In my opinion, the first impression of Heroes V was based on its graphics. Of course, it was a bit off-putting, not like in the third or fourth game; it was too generic, like Warcraft, and the Factions were similar to those in Warcraft (e.g., the Tower and the Inferno). Later, after replaying the campaigns, the high-quality graphics were no longer necessary, I agree, and even hindered the gameplay. And my computer isn't very powerful. When playing a map, the graphics aren't as important as the result itself. In this case, you have to set the lowest settings in the video options. I have nothing against Heroes III; I often play it with a neighbor over a local network. Due to the lower graphics, the third game wins because it doesn't lag or load slowly, and it doesn't require a fast internet connection. Therefore, it is more suitable for online play (I already wrote this at the end of post 687). But in other respects, Heroes V is in no way inferior to the third game. The fifth game even has many advantages. The universe of the fifth game is well-developed and does not lag behind the previous parts, in my opinion. The fourth game was a step in the wrong direction that didn't pay off. But, as they say, you have to learn from your mistakes. That's why we have the fifth game, whose developers took the best from the previous parts. And making the graphics the same as in Heroes III would have been ridiculous at the time when the fifth game was being created. Attracting buyers with good graphics is always a good thing.