Heroes 6: ooookay?? (rant, really)

[LongDarkBlues]

The H6 guys said they were specifically designing the game to prevent losing objects on the environment, so they are aware of that, at least.

Yeah, and they're doing it by making all the resources/artefacts glowy and sticking player symbols over all the mines, real sophisticated.

As far as I can tell, your complaint - and that of others - boils down to the fact that they weren't asked to be the lead designer on this game. I'm sorry, I wasn't either. If I was, I'd have really made sure that Age of Wonders II-ish world map altering spells were included, and left more room for Magic The Gathering-style spell combos. However, somebody else was, and I assume they aren't RTS-worshiping agents who have a single-minded goal of destroying the Heroes gameplay out of sheer spite and greed.

[Pitsu]

No, it does boil down to the fact that H6 developers do not know well what the map has to offer to player in a strategy game and in a RPG game. Sure, they have learned from the failures of H5, which shows their capability to learn from their faults, but unless they start analysing things more deeply it will take several incarnations more until we get a Heroes game, which strategic gameplay is comparable to H1-3.

Lets look at the same H5 screenshot you posted again. It is not that there is the same amount of objects on screen, it is whether there is the same amount of information on screen. By looking at it, could you please specify, who are the 4 enemy stacks and which artifacts are there for pickup? Maybe it is me, but compared to H3 one needs a lot of extra work (zoom in or right-cliking) to get the same amount of information. And by using glowing highlights and floating circles they IMO damage the atmosphere of the game.

[MattII]

As far as I can tell, your complaint - and that of others - boils down to the fact that they weren't asked to be the lead designer on this game. I'm sorry, I wasn't either. If I was, I'd have really made sure that Age of Wonders II-ish world map altering spells were included, and left more room for Magic The Gathering-style spell combos. However, somebody else was, and I assume they aren't RTS-worshiping agents who have a single-minded goal of destroying the Heroes gameplay out of sheer spite and greed.

Well my complaint about the graphics is that they're putting the graphics ahead of the playability of the game (they have to give everything an aura just so that it doesn't get lost), my complaint about the resources is that they're hamstringing themselves with the simplification because they won't be able to do as much later as they could have done with 7 resources. As for the rest of it, lets look at a line from a rough translation of the latest interview of Ervan. Notice the line:
"In Heroes 6 we focus more on role playing element, to be closer to present RPG’s"
You're saying they're not aiming at a more RPGish game?

[LongDarkBlues]

Lets look at the same H5 screenshot you posted again. It is not that there is the same amount of objects on screen, it is whether there is the same amount of information on screen. By looking at it, could you please specify, who are the 4 enemy stacks and which artifacts are there for pickup? Maybe it is me, but compared to H3 one needs a lot of extra work (zoom in or right-cliking) to get the same amount of information. And by using glowing highlights and floating circles they IMO damage the atmosphere of the game.

I don't know - I only know the H3 artifacts from having played the game for a decade. I didn't play H5 as much, but I got to where I knew them. Moreover, H5 runs at a higher resolution, I only shrunk it down like that to match H3's size - when it's larger, it's much clearer. I think H5 WAS hard to read, but hardly a flaw worth raking the game over the coals about (the atrocious system-locking draw distance and the general slow pace of gameplay being much more valid targets).

Notice the line:
"In Heroes 6 we focus more on role playing element, to be closer to present RPG’s"
You're saying they're not aiming at a more RPGish game?

As I've already said in this thread - do you really think that's not just going to be a more versatile, customizable skill tree for your Heroes when the level up, and some boss battles in the single player campaign? What's wrong with either of those? Heroes games of old had boss battles in the form of a stack of 10 Crystal Dragons, this is simply a more unique variation on that. And I would love to not ever get stuck with a choice between 2 skills I don't care about - never having Eagle Eye forced on me again sounds like a huge improvement, no matter how it's implemented.

Ultimately, there's simply no benefit to making a niche genre game into something other than what it is known for. If incorporating elements from other genres bolsters the gameplay here, I think that's great.

[ThunderTitan]

I don't care about - never having Eagle Eye forced on me again sounds like a huge improvement, no matter how it's implemented.

See, me, i'd prefer if they just didn't include such useless skills as EE.

there's no way to make splitting up your army be better then having it all in one place.

Well, that's not much of a strategy game, now is it?

Constraining strategy to only troop deployment is everything that's wrong with strategy games nowadays... (well ok, no, games work like that too, but we need more games that include the other aspects).

