What is your opinion about Heroes IV? — General

Katrine

12/22/2005 8:08 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Heroes 4 has undoubtedly become the most controversial game in the series. But despite this, it was also the first revolutionary game in the series after the second installment. In principle, I would like to know your opinion about Heroes 4. It had many very interesting aspects. And the only unsuccessful aspects, in my opinion, were the frankly weak artificial intelligence and the hero's participation in battles on the battlefield.

Хронология вселенной Might and Magic
Katrine
Третьи или пятые? Теперь Вы сами выбираете иконки
Диалоги с Модераторами
Сейчас играю в Diablo II LoD
:cool:

ДАК

12/22/2005 9:01 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Revolution + a generally unsuccessful implementation of otherwise excellent ideas.
They simplified castle building – in my opinion, this is a big drawback.
The hero leveling system is a definite plus.
Having a hero on the battlefield... well, it would have been better if it were implemented differently. IMHO.

White Hawk

12/30/2005 10:47 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Boring, unattractive, monotonous... the music is good, though.

In reply to White Hawk

MasterPainKiller

1/21/2006 11:59 AM UTC

Auto-translated

I think Heroes 4 could have been a revolutionary game if the developers had polished their innovations a bit more and hadn't destroyed the old system. Instead, they messed everything up, and the new features turned out to be underdeveloped. I still can't forget how a hero with an axe somehow attacks with his foot:):)

In general, I think they rushed things. And they should have consulted with gamers.

домосед

1/21/2006 12:06 PM UTC

Auto-translated

The interface is much more convenient compared to the third game, and especially the second. Perhaps the graphics could be better, but in the fifth game, they are generally awful, except for the battlefield, and I don't like the cities at all.

In reply to домосед

Medvaldo

1/21/2006 12:13 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Heroes 4 is still a revolution, but it's not quite the revolution that people usually expect. Usually, it's a transformation of something old. But here, we saw something different.
In general, Heroes 4 should be considered not as a continuation of Heroes 3, and not as an upgrade, but as a completely different game. Only the idea remains. Well, the music in Heroes 4 is still THE BEST.

At first, I didn't appreciate Heroes 4, but then, when I looked at it from a different angle, I decided to play it and completely went through all the campaigns.

In reply to домосед

DM_RuuD

1/21/2006 4:33 PM UTC

Auto-translated

homebody

The interface is much more convenient compared to the third game and especially the second. Maybe the graphics could be better, but in the fifth game, they are generally terrible, except for the battlefield, and I don't like the cities at all.

A brilliant post. Is this some kind of shooter you're talking about? What does the graphics have to do with it?!:mad:
There were many drawbacks, especially the stupid innovations of daily growth and the two-branch castle upgrade system. And a few well-developed heroes completely replaced the creature squads, which affected the gameplay (as did the daily growth, when players didn't leave the castle, waiting for "a couple more units":D).
The graphics are also important, but the excessive colorfulness of the

Sabir

1/21/2006 10:13 PM UTC

Auto-translated

I think that Heroes 4 was an unsuccessful experiment. As for the hero leveling system, it's cool, but the developers of Heroes 5 left the hero outside the battle perimeter, giving him the ability to cast spells. Apparently, this experiment failed abroad. The revolution in Heroes 4 lies in the transition to 3D graphics. It's especially nice to see 3D on the battlefield, but the overall map mode is terrible, and the game quickly becomes boring. The disc with Heroes 3 has been lying around for 7 years now...

In reply to DM_RuuD

домосед

1/22/2006 2:44 PM UTC

Auto-translated

DM_RuuD

There were many drawbacks, especially the silly daily growth and the two-branch castle upgrade system. And a few well-developed heroes completely replaced creature units, which affected the gameplay (as did the daily growth, when players didn't leave the castle, waiting for "a few more units":D).

I don't know, but after switching to the fourth game, I realized that the tactics had changed completely, and I had to play differently, and I can't blame them for that either. After reaching "expert game" level in the fourth game, I started losing even on easy levels in the third game, simply because the game tactics are completely different!!!!

In reply to домосед

MasterPainKiller

1/22/2006 3:03 PM UTC

Auto-translated

By the way, yes. It's a completely different tactic – a completely different game, but the universe is the same. Overall, I agree with Medvaldo – this game should be viewed as a new continent in the vast Might and Magic universe, and here the rules are completely different.

In reply to MasterPainKiller

Katrine

1/24/2006 11:59 AM UTC

Auto-translated

I liked the fourth installment from the very first screenshot. Of course, it has many flaws. But the game was released much earlier than planned. They simply didn't have time to finish it. What I liked: + Simultaneous attack + Superbly crafted combat system + No upgrades + 3D battlefield. In the fifth game, it's still 2D. + Magic divided by factions + Each faction has its own unique characteristics + Caravans + Buy all button + Number of spells + Division into mass and non-mass spells As for the opinion about the "terminator" heroes, I chopped them down like twigs. Dispel + sacrifice of a weak stack + attack with the whole group, and the hero is out of the game.

Хронология вселенной Might and Magic
Katrine
Третьи или пятые? Теперь Вы сами выбираете иконки
Диалоги с Модераторами
Сейчас играю в Diablo II LoD
:cool:

dartRevan

1/25/2006 9:32 PM UTC

Auto-translated

HOMM IV is an attempt to evolve the beloved third installment of the series, and in my opinion, it was a successful attempt, despite some minor flaws and the rushed release. I hope that the fifth installment will be well-executed, even if it takes a bit longer.

GvozD

2/10/2006 3:30 AM UTC

Auto-translated

I expected more from the graphics in Heroes of Might and Magic IV. They tried to make everything realistic, but in my opinion, it didn't quite work. Plus, the hero on the battlefield is a bit cumbersome, and the hero skill growth structure is also questionable, as is the magic system. In short, there's no doubt that there are many new features, but most of these innovations didn't appeal to me, even though I tried hard to like them.

Да будет так

In reply to GvozD

Pturs

2/16/2006 9:44 AM UTC

Auto-translated

I would only consider the development of skills as a purely positive aspect.

In reply to Katrine

Magnus

2/17/2006 1:58 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Katrine

I liked the fourth game from the very first screenshot.
Of course, it has many flaws.
But the game was released much earlier than planned. They simply didn't have time to finish it.
What I liked:
+ Simultaneous attack
+ Superbly crafted combat system
+ No upgrades
+ 3D battlefield. In the fifth game, it's still 2D
+ Division of magic by castle
+ Giving each castle its own characteristics
+ Caravans
+ Buy all button
+ Number of spells
+ Division into mass and non-mass spells
As for the opinion about the terminator heroes, I chopped them up like firewood. Dispel + sacrifice of a weak stack + attack with the whole group, and the hero is out.

I completely agree with Katrine.
I love playing as Haven. I especially liked the magic of nature. :cool: