Posts from Heroes of Might and Magic V [Game Discussion]

FIzik Finally, a sane person :-)
Nival is currently scooping up great specialists in "packs" .. and the probability that they'll do something other than what's intended is very low.
But there is something to actually be afraid of, because a game can be 1. "auteur", 2. "designed for the masses", or 3. "masterpieces" :-)
Since Nival is making the game for a significant amount of money, they'll want a return on it, and the game will inevitably turn out to be a mass-market product...
An auteur game is initially designed for a small number of consumers; people make the game for themselves and don't give a damn who else will or won't play it.
Now, "masterpieces" are those that can actually bring profit, appeal to a significant number of people, and naturally have something unique of their own:-)
Remember KB's sixth continent? The one that was sold for some amount of money I don't recall? While only 5 continents were available otherwise. And that was back then! )))

Guys!!! How could they refuse the idea of composite artifacts?! Or am I missing some information? Maybe there will still be "collections," right? And what about "hot seat" mode? There are random maps, right?

Don't worry about the hot-seat mode; it will definitely be included. Read the open beta testing thread. Regarding artifacts, I don't have a definitive answer yet either. But regarding the plot, I am deeply upset :( I will now create a topic on this subject… wait for it. As promised, I created a topic about the destruction of the Might and Magic world in Heroes 5. It is located here: /topic/170/

But there is something to be afraid of, because a game can be 1. "author's vision," 2. "designed for the masses," or 3. "a masterpiece." :-)
Since Nival is making the game with a significant budget, they will want to recoup their investment, and the game will inevitably become a mass-market product...

But Heroes was precisely an author's vision. And NWC was completely uninterested in the fans' opinions on this matter. They made the game as they envisioned it. But it was precisely their games that became masterpieces.
Making a cult game for the masses is the worst thing the Ubisoft marketers could have come up with. If the fifth installment is released and receives recognition (i.e., becomes profitable), then the Might and Magic series can be considered finished. The game's image will be diluted. I won't even mention the Dark Messiah. What is its purpose in the game world? What RPG elements are there?:confused: Hexen is still better.
The only hope is Tribute.

Since they made the map 8x10, it must have been a good idea because I simply don't believe that a group of beta testers wouldn't have pointed out the flaw in this idea to Nival.

Firstly, Laboule and the GU pointed out the problematic nature of this size. The phrase about the "genoid" is very telling. Furthermore, it cannot be said that the beta testers did not point it out. The developer makes the game. And he asks the beta testers to test his ideas, not to suggest their own. And the developer will never listen to anyone's opinion if it contradicts his vision of the problem. Moreover, if you believe the GU forum, it turns out that this 8x10 map was practically not tested. The rubberbanding was tested, but apparently, Nival didn't have time to refine it and simply unilaterally adopted this piece of land.

Guys!!! How could they abandon the idea of composite artifacts?!!! Or am I missing some information? Maybe there will still be "sets," right? And will there be "hot seat" mode? There are random maps, right?

1. No
2. Yes
3. Yes

Dear Katrine, I don't doubt La Boule's honesty, but it's possible that it was a subjective assessment – which he also had in the first preview. After all, many other people who have already seen Heroes of Might and Magic V didn't even mention the problem with the battlefield. Maybe the issue isn't as big as it seems? :D

Physicist: They were probably so engrossed in the game that no one paid attention to it:confused:
Or maybe no one wants to tarnish the game's reputation before its release:rolleyes:

After all, many other people who have already seen HoMM5 didn't even mention the battlefield issue. Maybe it's not as big a deal as it seems?

