On Nival and Heroes

Campaigner · Unread postby **Campaigner** » 25 Jun 2007, 12:33

Oh well....computergameprogrammers are expensive today....but in the east they're pretty cheap :p

I will follow the development but I will not care so much since when I get a new computer (and perhaps even a console) I will have games to keep me occupied for years. Add to the fact that I don't think my prime concerns (Might & Magic balance and A.I) will be fixed and my hopes are low.

Corribus · Unread postby **Corribus** » 25 Jun 2007, 13:48

H6 will reunite us.

Elvin · Unread postby **Elvin** » 25 Jun 2007, 16:50

Amen to that.
Edited on Mon, Jun 25 2007, 12:50 by Elvin

Omega_Destroyer · Unread postby **Omega_Destroyer** » 25 Jun 2007, 16:50

Unless they put the heroes back on the battlefield.

theLuckyDragon · Unread postby **theLuckyDragon** » 25 Jun 2007, 17:25

Corribus wrote:H6 will reunite us.

I want the Forge town in that game.

Omega_Destroyer · Unread postby **Omega_Destroyer** » 25 Jun 2007, 17:25

There goes the unification.

Corribus · Unread postby **Corribus** » 25 Jun 2007, 18:38

It was nice while it lasted. Unification would be so much easier if there were no people to unify.

theLuckyDragon · Unread postby **theLuckyDragon** » 25 Jun 2007, 18:40

Yeah, people ruin everything.

Corribus · Unread postby **Corribus** » 25 Jun 2007, 18:50

"People. They're the worst." - Jerry Seinfeld

Elvin · Unread postby **Elvin** » 25 Jun 2007, 19:50

We'll take down the forge fans first then

jeff · Unread postby **jeff** » 25 Jun 2007, 19:50

Well if unification means staying in the H3 view of the Heroes world, then long live the revolution.

winterfate · Unread postby **winterfate** » 25 Jun 2007, 21:27

Are you guys really having this discussion?

*closes eyes forcefully, then opens them again*

Yes you are.

H4 did a nice job of making sure the two separate fanbases would never be united.

I personally didn't mind the heroes being out in the battlefield and other such things like First Strike (reminds me of Master of Magic

). However, high level heroes were IMBA.

Keep your army on your weaker heroes and conquer with your superhero(es).

jeff · Unread postby **jeff** » 25 Jun 2007, 23:08

Hey I can enjoy playing with the Hero off the battlefield, but what fun is it agreeing with the H3 crowd, revolution is much more fun.

Elvin · Unread postby **Elvin** » 25 Jun 2007, 23:35

Depends what form it will take. I want to see new things but not an H4 fiasco. Some features just alienate gamers.

winterfate · Unread postby **winterfate** » 26 Jun 2007, 01:28

jeff wrote:Hey I can enjoy playing with the Hero off the battlefield, but what fun is it agreeing with the H3 crowd, revolution is much more fun.

Well...you do have a point there.

Elvin wrote:Depends what form it will take. I want to see new things but not an H4 fiasco. Some features just alienate gamers.

Indeed. I just hope they can build on all the things that made the first four games so great. In some aspects, HOMM5 was a regression.

Ceres · Unread postby **Ceres** » 26 Jun 2007, 03:02

Maybe in H6 they could make an option if the player would like to bring the hero on the battlefield or not.

winterfate · Unread postby **winterfate** » 26 Jun 2007, 03:10

Maybe...but that would be quite the mess to program...I would think.

Ceres · Unread postby **Ceres** » 26 Jun 2007, 03:37

Hmm... yeah, maybe it was a bad idea after all.

winterfate · Unread postby **winterfate** » 26 Jun 2007, 03:41

No, don't get me wrong...the idea is pretty good.

The problem is that it's just rather hard to implement.

For example, in Heroes 4, your Heroes didn't boost the attack and defense of your units unless they had the Tactics skill.

In Heroes 5, since you have the Hero off the field, then he/she adds her attack and defense to the stats of his/her units.

Now, imagine if both options were available...

Jolly Joker · Unread postby **Jolly Joker** » 26 Jun 2007, 05:38

winterfate wrote:
jeff wrote:
Indeed. I just hope they can build on all the things that made the first four games so great. In some aspects, HOMM5 was a regression.

Sorry, but I completely disagree. The fourth game is NOT great because it lacks in too many departments. The greatness of the game is shown in 3 because it hooks you EVEN THOUGH it lacks - and badly in some areas. H 2 was perfect when it came, but (or maybe even because) everyone could envision easily a version 3 with MORE (but 2 surely had no features you wouldn't want) and enhanced features without giving up any one of them.
For me, 2 stands as a foundation; 3 COULD HAVE made already a lot of things different (after all it was 3, that introduced uniformness for all races and useless hero skills, for example). So while 3 was great it could have been a lot better, yet.
Which is the problem: While 3 was great it left a lot to desire as well - and 4 didn't deliver. Instead 4 tried to invent everything new which was obviously wrong, after 3 had been such a success even though it was far from optimal.

If you disregard 3d, which is simply a sign of the times and nothing game specific, then 5 is a lot more 3 than 3 was. 5 is better than 3 in every major game design decision. The races are better designed, due to the fact that each race has a racial (something that H 3 should have already had after the introduction of Necromancy in 2), 5 has a brillant skill system - in H 2 we have 13 skills plus Necromancy, in H 5 we have 12 plus, currently, 7 racials, while they added sub-skills instead of simply throwing in more like in H 3 and so on.

4 wasn't evolution, 4 was revolution, and the game simply failed as part of the series (it may be an acceptable stand-alone game, but as part of a series it's a bastard) and it would have been folly to base 5 on 4.

The Heroes Round Table