Another Review of Heroes of Might and Magic 5

[Derek]

<a href="/http://www.gamecritics.com/review/hommv/main.php">Game Critics</a> offers a review of Heroes of Might and Magic 5. Daniel gives it a 7.5 overall, though it is worth mentioning that on their scale a 5 is average. The review is interesting in that it begs the question, "Has the series really changed that much and, if not, should it now?"

If you would like to take a look at the original page visit this link:
https://www.celestialheavens.com/1164035581

[The Mad Dragon]

Myself, I am finding that I am getting VERY addicted to this game, now that I have sat down and played a good 4-5 hours of it in a row. I honestly have no complaints about this game, and it's not because I'm a Nival fan, it's because I've always enjoyed the HOMM series.

[nevermindspy]

I find that review completely empty of meaning and also pretty much false ? hmmz is homm5 the same as homm4? they are quite diffrent in many ways, is homm5 like homm3 yes.. but the writer obviously understands so little of the game to see that.. He's speaking like someone who played each one of the homm games for few hours not much of a good review..
Edited on Mon, Nov 20 2006, 09:03 by nevermindspy

[DaemianLucifer]

This is a review?

[-Olorin-]

Pretty good review IMO, and I agree with him that the HoMM series hasn't changed much over the years, It's all about collect resources, build and fight, all the new skills, troop specialties and etc are just details, the core of the gameplay is still the same. But I like that it hasn't changed. But, I guess, you know, one mans tea is another mans whiskey...

[Qurqirish Dragon]

This reviewer is an idiot. I generally don't like saying things like this, but he is.

Saying that most sequels continue a storyline and improve things, but HoMM is the same game repeated is just plain nonsense. Using that logic, there are (maybe) 3 FPS games out there - Ultima Underworld, Wolfenstein 3D, and maybe one from a console (Goldeneye on the N64?)
Similarly, there are at most 3 RPGs (turn based, real time, tactical), 4 racing games (land, sea, air, and space), and so on.
Yes, I am exaggerating a bit here, but I hope my point is clear.

I will grant that most of the heroes games are very similar to the previous ones, but how can he say that Halo 2 isn't the same off of Halo? Or any sequal, from a predecessor. There are few series where there are drastic changes between incarnations, in any genre. That's why a sequal is made, and not a new title.

[atma6]

I agree with QD, right now the new Zelda game is getting bashed for not being different enough too.

[Campaigner]

Another idiot reviewing a game....uh...

He complains that the series hasn't changed enough from part I to V....Well, how much is "changed enough"?? It's like Mr.Dolt doesn't know that you buy a sequel because you like the previous game(s) and want more of the same with updated graphics, sound, improved features, etc....

Like most of these remakes, the most significant change is in the graphics

Sure, if you played like 5min or don't understand the game....

And this quote is just laughable:

Is HOMMV a good game? Absolutely. Is it essentially the exact same game as HOMMIV was? Oh yes.

The bolded part convinces me that this guy is not competent for his job. Not counting the changes from Heroes IV to V as big is really incredible to say the least....buut he noticed the graphics!


The only good thing in his review is where he requests more focused missions like where you have to win in a month, win without reinforcements and the like. (Though some noobs on the official forum called those lvls a rushfest....)

In essence: Whatever they're paying you Daniel, it's too much....


Just watched his review of Warhammer 40.000 Dawn of War and guess what? The same generalisation that he has played the same thing 10 years ago in the format of Dune 2....

Man this guy is just too much....

[The Mad Dragon]

I to, agree with QD. While the basis may stay the same, the tactics have changed from game to game to game. If you haven't followed the game, then you really shouldn't be giving a review.

[Veldrynus]

Worst... review... ever

[Derek]

I'll make a longer post later(I'm currently at university), but it is worth considering, if even for a moment, that Daniel is not an idiot.

He is noting that HALO 2 is a new version of HALO. Although he may word it oddly, one can see that his point is made nonetheless(those that have played it will know what I mean).

