've discovered a weird thing, someone who played some games from the series and the latest game disappointed him would stop playing(or so i think), but a player who haven't played past games and just started playing the latest one will, unlike the first case i mentioned continue playing and find the game O.K/Good, OR EVEN PERFECT, and when he looks at a past game, he will find that it's bad compared to the latest, which explains why people have different opinions about heroes games.
____________
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted March 19, 2014 04:07 PM |
|
|
In other words, heroes games aren't for heroes players  
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
daockloake
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted March 19, 2014 05:38 PM |
|
|
|
I enjoy HOMM3 so far the most, have played 4 and 5 and dont mind them so much, i think i enjoy the cheesiest graphics 3 purtains. Problem i always have is finding a map that is fun and incredibly hard to beat, havent found a map someone has made that was both. I have played the impossible ones that are difficult to beat if they can be beaten but they were boring and not enjoyable. Who has a map that is both, i would love to try it.
|
|
Manta
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted March 22, 2014 10:13 PM |
|
|
|
I actually like all heroes games, except heroes 4. I agree that heroes 5-6 aren't like heroes 1-3, but I still enjoy playing them. I do like playing heroes 2 more than I like playing heroes 3.
|
|
B0rsuk
Promising
Famous Hero
DooM prophet
|
|
posted March 23, 2014 09:48 AM |
|
Edited by B0rsuk at 10:03, 23 Mar 2014.
|
Herry said:
you feel that heroes 4 is EXTREMELY different. i haven't played it much but it disapointed me from the first look, i don't know what was the problem but i just felt that it lacked something, something very important, through i don't know exactly what is it.
A brain. Quite literally - the lead developer called the AI 'lobotomized'. They didn't have enough time to focus on that. A pretty serious problem in a serries designed for single player.
Quote:
i would imagine it being A LOT better if it was based on Heroes III.
How so ? Heroes III was a regression from Heroes II. The only advantages it has is more stuff and better balance of units. Disadvantages include:
- spellcasting heroes are almost laughably weak in multiplayer
- many most powerful spells, like mass haste, mass slow, mass bloodlust are level1. This is one of main reasons might heroes dominate.
- Bad spell balance in general, lots of crappy spells at level3 espcially because removal of Mass Haste (level3) and Mass Slow (level4) has left a vacuum. In Heroes 2, all mass spells have higher level. That's how it should be, because they're much more powerful. Level2 is also stinky in heroes3 as opposed to 2, where you have steelskin, for instance.
- gold income and magic points are much more plentiful, but corresponding spells and items haven't been updated. Estates yielding 500 is laughable if you earn 4000 with your first city and 2000 with each next one. It is a a major benefit if your cities earn 1250 each. Gold mines in Heroes II are worth waging wars over, and Endless Sack of Gold truly feels like a relic, makes you grin for 5 minutes each time you find one. Mysticism in Heroes III still gets you +1,+2,+3 magic points but spell costs have soared.
- failing to account for increased spell costs and gold earnings contributed to making HOMM3 skills a sea of crap. There's lots of junk and you're fishing for good skills. Aside from now crappy Estates and Mysticism, and skills that already were crap (Eagle Eye, Scouting) you have marginal First Aid, Learning, Artillery, Scholar, and Sorcery.
- heroes still have only 4 basic Primary Skills, but a ton of new heroes have been added. Instead of Knight, Sorceress, Wizard, Barbarian, and Necromancer whom you could often recognize by their primary skill values, you have 9*2 = 18 hero types. But still only 4 primary skills. Hero types are much more dilluted and it's hard to distinguish an Overlord from a Barbarian, a Knight from a Ranger, or an Alchemist from a Cleric.
- in similar vein, a ton of units have been added without expanding the underlying combat system to make it more interesting and support it. There aren't that many special abilities, which wasn't a problem with Heroes II's lower number of units and lack of upgrades.
- unit upgrades are rarely interesting, they rarely contribute anything. I'll argue they detract from the game, because you have many more buildings to complete which don't feel meaningful. There's also lots of filler like Blacksmith you might not want, or having Marketplace as a requirement. Building up Heroes III towns takes longer even if you are swimming in resources. Your decisions feel less meaningful. Heroes II towns feel expensive and you're constantly worrying about money, but you can build them really quickly if you're wealthy.
