Animik
Auto-translated
Who said that housewives like Heroes 5? I know at least a few who were enthusiastically playing Heroes 3 and 4, but Heroes 5 didn't interest them and even caused rejection. It seems to me that in this regard, the failure of Heroes 5 is 100% guaranteed, considering that it is generally difficult to interest women in computer games. I think that here the phrase "Not recommended for children under 12" should be changed to "Recommended for children under 12". Because that's approximately their level – these are infantile, puffed-up skeletons with glowing eyes, musclemen with faces of comic book superheroes, undead, demons, scantily clad, long-legged beauties wrapped in belts, knights in puffed-up armor. All that's missing are cyborgs and transformers (I almost suggested a new faction).
:confused: I don't understand why the respected Fizik constantly talks about the failure of HoMM 4? May the Nival creations continue to sell for so many years and in such quantities. I'm not even talking about Heroes 3, which continues to sell steadily, and even Heroes 1 and 2 can still be easily found on sale. This is an unprecedented case in the history of computer games. Personally, I think that Heroes 4 was successful in its own way. True, the faces of the heroes have faded, and their intelligence has become duller, but the beauty of the map made up for all the minor shortcomings. The cliffs alone were worth it, and there were a huge number of different types of trees. And all this is drawn with great imagination and is very picturesque. The developers' miscalculation here was rather commercial – they could not direct all the profits from these mega-sales into their own pockets. :( As for the prices of the expansions, I note that creating a good, beautiful map is not an easy and lengthy process, and it is much easier for the user to pay a certain amount and start playing than to create 20 maps themselves.
I, like Katrine, started with Heroes 3, welcomed Heroes 4, and now I play them alternately, when I get tired of one, I switch to the other. Recently, I got acquainted with Heroes 1 and 2 – I laughed to tears, the characters are so amusing in their naivety. I was transported back to the era of weak computers. The maps, of course, are very simple. But despite all this, the game turned out to be very soulful. I would gladly play it if it weren't for the later versions.
In contrast to this magnificence, Heroes 5 made the impression of some kind of commercially calculated hack, where ideas were borrowed from many existing games. Because of this, the game turned out to be faceless, somehow castrated – because all the best things were amputated from Heroes, as if to save them (as someone wrote earlier). In fact, it seems that this was done so that they would be easier to fit into the not-so-large mind of the game designer, or the project manager, or someone else from the developers. :mad: And what were the words, like: "Heroes, this diamond, was given to Nival as the best." And what do we see? In my opinion, the best way for Nival is to change the structure of the castles beyond recognition and release the game under a different name – it will turn out to be a mediocre turn-based strategy, at least something new on the market of turn-based strategies. And start making Heroes from scratch.
:eek: Fizik's statement that there is no visually better strategy than Heroes 5 sounds naive. Dear Fizik, you urgently need to broaden your horizons. And as for the trendy features, without which the game supposedly will not be accepted by the new generation: firstly, these trendy features are for whom? It seems only for the developers, for whom this is a great reason for loud advertising statements; secondly, today's teenagers are enthusiastically playing Heroes 3, and there, I note, there is no zoom, camera, three-dimensionality, and DirectX 9.c.
And this is not just my opinion, a dozen or two of my acquaintances, who are fans, will easily sign under my statement, which is why I speak with such confidence.
Katrine, you are not alone in your opposition to Nival, I agree with you on almost everything, Nival deserves eternal shame and our contempt for such deeds. :( Amen.
:confused: I don't understand why the respected Fizik constantly talks about the failure of HoMM 4? May the Nival creations continue to sell for so many years and in such quantities. I'm not even talking about Heroes 3, which continues to sell steadily, and even Heroes 1 and 2 can still be easily found on sale. This is an unprecedented case in the history of computer games. Personally, I think that Heroes 4 was successful in its own way. True, the faces of the heroes have faded, and their intelligence has become duller, but the beauty of the map made up for all the minor shortcomings. The cliffs alone were worth it, and there were a huge number of different types of trees. And all this is drawn with great imagination and is very picturesque. The developers' miscalculation here was rather commercial – they could not direct all the profits from these mega-sales into their own pockets. :( As for the prices of the expansions, I note that creating a good, beautiful map is not an easy and lengthy process, and it is much easier for the user to pay a certain amount and start playing than to create 20 maps themselves.
I, like Katrine, started with Heroes 3, welcomed Heroes 4, and now I play them alternately, when I get tired of one, I switch to the other. Recently, I got acquainted with Heroes 1 and 2 – I laughed to tears, the characters are so amusing in their naivety. I was transported back to the era of weak computers. The maps, of course, are very simple. But despite all this, the game turned out to be very soulful. I would gladly play it if it weren't for the later versions.
In contrast to this magnificence, Heroes 5 made the impression of some kind of commercially calculated hack, where ideas were borrowed from many existing games. Because of this, the game turned out to be faceless, somehow castrated – because all the best things were amputated from Heroes, as if to save them (as someone wrote earlier). In fact, it seems that this was done so that they would be easier to fit into the not-so-large mind of the game designer, or the project manager, or someone else from the developers. :mad: And what were the words, like: "Heroes, this diamond, was given to Nival as the best." And what do we see? In my opinion, the best way for Nival is to change the structure of the castles beyond recognition and release the game under a different name – it will turn out to be a mediocre turn-based strategy, at least something new on the market of turn-based strategies. And start making Heroes from scratch.
:eek: Fizik's statement that there is no visually better strategy than Heroes 5 sounds naive. Dear Fizik, you urgently need to broaden your horizons. And as for the trendy features, without which the game supposedly will not be accepted by the new generation: firstly, these trendy features are for whom? It seems only for the developers, for whom this is a great reason for loud advertising statements; secondly, today's teenagers are enthusiastically playing Heroes 3, and there, I note, there is no zoom, camera, three-dimensionality, and DirectX 9.c.
And this is not just my opinion, a dozen or two of my acquaintances, who are fans, will easily sign under my statement, which is why I speak with such confidence.
Katrine, you are not alone in your opposition to Nival, I agree with you on almost everything, Nival deserves eternal shame and our contempt for such deeds. :( Amen.