Final Consensus: Was Heroes V a step in the right direction?

[OliverFA]

The question is "Was it a step in the right direction?". And the answer is "yes".

If I elaborate a bit more my answer, I would say "It was a poor step in the right direction". But still in the right direction.

However, I have not played the game for long time now, but I have came back to Heroes III several times. This won't be a game I will remember in the years to come. But it was the game that saved the franchise, so I suppose we should be grateful for it.

So as you see, mixed feelings.

[frozd]

I've had the gold edition lying around for 2 years now, finally decided to play it through.

The good:

Fun game play (most important)
Skill system
Fancy 3d stuff (legs, boobs and beards)
Random spell casting animations while talking with closed mouths
Hero somewhat in combat
Online dueling is great


The bad:

So much Hollywood cheese and cliches in this game, that made my blood boil, started skipping cut sceens really fast
That whole initiative & speed non sense
The camera, missed so much stuff early on (highlight objects anyone?)
Dumbing down artifacts and hero inventory
Turns take too long even when you speed everything up to max


Conclusion:
Was a fun experience, but I won't play custom maps or the campaigns again. I'm a homm 4 fan and think that was the best one of the series, followed closely by homm 3 and 2. I'll try homm 6 though. ;D

[Muszka]

I presume we couldn't expect a better game from ubisoft than what we've got. If you look at their other titles, all are money oriented. Made to attract people with their shine, but never intended for a long relation. Too bad the veterans are the one to suffer, if for the editor, if for the game. Simply no one can expect a company to put it's soul in a game if it has none. NWC could do it, it's like something you do for yourself, with care.
But I think the game wasn't a step back, and neither was it forward... it was a soulless reincarnation of HoMM III driven by greed.

[Variol]

Overall, I would say yes. It's hard to play the older versions now, because of some of the new features. It is a pity they made the game such a "hog" though. My new PC runs it pretty well, for the most part. I can play the XL maps without too much AI wait time.

[ThunderTitan]

Overall, I would say yes. It's hard to play the older versions now, because of some of the new features.

H4 had a way better UI... only thing H5 had was the skill system...

[Variol]

Overall, I would say yes. It's hard to play the older versions now, because of some of the new features.

H4 had a way better UI... only thing H5 had was the skill system...

I think a big + is the threat level indicator for me. It saves a lot of reloading.

I just played a little bit of H4 this week. The problem is that, everything on the world map is blurred together. All the individual items on the map look nice, but there seems to be not even contrast between them.

I also noticed that items are really hidden behind some terrain features. I kept trying to move the screen to see them better.

[Mirez]

The thread level made the game more noobified in my opinion. Back in the days I knew exactly what my army could beat and what not without it. Now I'm completely dependent.

[Muszka]

You don't have to pay attention to the threat level... I don't... you can beat enemies considered by the AI to be superior to your army, and at times you can do it with ease... that's why this is a strategy game. To outmaneuver the odds.

[Variol]

The thread level made the game more noobified in my opinion. Back in the days I knew exactly what my army could beat and what not without it. Now I'm completely dependent.

junky!

[Mirez]

You don't have to pay attention to the threat level... I don't... you can beat enemies considered by the AI to be superior to your army, and at times you can do it with ease... that's why this is a strategy game. To outmaneuver the odds.

Sure you don't have to, but is a lot easier avoiding neutrals until they are considered a moderate thread (which means no losses). Like already mentioned it saves a lot of reloading which you would have to do if you had to estimate it yourself/take risks.

[Variol]

You don't have to pay attention to the threat level... I don't... you can beat enemies considered by the AI to be superior to your army, and at times you can do it with ease... that's why this is a strategy game. To outmaneuver the odds.

Yes, of course, anyone can do that. But the meter gives some idea of what one will be in for.

[Orfinn]

Alternate upgrades did it for me, so yes.

[Mirez]

I like the idea of alternate upgrades, however it's poorly executed. 1 of the 2 always being the better choice.

[ThunderTitan]

Wasn't this forum supposed to be the anti-H5 one, in opposition to the OtherForum?!

[Mlai]

I've truly enjoyed this game and its 2 expansions, and I do know what bad games are like. Therefore this game was "a step in the right direction."

Regarding the initiative vs speed... This is not a game design problem, but merely a game balancing problem.

Simply give the "slow" creatures a higher initiative but even lower foot speed, and your entire complaint regarding them being statues vs tanks, is solved.

[Pol]

Wasn't this forum supposed to be the anti-H5 one, in opposition to the OtherForum?!

No, we're just supposed to create more profound atmosphere. As it can be derived from "Round Table & For Enthusiasts"

[ThunderTitan]

No, we're just supposed to create more profound atmosphere. As it can be derived from "Round Table & For Enthusiasts"

That's not what i was hearing on the HC a while back after H5 was released...

[xztowel]

HOMM 5 was great step in a good direction. Most people have complained about the 3d aspect or its "too complicated". I happen to like these additions the most as it brings the HOMM into the modern ages of computer games without breaking what i loved about it as a younger lad.