- Money abundance in Heroes III is worth a separate point. When money is largely not a factor anymore, your decisions matter less and you can start complaining that Hydras are overall weaker than Archangels. First world problems :-).
- visuals of Heroes III aged worse
- significant increase in combat unit speeds has made lack of zones of control worse. Formations and blocking access is less important. Often the only real decision is "who attacks whom".
- as many unit slots as there are unit tiers is a disadvantage for me. It removes one potential meaningful decision. If you're a "LOL orcs, I leave them to guard my castle always" kind of player, you're a bad player. Don't overestimate faster hero speed. I've played scenarios where taking orcs instead of elves allowed me to conquer AI castles (complete with turrets) in week 2 as opposed to later. Elves would just become a pincushion. Orcs can live under fire and even deal serious damage.
Many women are fooled by lipstick labels. You have colors like Cherry, Ultimate Suede, Lip Butter, Wine with Everything, Softspoken Pink, Tawny Peach, Smoky Rose, Berry Rich... many of them have exactly the same shade. It's all in your brain. But they're more marketable with fancy names. This is what Heroes III units are. They're largely just labels on often similar piles of HP and damage. And that's not just units. Heroes III has tons more stuff, but it's mostly just relabeled stuff and combinations of already known mechanics. This is the theme of Heroes III for me - many more choices, but much less meaningful.
Blandness of so many units with not enough special abilities and tired combat system is something Heroes 4 has recognized. Since Heroes4, every single unit has a special ability.
Quote:
Heroes V looks like it's not a strategy game, at least not a GOG(good old game), i don't care about 3D(in fact i don't like the grahics of heroes in 3D), i just care about good and balanced gameplay, not bad graphics(they should take HOMM III graphics as an example) and good and interesting storyline, like that of Heroes II and Heroes III(didn't play Heroes 1 so i don't really know about it), Heroes 6 doesn't have that feel of interest and addiction when you dive into the gameplay,
Heroes IV was an attempt to break the stagnation that was Heroes III and improve design. According to interviews, Heroes IV and V (the one with Catelf creature, by the original team) was meant to be back to roots. Back to STRATEGY roots and dialing down of storylines.
Unfortunately it failed because 3DO burned a heap of money trying to establish its own console. This meant Heroes IV was rushed. It has excellent and interesting mechanics in many places, but dreadful AI and campaigns that don't feel like a strategy at all. This was made worse by business aspects, and scenario designers determined to make a RPG game despite the wishes of lead programmer and designer Gus Smegstad (who preferred Heroes II to Heroes III, like me).
However, it has hands down the best storylines of all HOMM games. Nothing comes close. If you stop treating it like a game and treat like a book, you'll have a great time. Really, if storyline is so important to you STICK WITH HEROES IV.
Heroes I is cute in a good way. It has an absurd but pleasant magic system, no skills (but a few hidden hero perks). The campaign is a string of scenarios but you can pick any class to go through them, unlike the later games. Storyline is not worth mentioning, but if you enjoy playing single scenarios and experimenting it can be a lot of fun.
One of quirks of Heroes I spell systems is that only 1 enchantment can be active on a unit at a time. This was later kept for Bless and Curse, Haste and Slow because it kind of made sense.
It takes little time to finish the entire HOMM1 campaign, so I've done it recently several times with all classes and even strange hero/town combinations. Sorceress army has huge initiative, flyers and ranged trops ? How would that work with a Barbarian ? How would Warlock's most expensive army fare under a Knight ? These are devastating. Orcs, goblins led by a sorceress are meh. Knight troops led by a Warlock hero is weak and a real challenge to win. Makes you realize how crappy Spell Power truly is.
------------------------------
Heroes V and VI are a break from HOMM's strange but fun "colorful ZOO" type cities. In previous games, it was all about fantastic creatures with no pretense of a society. It was unrealistic but fun and colorful. Heroes V, VI tried too hard. They tried to be games about characters, not armies. The main story delivery method was changed from a war diary to the cutscene. The design is all over the place especially when it comes to hero abilities. There's no rhyme nor reason to the way the skills are. Compare to Age of Wonders III where you can see a skill name and know what class it probably belongs to. Because it makes sense.
____________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5um8QWWRvo RSA Animate - Smile or die
|
| |
|
|
