Heroes III VS Heroes IV

[Pol]

the AI IS one of the most important aspects of a computer game, when viewed as a whole)

That's a very unique opinion. Do you know of anyone who shares it?.

If you asked... I believe in that too.

(Or I should say that's true, because believing is only sort of phrase in this case for me....)

Sound like that: "The AI is the extremly important thing behind, you may didn't notice it at the first glance but finally that's what makes the game."

[Metathron]

Heroes 2. Well, it was where I started playing the series. However I'm not impressed by it anymore in the least. Simple skill system, simple tactics, and I don't even like the graphics anymore as the so many people seem to. Still, it's ok game, just surpassed by H3 and H4 (which almost everyone would agree ARE better games if people just started being realistic instead of nostalgic).

If you really want to be realistic then you ought to take each Heroes game and not just pit it against one another, but consider when each of them was published (H1 - 1995, H2 - 1996, H3 - 1999, H4 - 2002) and also keep in mind that each next hero game is based off of the previous one. Thus, H2 is the best game overall, at least for me.

[Corribus]

And, please, don't make an irony that you didn't read this in manual, because it's just my opinion - just like yours is yours.

Oh - I was under the impression that you felt that your opinion was right, and that I just wasn't thinking before I posted. I wonder what gave me that idea?

[Corribus]

the AI IS one of the most important aspects of a computer game, when viewed as a whole)

That's a very unique opinion. Do you know of anyone who shares it? It surely isn't the mainstream market (where the genre and the graphics seem to be the most important aspects).

ONE of the most important aspects.

In fact, there is only _one_ genre that I can think of that absolutelly require a decent AI, and that's chess, bridge and similar games. All others seem to have a good AI as an optional extra.

Then I wonder why all these programmers are hired to write AIs for computer games? If it's so unimportant, why even make one at all? You don't think a good AI is necessary in a first person shooter? That's strange - because every review at gamespot I read about first-person shooters always evaluates the AI. Not much point in playing a shooter by yourself if the AI isn't very good.... unless you just like listening to the music. And obviously a good AI is mandatory in any strategy game because unless you're playing the game versus other humans, you're playing it against the computer.

Besides, I find it a bit useless to argue AI in case of Heroes games, because the AI sucks in all of them. I find the distinction of "H3 AI is slightly less awful than H4 AI" insignificant when compared to e.g. ballance (H3 rules) or game depth (H4 rules).

I don't find the H3 AI "slightlyless awful" than the H4 AI. I don't even consider the two to be anywhere close. The H4 was simply broken and didn't work at all. The H3 AI, while open to exploitation, was at least functional. They aren't even comparable.

[Humakt]

If you really want to be realistic then you ought to take each Heroes game and not just pit it against one another, but consider when each of them was published (H1 - 1995, H2 - 1996, H3 - 1999, H4 - 2002) and also keep in mind that each next hero game is based off of the previous one. Thus, H2 is the best game overall, at least for me.

Sure, if I'd take into the account what you said and be extremely nostalgic then Doom is the best FPS overall since it came 1994 and I was very addicted to it then. Which it is definitely not, and so neither is HoMM 2 better than 3 or 4 (or possibly 5).

Actually, HoMM2's relation to HoMM3 is pretty much the same as Civ2's relation to Civ3. If the games were different enough of each other like Civ3 is from Civ4 and HoMM 3 is from HoMM4 then they might be little harder to rank. But in Civ2's and HoMM2's cases they both are surpassed by their sequels which are just plain better and improved.

But world looks different through pink (nostalgic) glasses.

[Corribus]

If you really want to be realistic then you ought to take each Heroes game and not just pit it against one another, but consider when each of them was published (H1 - 1995, H2 - 1996, H3 - 1999, H4 - 2002) and also keep in mind that each next hero game is based off of the previous one. Thus, H2 is the best game overall, at least for me.

