Connection ErrorBad RequestSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Error Details:
Share Link
Posts from Do you still play Heroes of Might and Magic III after the release of Heroes of Might and Magic V?
The fifth installment is really captivating. And I haven't played the third one in a long time. To truly grasp all the depths and nuances of the game, you need to focus on just one, and the fifth one is more interesting in that regard...
The fifth installment is taking over. And I haven't played the third one in a long time. To grasp all the depths and nuances of the game, you need to focus on one thing, and the fifth one is more interesting in this regard...
I disagree with that. Many elements from the third game were incorporated into the fifth, and to have a complete understanding, you need to connect both parts, and then new possibilities will open up before you.
The fifth installment is gaining popularity. And I haven't played the third one in a long time. To truly understand all the depths and nuances of the game, you need to focus on one thing, and the fifth installment is more interesting in that regard...
Heroes 5 is currently winning with its graphics... But with each expansion, more possibilities are appearing... The third installment is good because it requires fewer computer resources. It is also very well-designed... Besides, we know that Heroes will deviate from its usual traditions in the Hammers of Fate expansion. There will be an alt upgrade. I think that Heroes 3 and Heroes 5 will be on par... and not higher or lower.... These are both independent products worthy of the attention of fans!
Kamikaze
19 years ago
Auto-translated
The fifth installment is good, even very good, but the third one is like a benchmark, at least for me. So, definitely YES!
Sometimes I get the impression that being a fan of Heroes 3 is trendy? People write in such a way that it seems like they just saw it somewhere and decided to support it...
I myself believe that Heroes 5 is no worse than Heroes 3... For me, they are on par... Both parts are very good! :smile49: :smile13: :smile20:
I agree. Heroes 5 and 3 are very similar; they are the best versions, in my opinion. Of course, I like 5 more because of the two elven castles (I love the pointy-eared ones), the plot is interesting, the graphics are STUNNING, but 3 is also great. 4 is sharply different from the others, but I really like them too.
And in general, all HEROES OF MIGHT AND MAGIC FOREWER!!!:smile13: :smile44: :smile54: :smile03: U]
Added after 2 minutes [/U]Xaker;102746
I myself believe that Heroes 5 is in no way worse than the 3rd... For me they are on par... Both parts are very good! :smile49: :smile13: :smile20:
Sometimes I get the impression that being a fan of the third game is trendy??? People write in such a way that it seems like they just saw it somewhere and decided to support it....
But I disagree – everyone has the right to defend their point of view. If they like the third game, what, should we shoot them? :D And fashion has absolutely nothing to do with it. Besides, the fifth game has already gained momentum and is more often encountered in modern trends; it's just more fashionable, it just needs time...:) Xaker;102746
I myself believe that Heroes 5 is no worse than the third... For me, they are on the same level...
I disagree again. Of course, they are similar – after all, it's still the same game :), but I think the fifth game is still underdeveloped... Xaker;102746
Both parts are very good! :smile49: :smile13: :smile20:
But it's hard to argue with that – both are masterpieces ;)
Монца
19 years ago
Auto-translated
I started with the second game, then played the third. I somehow skipped the fourth (installed it three times, but I couldn't play for more than 20 minutes and I would delete it). I did play the fifth, but only recently realized that nothing is better than the third.
I didn't like the fifth installment of the series at all. What did I expect from it? Or rather, what did I want to expect, but understood that it wouldn't happen?
The extensive development of the Heroes series, from King's Bounty to the third part, in my opinion, became the key to the success of this series. In the first Heroes, there are only 28 units, in the second, already 65, in the third, 118-130 (approximately, depending on the version). In the first part, there are only 4 types of castles, in the second, 6, in the third, already 8 (9). In the first part, there are only primary skills, in the second, secondary skills appear, and in the third part, the list of skills was expanded (4 elements of magic, ballistics, first aid...). In the first part, there are only 5 units in each castle (I might be wrong), in the second, already 6 and with the possibility of upgrading, in the third, already 7*2... And this list can be continued: artifacts, spells, special buildings, the size of the battlefield... And I wanted the fifth installment to be a logical continuation of these chains. To see 12 factions, units of level 8, and the possibility of double upgrading (like in Heroes of Might and Magic 2 with dragons), and to increase the size of the battlefield, add new skills, spells... I could continue for a long time. But that didn't happen. Again, only 6 castles, 6 units each, a radical change in skills and magic, a poor battlefield... And most importantly, the 3D graphics. I really don't like this graphics, it's on the level of Warcraft 3 (maybe it's even better, but that's the impression), an inconvenient camera... In my opinion, it would have been much better to make it 2D and with the same amazing drawn style as in the second Heroes (although I understand that 2D is a death sentence for a modern game). In general, I am even more disappointed than with the fourth installment (although I completed it entirely for the sake of the plot).
