Another Review of Heroes of Might and Magic 5

[HodgePodge]

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

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"

Okay not TOO boring, but still not Heroes I or II or III or IV.

[finkellll]

So i highly doubt that he's played a lot of the game



1) Hes say's its a very slow game, yet IMO its faster than 3 or 4.

2) the comparison to 4, no way its a typo bcuz he used roman numerals

3) He says that sequels bring back some characters, yet HOMM isn't 1 of those kind of "sequels" i wonder if this kid has ever played any of the final fantasy games....

4) they took a hint from warcraft to add "win in a month" type conditions? last i checked HOMM3 came out earlier....



conclusion: we find out where he lives and smash his mailbox

[shinybeast]

Okay. Daniel's writing is immaculate. His ideas are another matter; but let's try to be adult and not call names. If you like the style of a particu;ar game (RTS, TBS, Kickboxing Action, etc.) that's what you're going to get with each new iteratation, and so it should be. You want a different game? Go get a different game. If any of you remember, there was one fellow on this CH site who gave an incredibly detailed list up of ways to make HV more intricate, most of which I would have been happy to see implemented.



The end result is still stunning, to my mind, and I'm just grateful that someone upgraded the game that I have loved for so long. On the one hand, perhaps fans feel that, if they don't piss and moan, the developers will not be prodded into innnovation. On the other hand, I fear that their petulent ways will help to kill off any further iterations.





In the the Tremendum



Shinybeast

[DaemianLucifer]

1) Hes say's its a very slow game, yet IMO its faster than 3 or 4.

Not from what I saw.

2) the comparison to 4, no way its a typo bcuz he used roman numerals

Damn this guy!I cannot even defend him properly

3) He says that sequels bring back some characters, yet HOMM isn't 1 of those kind of "sequels" i wonder if this kid has ever played any of the final fantasy games....

Well there were mentions of crag and sandro and erathia

[Cleanpea]

I don't think he is comlaining, it is just his way of writing. He is writing a short simplistic review which is, pretty accurate(accurate enough for newbies). He never says anything bad, but states the point, that you can't expect anything fundamentally new from any sequel.





Probably something he has been thinking of alot lately... He doesn't use a lot of praising, but uses comparisons instead. Is that a reason for burning his ass?





So if someone don't talk the way you want, you just hate the person? It was a good SHORT review!

[DaemianLucifer]

Probably something he has been thinking of alot lately... He doesn't use a lot of praising, but uses comparisons instead. Is that a reason for burning his ass?

No,but saying that HV is just the same as HIV is.The only thing that those two have in common is their name.

[Cleanpea]

much difference, yes in the mechanics and gameplay. But it is still heroes on the adventure map, turn based, resources, two sides on the battlefield, chess like pieces, and stuff. Compared to other heroes for fans-total innovation and new look





New players don't really care about the previous games, so the reviewer doesn't write about it

[DaemianLucifer]

much difference, yes in the mechanics and gameplay. But it is still heroes on the adventure map, turn based, resources, two sides on the battlefield, chess like pieces, and stuff. Compared to other heroes for fans-total innovation and new look





New players don't really care about the previous games, so the reviewer doesn't write about it

Ok,using that logic heroes is just the same as quake.They both have graphics,sound,enemies,weapons,walls,monsters,objectives,SP and MP mode.

[finkellll]

if there were references to craig and sandro etc than i missed it, so ill give u that 1

[DaemianLucifer]

Be gratefull that you missed those,because those references are weak.

[Cleanpea]

No, DL, quake is not turn based:/ That's the lamest excuse for a post I've ever seen!

[DaemianLucifer]

No, DL, quake is not turn based:/ That's the lamest excuse for a post I've ever seen!

You dont say?Its not turn based? I was just making a point that using that logic you can connect any two games.You wouldnt call civ equal as heroes,now would you?Why not,they are both turn based,have cities,units,experience,heroes,factions with different specials,so how come they arent the same?

[Cleanpea]

And I was defending one of the reviewer's opinions. He said, compared to previous games, it's much the same. I said, yes, that is true. And then, you suddenly said, that within all logical boundaries, quake was also similarly enough, and should be considered a heroes game? And then civ?
Edited on Thu, Nov 23 2006, 02:19 by Cleanpea

[DaemianLucifer]

Because,as far as sequels go,there arent two games as far apart as HIV and HV(or any other heroes for that matter).Saying that those two are the same is exactly like saying heroes is the same as quake,or civ,or any other game.

[The Mad Dragon]

And I was defending one of the reviewer's opinions. He said, compared to previous games, it's much the same. I said, yes, that is true. And then, you suddenly said, that within all logical boundaries, quake was also similarly enough, and should be considered a heroes game? And then civ?
Edited on Thu, Nov 23 2006, 02:19 by Cleanpea

It's the same in terms of the general basis(capturing castles, recourses, army building, etc). The strategics, however, are different, as well as the storyline.

[Cleanpea]

Which was what I said.

[DaemianLucifer]

And that doesnt make them same at all.Genrally speaking,civ and heroes are lot alike.Generally speaking,heroes and quake are a lot alike.Generally speaking,any two games are a lot alike.

[The Mad Dragon]

Which was what I said.

So then all the command and conquers are the same then eh?

[Demiurg]

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 should really not enter this discussion, as I haven't played HOMM I-IV and only 2 campaigns of HOMM V, but I just want to defend the reviewer on this point. He doesn't say that IV and V is the "exact same game" - he says that they are essentially the same, that the series is fundamentally unchanged.

And earlier in the review he gives a brief description "that could easily be applied to any one of the games", i.e. he states what he sees as the fundamental essence of the series.

As much as I love the Quake-series - to continue with that comparison - I wouldn't be upset if a reviewer said that Quake IV is essentially the same game as Quake 2, because they are. At the same time I think that Quake 2 is superior, but that is another story.

[DaemianLucifer]

Believe me,HIV is a completelly different game.Imagine comparing quake with thief.Thats how far it is from the rest of the series.