Skip to content

Posts from Discussion about Heroes 4. Auto-translated

No ratings yet — be the first to rate!
User Avatar
#192
Auto-translated
And especially when there are rubies, it provides virtually limitless upgrade possibilities.

Мои страницы:
VK, YouTube
Мои работы:
Герои Падших Крыльев, Пять Друзей Леонида, Дракон Природы, Две деревни, Неумолимый
Мои видео:
Топ-10 официальных карт Героев IV, Нюансы картостроения 1 / 2 / 3, Рейтинги карт (Оригинал / Грядущая Буря / Вихри Войны / конкурс), Странности в Героях IV
Плейлисты:
Конкурс адаптаций, Неумолимый, Баги и фишки, Редактор карт

In reply to ColdWarrior
User Avatar
#193
Auto-translated
nikitos palisos
And especially when there are rubies, it gives virtually unlimited upgrade possibilities.
Sorry, could you be more specific about which rubies you mean? :o
User Avatar
#195
Auto-translated
Yes, about them.

Мои страницы:
VK, YouTube
Мои работы:
Герои Падших Крыльев, Пять Друзей Леонида, Дракон Природы, Две деревни, Неумолимый
Мои видео:
Топ-10 официальных карт Героев IV, Нюансы картостроения 1 / 2 / 3, Рейтинги карт (Оригинал / Грядущая Буря / Вихри Войны / конкурс), Странности в Героях IV
Плейлисты:
Конкурс адаптаций, Неумолимый, Баги и фишки, Редактор карт

#196
Auto-translated
To be honest, I don't know why the fourth installment is so disliked. I mean, really disliked. It's almost completely dismissed. And who's doing this, primarily? Those who played it for a couple of minutes and said, "I'll level up my hero to 100,000,000,000 and easily defeat everyone; it's so easy, no need to think. There's no balance, I hired some dragons, and that's it..." It's not even funny.

Perhaps I'll be very original, but I'll still ask: what exactly do you dislike about the fourth part of the game? Besides the fact that "it's not the third one and not an improvement" and "there are no upgrades"? What is globally bad about it?
User Avatar
#197
Auto-translated
/post/619412/
/post/493110/
You seem to have a rather subjective opinion about people who don't like the fourth game. Yes, tastes differ; some people are happy with the mix of an underdeveloped RPG and an underdeveloped strategy game, while others aren't. What can you do? You shouldn't force your opinions on others
 

К А
Стикеры GBF в Telegram
#198
Auto-translated
Terraniux
What exactly don't you like about the fourth installment of the game?
1. The graphics are sometimes clunky.
2. There is no random map generator.
Otherwise, it's a great game.
In reply to Ment
User Avatar
#199
Auto-translated
Ment
You seem to have a rather subjective opinion about people who dislike the fourth installment. Yes, tastes differ, and some people are happy with the mix of a subpar RPG and a subpar strategy game, while others aren't. What can you do? You can't force your opinion on others.
The issue isn't about tastes. I enjoy playing both the third and fourth games and don't think one is better than the other. If we're talking about bugs and other flaws, the popular third game has just as many (some of which haven't been fixed yet). If a new game should be a continuation of the old one, why? They are two completely different games. If I don't like something in a game, I can at least justify it. But what bothers me more is that those who couldn't or didn't want to understand the game immediately tried to bash it.
Техника в руках индейца мертва.
Справочник по НоММ-4 http://handbookhmm.ru/pamyatka-dlya-heroes-iv.html
Памятка по НоММ-3 http://handbookhmm.ru/pamyatka-dlya-homm-iii.html
и HotA http://handbookhmm.ru/vyishla-obnovlennaya-pamyatka-dlya-homm-iii-hota.html
User Avatar
#200
Auto-translated
But what bothers me even more is that those who couldn't or didn't want to understand the game immediately tried to criticize it.
Well, yes, it can be unpleasant, but this doesn't always happen, and you can't generalize. Although, on the other hand, even if we consider that specific audience that didn't want to understand the game, the question arises: "Why didn't they want to?" and, I'm afraid, the answer to that question won't be very flattering for the game. But that's a completely different conversation.
 