[LocutusBorg]

As I've already said in this thread - do you really think that's not just going to be a more versatile, customizable skill tree for your Heroes when the level up, and some boss battles in the single player campaign? What's wrong with either of those? Heroes games of old had boss battles in the form of a stack of 10 Crystal Dragons, this is simply a more unique variation on that. And I would love to not ever get stuck with a choice between 2 skills I don't care about - never having Eagle Eye forced on me again sounds like a huge improvement, no matter how it's implemented.

Ultimately, there's simply no benefit to making a niche genre game into something other than what it is known for. If incorporating elements from other genres bolsters the gameplay here, I think that's great.

And I hope H7 won't be hack'n'slash... Where you forgot totally about units, but will have a hero (on a horse, elephant, lizard or camel. Oh, you can have spider as well) with skill tree and fight will look like.. hm, WoW.

I've been waiting for H6 sooo long. Had hope that they finally listen ppl cry about original MM roots. But nope - Ubi made something that petrificated me: they abandoned that world for good. And world they give us here? Imitating on middle-age Europe??? C'mon! What, they suffer on lack of their own fantasy?

Graphic: well, I can only tell what I saw on screens - on the first sight I thought i am looking for H5. Then I realized those screens have some differences, but still, it is very similar to H5. I do not know if engine is the same or not, and I do not care in this case, becouse what I see is damn similar to H5!
It is like with Colonization (I mean remake, not an original one). I was so happy when I heard about making it, but when I finally saw it (especially after I finally installed it...), I was a little disappointed. I saw an exactly copy of Civ4 with new units. Damn, they could make a mod for C4, pack it and sell for half a price of that "new" game. Heh, economy kills all nowadays, game included

Will I buy it? Yes, but not with premiere. And only if it won't have DRM or other similar stupid anti-pirate protection.

Will I like it? Dunno yet - I can tell it after I play it. Maybe. But probably I will like it as a game, but not as HoMM.

[intipacha]

it could well be that they changed the name of the game, so that we can't complain how they ruined "Heroes of Might and Magic".

[LongDarkBlues]

A good article about the state of entitled game 'fans'

http://kotaku.com/5749466/are-angry-fan ... e=true&s=i

[ThunderTitan]

A good article about the state of entitled game 'fans'

http://kotaku.com/5749466/are-angry-fan ... e=true&s=i

Ahem: "Manager at Call of Duty: Black Ops developers Treyarch"

Yeah, that's who should be talking about innovation...


But really, if devs really just want to be innovative there's no reason why they can't just create new IP's (which is what "Ico, or Katamari Damacy, or Deus Ex, or BioShock*" where btw) instead of totally remaking old ones just so that they have the safety net of a brand name...


* really, BioShock was a cool game with a good story, but innovative... it's a spiritual sequel to SystemShock and Undying had magic and shooting together way back in the day...

[Kranyum]

Totally agree with ThunderTitan.


Some fans will always be unsatisfied but when you try to shove some shit and wrap it as a sequel of a beloved game, people will call bullshit more often than not. Playerbase might be overcritical but for a good game the majority will simply put up the cash, buy it and play it for a long time, even with the occasional rants. For a crap game, however, I feel that people will even stop ranting after a while, because they realize how hopeless it is.

imo, player ranting is a sign that they like the game and recognize its potential instead of hating it, but would change stuff to make it perfect. Its the silence that engulfs mediocrity, because that's when everyone stops caring and moves on. Look at Heroes 5: we all ranted back when it came out, do you hear anyone saying anything about it now?

[MattII]

A good article about the state of entitled game 'fans'

http://kotaku.com/5749466/are-angry-fan ... e=true&s=i

Well to quote John Cleese as Pope in 'Michelangelo and the Pope', "I may not know much about art, but I know what I like."

Also, while this article is about RTS games rather than TBS one, the same arguments still apply.

[klaymen]

Ahem: "Manager at Call of Duty: Black Ops developers Treyarch"

Yeah, that's who should be talking about innovation...

Pwned.

Totally agree with ThunderTitan.


Some fans will always be unsatisfied but when you try to shove some **** and wrap it as a sequel of a beloved game, people will call bullshit more often than not. Playerbase might be overcritical but for a good game the majority will simply put up the cash, buy it and play it for a long time, even with the occasional rants.