Sure, if I'd take into the account what you said and be extremely nostalgic then Doom is the best FPS overall since it came 1994 and I was very addicted to it then. Which it is definitely not, and so neither is HoMM 2 better than 3 or 4 (or possibly 5).

Metathron makes a good point. It's basically equivalent to the statistical principle of normalization. What he's saying is that it's unfair to compare, for instance, H2 to H4 at face value. You have to normalize your perception of the game for natural advances in technology. In statistics, of course, normalization is easy to do; however in opinions, which are qualitative evaluations, it is not so easy.

[Humakt]

I don't find the H3 AI "slightlyless awful" than the H4 AI. I don't even consider the two to be anywhere close. The H4 was simply broken and didn't work at all. The H3 AI, while open to exploitation, was at least functional. They aren't even comparable.

Funny, because it certainly works in my computer. Actually HoMM4's battle AI IS better than one in H3. Also, AI in HoMM4 IS NOT sitting duck even though it certainly wastes a lot of its moves when visiting objects, possibly bug. Maybe you should try updating your HoMM 4 from version 1.0 to Equiblris and try some decent player made maps instead of crappy official ones.

You have to normalize your perception of the game for natural advances in technology.

Design, playability and interface aren't things really restricted by technology. Which is why some games like Fantasy General, Betrayal at Krondor and King of Dragon Pass are still great atleast to me. But that's an opinion.

[Corribus]

Funny, because it certainly works in my computer. Actually HoMM4's battle AI IS better than one in H3. Also, AI in HoMM4 IS NOT sitting duck even though it certainly wastes a lot of its moves when visiting objects, possibly bug. Maybe you should try updating your HoMM 4 from version 1.0 to Equiblris and try some decent player made maps instead of crappy official ones.

1. I should be more specific: by AI I am referring to the adventure AI. The H4 combat AI I agree is decent. I'm not sure I'd go so far as to claim it's better than the H3 battle AI, because it does do a lot of really stupid things (although so does the H3 battle AI). But it does at least stay competitive. A lot of the problems with H4 battles are due to flaws in the design, particularly the strength of Heroes, rather than deficiencies in the AI. Still, the adventure AI is so bad that it overwhelms any positive contribution of the battle AI.

2. I don't really consider Equilibris as relevant to the discussion, as it's not officially part of H4. Neither is WoG officially part of H3. Besides which, does Equilibris modify the H4 AI at all, anyway?

3. Aside from the H4 campaigns, I did not play any of the "crappy official ones". I have played many of the "great" custom-made H4 maps and I have to say that I liked very few of them because of the problems with the AI.

[Metathron]

Sure, if I'd take into the account what you said and be extremely nostalgic then Doom is the best FPS overall since it came 1994 and I was very addicted to it then. Which it is definitely not, and so neither is HoMM 2 better than 3 or 4 (or possibly 5).

Actually, HoMM2's relation to HoMM3 is pretty much the same as Civ2's relation to Civ3. If the games were different enough of each other like Civ3 is from Civ4 and HoMM 3 is from HoMM4 then they might be little harder to rank. But in Civ2's and HoMM2's cases they both are surpassed by their sequels which are just plain better and improved.

But world looks different through pink (nostalgic) glasses.

Then perhaps it's time you shed these glasses that you constantly keep referring to and stop trying to put said glasses on those you are having diametric views with.

Like I said, in my opinion Heroes 2 is the best heroes game, even though I hardly ever play it anymore, having "replaced" it in favour of H4. That doesn't mean I consider H4 better, just different.

But I think it would be prudent if we put this one into the agree-to-disagree basket.

[Nucleon]

If you really want to be realistic then you ought to take each Heroes game and not just pit it against one another, but consider when each of them was published (H1 - 1995, H2 - 1996, H3 - 1999, H4 - 2002) and also keep in mind that each next hero game is based off of the previous one. Thus, H2 is the best game overall, at least for me.

Nucleon does not need the relativity of ages; he thinks as of this very day, that H3 (WoG) does not suffer from the comparison with its successor, H4, whereas he cannot seriously compare H3 to H2, however charming was the later.

[[T]osHiro]

Both are almost the same. I like H3 for its strategy and H4 for its RPG.

[Justice]

I agree with Corribus, Kristo, Wimfrits, BAndobras Took, Black ghost (he choose 4, but still), Dragon Angel.... gah I give up, it's to boring to find them all . I'd like to vote for Heroes II, but since I can't, I'll go with H3.

[Kareeah Indaga]

Vote Heroes III

I like the town set-ups much better in 3 than 4. I dislike choosing creature dwellings; it's largely useless as some choices are obviously better than others and it is irksome to take a town and find it doesn't match up with my previous settlements. I hate H4's magic system. I like H3+expansions plot much better. Creatures are generally cooler looking in H3 IMO. Haven't done a side-by-side comparison of the music but I generally listen to H2 anyway. I don't play multiplayer so I don't care how well the game functions with a human exploiting the game system. I do miss caravans, however.

[MistWeaver]

Vote for H4.
I love H3. But I love H4 much more. And I love H2 no less than H4.
And Im not sure If I will love H5 at all.

[george137]

Vote Heroes III

I like the town set-ups much better in 3 than 4. I dislike choosing creature dwellings; it's largely useless as some choices are obviously better than others and it is irksome to take a town and find it doesn't match up with my previous settlements. I hate H4's magic system. I like H3+expansions plot much better.I do miss caravans, however.

Can you explain how choosing creature dwellings is largely useless or why you hate Heroes IV's magic system? The creatures in Heroes IV seem pretty balanced (equilibris) and if a towns creatures doesn't match up with anothers it isn't always bad. With Heroes III I found it annoying when a level 5 has armagedon.

[dallasmavs41]

H4 has some ideas that are good, and some that are not. I like H3 better because it is more balanced, and dependable...but H4 has some things which make it VERY interesting.

[Kareeah Indaga]

Can you explain how choosing creature dwellings is largely useless or why you hate Heroes IV's magic system?

Easily!

The creatures in Heroes IV seem pretty balanced (equilibris)

See, that’s the key word. “Equilibris”. I generally don’t mess around with mods, and I shouldn’t have to for the game to function well. If it needs a mod to be balanced, then it wasn’t balanced in the first place. Therefore it is not balanced, and is painfully easy to exploit (Waerjak the Human Stealth-Tank vs. Bad H4 AI = complete domination of the map for months without buying a single creature).

and if a towns creatures doesn't match up with anothers it isn't always bad.

Not ALWAYS bad, perhaps, but that doesn’t make it less annoying when I want Cyclopses and the enemy town has Ogre Magi, or it has Hydras when my army is filled and I need more Black Dragons.

As for the magic system, my dislike for that is also rather simple; the only time you’re guaranteed a compatible Mage Guild is if you conquer a town of the same alignment or one close to it. Otherwise it’s generally wasted. There are also a ridiculous number of repeat spells (Illusion/Summon anything/Reanimate all have basically the same effect with the only real difference being when each can be used), and the shrines are horribly ineffective. ‘Ooo, you have Nature Magic? Great! But you don’t have EXPERT Nature Magic, so shoo!’ ‘Hi! My name is Level One Order Shrine. Sorry Mr. Lvl. 60 Archmage-with-everything-Grandmastered, you don’t know Order Magic, just like everyone else on this map, so you’re too stupid to learn my spell. Have a nice day!’

[Derek]

H3. (Although I do agree with Csarmi about this topic...it really should be the last time this goes around.)

Although I do admire the people who claim that H4 is better, living with a horrible AI like that...

Either way, Kareeah Indaga really did hit it on the head about H4. Equil, while good, cannot be judged with the actual product.

[Monte Cristo]

After a lot of thought, I voted like both the same.

[csarmi]

There is no competition here. H4 is simply much better in every aspect. Especially strategically.