К А
Стикеры GBF в Telegram
In reply to Ment
#201
Auto-translated
Ment
/post/619412/
/post/493110/
You have some subjective opinion about people who dislike the fourth game. Yes, it just so happens that tastes differ; some are satisfied with a mix of an underdeveloped RPG and an underdeveloped strategy, while others are not. What can you do? You shouldn't impose your opinion on people.
Ment
/post/619412/
/post/493110/
You have some subjective opinion about people who dislike the fourth game. Yes, it just so happens that tastes differ; some are satisfied with a mix of an underdeveloped RPG and an underdeveloped strategy, while others are not. What can you do? You shouldn't impose your opinion on people.
That’s right, every opinion is subjective. I don’t impose opinions; I simply state what most posts say about this. And I am not the first, nor will I be the last, to speak in defense of the fourth game. Your view is also as subjective as mine, only from different perspectives. Yes, I really like this part, almost everything, except for the problems that actually exist.

But you yourself write: "My view of games is 80% based on the first impression. When I first launched the fourth game, I didn't like anything about it: squeaky music, angular, poorly drawn graphics, a bunch of innovations with an incomprehensible deep philosophical meaning, similar to the fantasies of small children..." And about hero-tanks, because that's exactly what it means to "level up to 100,000," as I already wrote. Is that bad? I just don't understand. I'll try to explain:
1. Some people didn't like the innovation "Heroes participate in battles." Well, all I can say is that many people liked it instead. It adds dynamics. It shouldn't be compared to a commander, because the player still controls the pawns himself.
2. An underdeveloped RPG and an underdeveloped strategy... Well, it’s hard to say anything here, but this is pure subjectivism, just like your attitude towards the fourth game, which is no less than my attitude towards those who dislike it. Moreover, I am not criticizing everyone подряд, but only those who make unsubstantiated statements, which often turn out to be unfounded.
Regarding the underdeveloped RPG and underdeveloped strategy – calling a game that way just because they added a hero to the battle seems wrong to me, because the strategy in the fourth game is not “underdeveloped,” but rather good.
Criticism should certainly exist, but not when you nitpick at everything for no reason. Although this has been said many times and will continue to be discussed.

Added 1 minute ago
Ment
Although on the other hand, even if we consider exactly that audience that didn't want to figure out the game, there also arises the question "Why didn't they want to do it?" and, I fear, the answer to it will not be very flattering for the game. But that's a completely different conversation.
And what will it be?
User Avatar
#202
Auto-translated
Of course, my opinion is subjective. But at the same time, there are certain reasons, which I obviously wouldn't be able to articulate immediately if I had only played it for "a couple of minutes." This opinion formed after a detailed study of the game (I don't remember exactly how long, but it was around a year), along with using the map editor (well, at an amateur level. I remember that I didn't even figure out the scripts, although I tried once). And only after that was I able to understand what exactly I didn't like about it. But the most important thing is that what I formulated after a year of playing and the impression I got at the very beginning... Well, as I wrote, it's practically identical, only the initial impression is more on a subconscious level, and after a certain experience, it becomes conscious. And the question arises: maybe it's not worth trying to understand what you initially don't like? ) The question is rhetorical. All of this, of course, is just my humble opinion.
 

К А
Стикеры GBF в Telegram
User Avatar
#203
Auto-translated
Of course, it's hard to understand why someone wouldn't want to engage with something.
But what can you do, there's no accounting for taste. In my opinion, many strategies lack the element of the commander not fighting side-by-side with their subordinates, because he is just as much a person as they are.
Regarding tank-like heroes, you decide what to upgrade. Although, it's true that when you max out the combat skills and buy 100 potions of immortality, the balance becomes a bit off. The only thing I would like to change is to limit the "dosage" of certain potions per battle. As for the graphics, it's not better in the 3rd and 2nd games, and I prefer not to compare the 5th game with the previous games in the series at all.

Мои страницы:
VK, YouTube
Мои работы:
Герои Падших Крыльев, Пять Друзей Леонида, Дракон Природы, Две деревни, Неумолимый
Мои видео:
Топ-10 официальных карт Героев IV, Нюансы картостроения 1 / 2 / 3, Рейтинги карт (Оригинал / Грядущая Буря / Вихри Войны / конкурс), Странности в Героях IV
Плейлисты:
Конкурс адаптаций, Неумолимый, Баги и фишки, Редактор карт

In reply to Ment
#204
Auto-translated
Ment
Of course, my opinion is subjective. But at the same time, there are certain reasons that I obviously wouldn't be able to articulate right away if I had only played it for "a couple of minutes." This opinion formed after a detailed study of the game (I don't remember how long, but it was about a year), along with the map editor (well, at an amateur level. I remember that I didn't even figure out the scripts, although I tried once). And only after that was I able to understand what exactly I didn't like about it.
But the most important thing: what I formulated after a year of playing and the impression I got at the very beginning... Well, as I wrote, it's practically identical, only the initial impression is more on a subconscious level, and after a certain experience, it becomes conscious. And the question arises: maybe it's not worth even trying to understand what you initially don't like? ) The question is rhetorical.
All this, of course, is just my humble opinion.

Okay, I understand the point!

Some people just don't want to see the good sides, and there are many of them. There are quite a few of them to call it a "failed experiment."
никитос палисос
Of course, it's hard to figure out what you don't want to deal with.
But what can you do, there's no accounting for taste. In my opinion, many strategies lack the fact that the commander doesn't fight side by side with his subordinates, because he is just a person like them.
Regarding tank heroes, you decide for yourself what to upgrade. Although, it's true that when you max out the combat branch and buy 100 nectars of immortality, there will be a lack of balance. The only thing I would like to change is to limit the "dosage" of some potions per battle. As for the graphics, it's not better in the 3rd and 2nd games, and I prefer not to compare the 5th game with the previous games in the series at all.

No need to) Because while you're drinking, they'll beat up the hero, and you won't be able to cast spells. So, you can only seriously rely on potions in arenas, where I personally used them. Although, maybe I'm wrong.
In reply to Ment
User Avatar
#205
Auto-translated
Ment
Of course, my opinion is subjective...
If I'm not mistaken, you had a post where you very well analyzed all the pros and cons of HotA, so I appreciate your objectivity. And taste. But regarding the generalization of conclusions — before posting the memo, I looked at reviews for the fourth game, and not only on this site but others as well, so the generalization of the negatives is also correct. Moreover, most of the reviews were quite the opposite. And almost all the alleged shortcomings of the game were biased. Perhaps I wasn't a fan of previous versions of Heroes and approached the game without bias — and once I figured out the game, I saw almost none of these "shortcomings." You can't upgrade units, you can't pass them along in a chain, you can't use Flight or DD — therefore it's trash. But there are other possibilities that quite effectively replace them. And the rest is a matter of taste.
Техника в руках индейца мертва.
Справочник по НоММ-4 http://handbookhmm.ru/pamyatka-dlya-heroes-iv.html
Памятка по НоММ-3 http://handbookhmm.ru/pamyatka-dlya-homm-iii.html
и HotA http://handbookhmm.ru/vyishla-obnovlennaya-pamyatka-dlya-homm-iii-hota.html
In reply to dnaop-wr
#206
Auto-translated
dnaop-wr
If I'm not mistaken, you had a post where you broke down all the pros and cons of HotA very well, so I appreciate your objectivity. And taste. But regarding the generalization of conclusions - before posting the guide, I looked at reviews about the fourth game, not only on this site but on others as well, so the generalization about the negativity is also correct. Moreover, the reviews were mostly directly opposite. And almost all of the supposed shortcomings of the game were biased. Perhaps I wasn't a fan of the previous versions of Heroes and approached the game without bias - and once I understood the game, I saw almost none of these "shortcomings." You can't upgrade units, you can't transfer them via chain, you can't use Flight and Dimension Door - so it's garbage. But there are other options that fully replace them. The rest is a matter of taste.
I fully support this
As
Terraniux
some people just don't want to see the good sides
already said