Many fans will buy even s**t in a box, just because it has a shiny logo of their beloved game. They are mostly those who will fight against people even mildly suggesting that game A is not perfect.
Case in point: Steam forums. Go there and say that you don't like something about Valve games (or about Steam, for that matter). At best, a few people will response in a civilised matter that they don't agree with you. At worst, Valve lapdog....er I mean forum moderator in his holy zeal and filled with righteous anger will ban you for trolling.

[Tress]

Many fans will buy even s**t in a box, just because it has a shiny logo of their beloved game. They are mostly those who will fight against people even mildly suggesting that game A is not perfec

Well, if I remember correctly there is more than one killed brand by such policy. To start with mmx/4 as prime example. That nearly killed brand and actually killed in form we know it.
Second is thing(more important in this case) people are making preemtive trash talking towards homm6 without even seeing game. Have you seen game, have I seen it to judge? Hell no.
There is enough changes to make it a lot apart from predecessors to not talk about stagnation and rehashing old parts(wonder how people tolarated homm2/3 with such logic thou) already, some of which are quite controversial, but we can judge on those aspects only when we see them implemented.

[ThunderTitan]

I'm pretty sure 3DO going under had more to do with the new setting then anything H4 did...

Also, while this article is about RTS games rather than TBS one, the same arguments still apply.

Thing is that most of that stuff that got taken out was rather static build order inducing, and really needed to be made less so in some way...

Not to say that taking it out to not have to deal with it is not lazy as fakk...

[MattII]

Thing is that most of that stuff that got taken out was rather static build order inducing, and really needed to be made less so in some way...

I fail to see how the changes help that, given that we now have less choice as to what to build (only two special buildings of four, no Mage Guild, and who knows what else).

[Kranyum]

It really saddens me to see how generic some of the new units look like.

Haven and Necropolis look pretty good in perspective but Stronghold and Inferno are just soooo dull.

I mean Inferno they all look like big red flesh things (except maybe for the succubus, dog and to a lesser degree the pitlord).
I know I shouldnt be longing for units from H3-H5 but why the hell add generic red-meat creatures when models like Efreeti, Devils, Venom Spawns and even imps existed. We get it, Inferno is all about being red and mean, but cmon... some variety please.

Same for Stronghold: they are set into showing us that all they are is big bad orcs, nothing more nothing less. Thunderbirds were cool, same for Mighty Gorgons, Wyverns, Basilisks, Serpent Flies. Why make all units look like some big angry dude???

Are we gonna relive H5 Fortress all over again?

[ThunderTitan]

Why make all units look like some big angry dude???

Because Steroid Inc. is one of their main sponsors...

Thing is that most of that stuff that got taken out was rather static build order inducing, and really needed to be made less so in some way...

I fail to see how the changes help that, given that we now have less choice as to what to build (only two special buildings of four, no Mage Guild, and who knows what else).

1st: i was kinda talking about the RTS's actually.

2nd: notice how i called it lazy... they can make the choices have more influence easier if it's only between 2 things...

[MattII]

1st: i was kinda talking about the RTS's actually.

So, the same thing is happening with TBS's.

[ThunderTitan]

No, they're not removing gameplay aspects whole sale so they don't have to bother with cookie cutter builds (although DoW replaced the gathering instead of just taking it out), they're simply reducing the number of things used in those aspects... enabling easier dissemination of a lower number of cookie cutter builds...

[OliverFA]

They have, however dumped several long-standing elements in favour of some new RP elements (cutting 3 rare resources, only 4 speciality buildings per faction, and only two per town, creatures no longer affect movements speed at all, etc.)

But did they do it to make the game worse, or because a group of game design professionals thought it would make the gameplay better? If it turns out they were wrong and it totally sucks, I'll be the first to say so, but until we see how it plays out, I see no reason to assume they are trying to make a terrible game.

I just say that in light of those game design choices I'm waiting until the demo comes out to decide if I buy the game or not. I won't say that it's totally crap, but I do say that all those revolutionary decissions make me worried.

The OP is right about one thing. A successful game franchise has to be evolutionary, not revolutionary. Heroes 5 has plenty of aspects that could be improved/expanded/fixed. I am not saying H5 is bad. I'm just saying that there is plenty of room for improvement in H5. And that should be the logical path IMHO. But instead of that we get many things upside down and old mechanics out to be replaced by new ones. That's why I am posponing my decission to buy the game and won't buy blindly. Specialy after almost having preordered Civilization V and being glad that I decided at the last moment not to do it.