[theLuckyDragon]

Is it essentially the exact same game as HOMMIV was? Oh yes.

Hmm. Well, at least he is consistent with the description of the game he gave in the 3rd paragraph.

turn-based strategy game in which the player controls one or more "Heroes" in a generic fantasy kingdom.

I-II-III-IV-V check

In campaign mode the player is given a task they have to accomplish (generally 'kill all opponents'), and they're set free to wander the countryside, gathering resources and slaughtering random creatures so they can go back to their home base and build an army large enough to complete the objectives.

Not so generally, I'd say.

All the while enemy 'heroes' are doing the exact same thing on the other side of the map, forcing the player to work quickly if they want to come out on top.

Isn't the AI actually doing that? (within scripting limits, of course)

The combat is similarly turn-based, with each player setting up his various forces on either side of a battlefield, then moving them into combat like chess pieces until one side has been wiped out.

Again, I-II-III-IV-V check.

Aren't these pretty much the basic principles of gameplay in Heroes?

Of course, there's not a mention in sight of the things that did change. So he is rather right... according to his own definition.

[Sir Charles]

Hmmm....surprisingly enough, I actually agree with him on many points. It's definitely not the worst review ever. Not by a long shot. He's simply trying to look at it from a different aspect. Heroes IS a slow game. It always has been. And while there are always differences between game sequels....H5 IS indeed basically the same as it's predecessors...when you look at it from his vantage point of looking at sequels in general. While I don't want to see a "hammer" taken to the series...fresh ideas and variations on gameplay wouldn't be amiss either.

[Metathron]

Some of his skewed comments aside, I do think the final grade of 7.5 is spot on for this game.

[Gaidal Cain]

Well, if one limits one's definition of heroes to the bare minimum (like what NWC did before starting on H4), of course nothing has changed, so that far he's right. However, one could then proceed to argue that MM8 and Baldur's Gate 1 are exactly the same- gather a party, go out to svae the world while gathering artifacts. Stating that H4 and H5 are essentially the same is IMO something one can only do if one hasn't played the games very extensively. There are series who's seen far fewer changes over the years.

[ThunderTitan]

Wait, what?! All HoMM games are TBS both on and off the BF?! LIES! Yup, nowadays all sequels are a different genre to their predecesor.

And where are all those ppl that said the H4 was sooooo different it wasn't a HoMM game anymore?

Seriously, it sounds like he's complaining they didn't turn it into a RTS.

[Shauku]

I was really thinking that his review wasn't that bad...until he blew it up by saying its exact same game as Heroes 4. I seriously doubt he has ever played 4... I just can't respect a reviewer who I feel like hasn't really even played the previous versions, but quotes them just to get more credibility

[HodgePodge]

Excuse me … allow me to VOMIT! This "reviewer" clearly has never played Heroes I, II, III or IV! To compare Heroes V with Heroes IV or any of its great predessors shows his complete ignorance.

My advice, Mr. Daniel Weissenberger, is to blow it out your …… umm … I mean go play the previous Heroes games before you go making a complete fool of yourself by posting an article that is so obviously an attempt to pretend you've played all of the former Heroes games in the series. So quit trying to be cool 'cause you're NOT!!

[DaemianLucifer]

Maybe it was a typo.You know how close 3 and 4 are,and how easy it is to confuse them on screen because they are so similar?I even had to recheck thrice to be sure I wrote both numbers up there and not just one of them twice

My advice, Mr. Daniel Weissenberger, is to blow it out your …… umm … I mean go play the previous Heroes games before you go making a complete fool of yourself by posting an article that is so obviously an attempt to pretend you've played all of the former Heroes games in the series.

You shouldve told him that before he wrote that thing

Besides,the review depicts one of the(old and incorrect)views of TBS games.And like someone else said:"Although the game is completelly turn based,its not boring"

[1979]

lol! Sequels that are similar to their predecessors?! Surely not! How could anyone dare! I demand a refund!!



What kind of reviewer is this guy anyway? A stupid one, clearly.