Don't forget about the NDA rules that apply to beta testers. The fact that Laboule went beyond these rules is his problem. Let Ubisoft and Nival deal with him.
I find the battlefield too small because there's no room to maneuver. Retreating and shifting the attack from flank to flank is pointless because the battlefield turns into a crush. In the same Castle battles, there were no 2x2 creatures; they were all 1x1. So, there was no crush problem. But when a Lich attacks with a 9-cell area of effect, and the Dungeon army occupies all the available deployment cells, what is that? Some call it tactics, but I don't think so. IMHO.
I'm even more annoyed by the deployment. Previously, the attacker had an advantage. They could see the enemy army and adjust accordingly. Now, let's take the battlefield deployment. The first player deploys, and the second player looks and deploys differently. And don't tell me the second player won't see it. It's like in HotS – they close their eyes:D. This is a stupid innovation, and no one will convince me otherwise. In the 3rd game, the tactics were optimally refined (we're talking about the skill's effect).
I'm tired of arguing about the balance of the proposed battle system, or rather, the impossibility of balancing it. I haven't heard a single argument about its balance. The 4th game had a great battle system. It was almost perfect. Take something that's already good, but no. Nival knows how to make Blitzkrieg and Demiurges, but neither of those are Heroes... A different approach is needed here. One based on a deep analysis of the series, not on ephemeral experience with real-time games.
All of this is just my IMHO. I'm not trying to convince anyone. If the game appears in stores now, I'll go and buy it. But if even more terrible details emerge, I'll download Equilibris and let the 5th game burn with blue flames.

I'll read the reviews first;
And Katrine's review is definitely one of the most important!

:eek: :eek: http://marauder.al.ru/images/hero.jpg :eek: :eek: [from Admin: the link is somehow unavailable]
This is how you equip mono artifacts. Even in Might and Magic IX it was more graphical. Pathetic.
http://img41.imageshack.us/my.php?image=h5game20060124012331108pu.jpg :mad: :mad: Brilliant :mad: :mad: :mad:
And you can destroy tents and other things :mad: http://img41.imageshack.us/my.php?image=h5game20060124012618814ye.jpg
And this is despite the fact that they are off the battlefield:(
Do I want to download the beta :confused: That's already a question:(

Dear Katrine, I'm not going to try to convince you. I'll just say that when the game comes out, we'll see who's right and what's better. Regarding the beta test, I disagree that Nival didn't listen to the testers; otherwise, what's the point of the entire beta test if not to identify bugs and errors? As for your attitude towards the fifth game, everything becomes clear after you praised the fourth game: - personally, I can't stand it, except for Equilibrium, and even then, with a lot of beer. Fans of the fourth game don't like Nival - that's an axiom; they don't like it because it's a continuation of the third game - that's a fact that all fans of the fourth game stubbornly don't want to admit. Maybe I'm wrong about you, but in general, that's how it

Fizik, I absolutely hate Heroes of Might and Magic IV, but I'm not impressed with the features offered in Heroes of Might and Magic V, quite the opposite!

Katrine, the links are a bit awkward. I mean, if you dig around for a while, you'll see the picture, but... Please post them as images! If they're large, resize them...

Katrine, the links are a bit off. I mean, if you dig deep enough, you'll find the picture, but... Just post the pictures! If they're too big, resize them...

We worked on it during the day. Here, I found it again.
Here are the comments.
1st picture. The battlefield.
What we see. The Paladins only have one movement option: straight ahead, because all other routes are blocked. It's enough to send any stack into the passage, and that's it. The Paladins are engaged.
The Hive built all its troops, and they occupied all 16 squares. If Meteor Shower is cast on the griffins, 6 stacks will take damage. Similarly, if a Lich fires.
And the most interesting thing is that the position is unchangeable. That is, with this size, there is no room for maneuver. So, the battlefield needs to be significantly increased. Although, for weak players, such a battlefield is advantageous. A professional (if, for example, he is playing as the Hive in this situation) is simply constrained by obstacles and his own units. All his moves are visible as plain as day. Leveling the playing field by reducing the size of the battlefield is the result of Nival's work.
2nd picture. The hero.
1. The hero screen is terribly small.
2. Only 9 artifacts can be carried. This means there will be no more artifacts like the Clover of Fortune, etc.
3. Was it really that difficult to make a hero figure? I was expecting it to be like in M&M, where when you put artifacts on a hero, he changes his appearance.
4. The screen is not informative. Only one of the 5 possible hero types is displayed. Horrible. This is a terrible slowdown in the game. You need to cycle through 5 screens instead of one, as before.
3rd picture. Recruitment.
1. It's inconvenient; the figures can be confused.
2. There is no recruitment based on buildings.
3. There is no unit animation.
4. The process takes more time than in the other parts.