SandroXXL
19 years ago
Auto-translated
Many people say that 5 is Warcraft-like (in terms of graphics), but I don't understand why? Yes, the graphics are cartoonish, but there is a lush color palette, which Warcraft lacked; at maximum height, the image simply hurts the eyes, and the game lacks the fatalism found in Warcraft. The objects and buildings are also different. Units... You can only compare Night Elves with Dark Elves. I think the graphics aren't similar at all. Personally, I only regret the plot: I was expecting a return to the world of 3. But I don't know. There are units of levels 1-7 with upgrade possibilities, there are castles, the number of which increases with add-ons, and finally, there are very spectacular battles rich in tactical maneuvers—and this is exactly where the graphics make up for their shortcomings in exploration mode. But personally, I just can't accept the game; I tried playing it, then quit. Maybe I'm getting old, maybe it's just a matter of habit and 3 still seems better to me. But the general gaming style is also different, not like the one in 3.
Arandor
19 years ago
Auto-translated
the buildings here are good, and they turned out to be a decent size... but some of the creatures are very similar in design to creatures from Warcraft... huge hands, etc., I've already mentioned this I think that's what the author meant)
P.S. this is the only downside, IMO and it's a shame that there's no Swamp and Necromancers (from Heroes of Might and Magic III).
I didn't like the fifth installment of the series at all. What did I expect from it? Or rather, what did I want to expect, but understood that it wouldn't happen?
The extensive development of the Heroes series, from King's Bounty to the third part, in my opinion, became the key to the success of this series. In the first Heroes, there are only 28 units, in the second, already 65, in the third, 118-130 (approximately, depending on the version). In the first part, there are only 4 types of castles, in the second, 6, in the third, already 8 (9). In the first part, there are only primary skills, in the second, secondary skills appear, and in the third part, the list of skills was expanded (4 elements of magic, ballistics, first aid...). In the first part, there are only 5 units in each castle (I might be wrong), in the second, already 6 and with the possibility of upgrading, in the third, already 7*2... And this list can be continued: artifacts, spells, special buildings, the size of the battlefield... And I wanted the fifth installment to be a logical continuation of these chains. To see 12 factions, units of level 8, and the possibility of double upgrading (like in Heroes of Might and Magic 2 with dragons), and to increase the battlefield, add new skills, spells... I could continue for a long time. But that didn't happen. Again, only 6 castles, 6 units each, a radical change in skills and magic, a flawed battlefield... And most importantly, it's the 3D graphics. I really don't like this graphics, it's on the level of Warcraft 3 (maybe it's even better, but that's the impression), an inconvenient camera... In my opinion, it would have been much better to make it 2D and with the same amazing drawn style as in the second Heroes (although I understand that 2D is a death sentence for a modern game). In general, I am even more disappointed than with the fourth installment (although I completed it entirely for the sake of the plot).
And why do you only use the first 3 parts as an example, adding something each time? What about the fourth - you could easily write something about the commander in the army and his personal parameters - isn't this just a negative attitude towards the fourth Heroes? Regarding the fact that in the fifth installment, "Again, only 6 castles, 6 units each" - I can't agree with that - there are more and more factions - who knows, maybe they will catch up with the third installment :). Regarding the graphics: why write that 2D graphics are better in this way - it's your business how you think, you are aware of your words... well, that's your right, it would be better if you wrote that YOU PERSONALLY prefer 2D graphics, and not that it is better... Regarding the camera - you are given options on how to better and more conveniently rotate the battlefield, for example, you can see everything you want, which, as everyone knows, was not possible in Heroes at all - I don't think this is a minus ;) Personally, I have nothing against the fifth installment and will not give various arguments about its shortcomings, I just find the third installment closer to me...:)