Dear Katrine, I'm not going to try to convince you. I'll just say that when the game comes out, we'll see who's right and what's best.

;)

Regarding the beta test, I disagree that Nival didn't listen to the testers. Otherwise, what's the point of the entire beta test if not to identify bugs and errors?

Beta testers are just hired workers, like everyone else. Their only task is to identify bugs and errors. The conceptual vision of the game is chosen by the development company. Moreover, recently, this decision is almost always made by marketers, not designers and other more competent people. A beta tester doesn't answer why the map is small and why a griffin might not be able to land on the battlefield after a Battle Drive. That's what the people in warm offices who call themselves "developers" decided.

Those who prefer Heroes 4 don't like Nival – that's an axiom. They don't like it because it's making a sequel to Heroes 3 – that's a fact that all Heroes 4 fans stubbornly refuse to acknowledge.

No one knows what Nival is doing. You can't call it a sequel to Heroes 3 (there are plot inconsistencies).
Those who prefer Heroes 4 don't like Nival because Nival is constantly badmouthing Heroes 4. We've already seen what kind of "GURUs" they are:mad: the battlefield is simply superb:mad:

Leveling the playing field by reducing the map size – that’s the result of Nival’s work.

Quote of the day. Well said, a very accurate description. That’s exactly what it is – I talked about it on the Nival forum. The larger the battlefield, the more tactical options it offers; this was proven back in the time of Alexander the Great, and I frankly don’t understand the talk about some new tactical concept on a miniature field. After all, the uniqueness of each battle depends on the number of possible maneuvers and strategies, not on a well-thought-out scheme for delivering fast units to the enemy’s rear or simply using area-of-effect magic... it’s a rare monstrosity... IDIOCY!!! They decided to speed up the gameplay by speeding up the combat mode – the MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THE GAME!!! For example, I want new tactics and new combat systems to develop with experience, because if I win battles day after day using the same system, what’s the point of the game??? The flexibility of possible tactical moves depends on the space for imagination, which in our case is the size of the battlefield. We need strategy games primarily for mental development, which is formed by experience multiplied by the diversity of the gameplay. If there is only experience, then there is no development of personality, and the game is no longer a turn-based strategy, but a turn-based action game.:mad:
For now, I see a degradation in the genre of turn-based strategies – just like in everything else that surrounds us. There is a time of global Opsonization of the planet’s population, as evidenced by the sacrifice of quality for the sake of convenience and fashion. This applies to music, where modern “musicians” create entire albums using four chords, and to photography – where the most important part of the camera is no longer the lens or the quality of the body, but the size of the screen or the number of megapixels, or even the COLOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now any dumb blonde can press the shutter button without scratching her expensive pedicure on her left foot and get a terrible “photo” that she will post on a dating site as a work of art:mad: :mad: All this is called the AGE OF POP, and unfortunately, games have also fallen under this influence... now they demand “realism” from players, which is completely illogical and incompatible with the term “game,” polished graphics, and, most importantly: IT SHOULD BE EASY TO LEARN!!!!!!!! That is, now mass-produced products are in vogue.
....sorry if I’m being too harsh....I’m just feeling emotional....I guess it’s because I’m disappointed....
I hope that the developers will come to their senses and REMEMBER what game they were entrusted with.

and, frankly, I have nothing to criticize except the battlefield... and I don't even want to criticize anything... it's just that the battlefield is such an important component that its poor implementation can easily kill the ENTIRE game in its infancy.