UbiSoft is Making Money

Discussions about the latest news in the Might and Magic community.

Moderators: Moderators, Celestial Heavens Staff

User avatar
evilp
Scout
Scout
Posts: 168
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: China
Contact:

UbiSoft is Making Money

Postby evilp » Oct 28 2008, 19:25

heroes 5 map editor was awkward. although xml and lua are powerful

User avatar
astral76minor
Assassin
Assassin
Posts: 252
Joined: 12 Jun 2006
Location: There I am

UbiSoft is Making Money

Postby astral76minor » Oct 28 2008, 19:26

You can make a map with a good storyline (if you care to read). What is the sense in the cutscenes anyway? They only serve the storyline of Nival/Ubi. I noticed Franzy, rdeford and GOW make excellent maps with very good script and storylines that are often way better than the original maps in campaign or single mission. Some people don't even bother to tap the awesome features of the editor that came with the game. It takes some time, but you'll find the script functions in the H5 editor to be far better than any heroes game editor of the past..... Just read and learn about script functions and how to utilize their intense complexity in the mapmaking process.

User avatar
Pitsu
Round Table Hero
Round Table Hero
Posts: 1828
Joined: 22 Nov 2005

Postby Pitsu » Oct 28 2008, 20:06

just to clarify a few words about my own relations with the editor. First i was a beta tester for it (not just the beta tester for game) and that version had several features that were latter removed due to unsafety. Then in early map editor days published a map "Ruins in the desert" (due to not being updated to latter patches i cannot truly recommend it). Then a H5 scripting guide got published and later nearly finished editor util (abandoned due to lack of interest from myself and community). Not being much a modder, but specifically for Myythryyn's story maps created the "large message box mod" and at some point managed to do simple cutscenes. Indeed i have only heard rumors about the TotE editor, but other than that i should have a general picture about the editor capabilities. no?
Avatar image credit: N Lüdimois

User avatar
Asheera
Round Table Knight
Round Table Knight
Posts: 4506
Joined: 06 Jul 2008
Location: The Shadows
Contact:

Postby Asheera » Oct 28 2008, 20:44

@Pitsu: They removed features? If you follow my advice from my previous post, you will 'improve' the editor... I'm just wondering if that's what they 'removed'? Maybe a simple modify of that file will restore the editor to what it was before they removed those features?
No matter how powerful one becomes, there is always someone stronger. That's why I'm in a constant pursuit of power, so I can be prepared when an enemy tries to take advantage of me.

User avatar
astral76minor
Assassin
Assassin
Posts: 252
Joined: 12 Jun 2006
Location: There I am

UbiSoft is Making Money

Postby astral76minor » Oct 28 2008, 20:52

I am a maptester and know some details thanks to GOW, Pitsu, Rdeford, and Franzy about making script work in multiplayer mode (which is not recommended).

Objections about H5 include the fact that multiplayer scripting is a total pain. The testing takes forever. So if UBI wants to make H6 then make an editor that functions 100% for multiplayer scripting. Single player should be fine. I hold objections similar to many about H5 and I think that the script commands need extreme clarification before usage in multiplayer mode on the internet. The odds are that the next H6 will be for internet play, although the map editor may be neglected. I strongly urge that UBI/NIVAL make an editor that requires less scrutiny and trial and error routines. So, to me, yes the game revolves around a darn good map editor for internet play and single player modes!!! Heroes of Might and Magic 6 with a map editor that requires less trial and error is a must for Ubi and Nival. If this can be done, then we can discuss the basic things that are missing from the older games and add them to H6.
Edited on Tue, Oct 28 2008, 17:20 by astral76minor

User avatar
Moragauth
Demon
Demon
Posts: 305
Joined: 22 May 2007

UbiSoft is Making Money

Postby Moragauth » Oct 29 2008, 0:00

"4E is just stupid overall - not just in alignments! ;)"



QFT. :P

User avatar
CloudRiderX
Succubus
Succubus
Posts: 808
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: USA

UbiSoft is Making Money

Postby CloudRiderX » Oct 31 2008, 18:55

"Game looked initially very promising, but it was mainly Ubi who came with the request to make the game "darker". Because for them darker = more mature (=stupid philosophy if you ask me). And they "darkened" everything: the interface, the creatures, the alignments..."



Yeah, Blizzard is having the same problem right now with Diablo 3. I'll be damned if these complaints about WoW-like color schemes **** up my favorite Blizzard franchise.



"I like how the factions are structured in HOMM V."



Oh yeah, (rolls eyes) I love having six different types of dwarves and then a dragon as opposed to, you know, mixed races of unique creatures and stuff. Faction structure...don't make me laugh. Making each faction based on a different race shows a lack of structure if anything.



"I'm sure they learn from their mistakes :D... or maybe not :devious:"



You're telling me. Look at the freakin Phoenix. It was a flaming bird-like creature in the original H5, and then Ubi thought it would be a better representation if it looked like a non-flaming dragon creature, like everything else in the goddam game.



At this rate Heroes VI will entail Dragons just coming to (what is it these days, Ashan? Yeah guess so..) Ashan and kicking the crap out of all the existing factions. Then Ubisoft can just make new all-dragon factions and they'll be satisfied at last.
"A Guardian is always prepared." - Galio, the Sentinel's Sorrow

User avatar
CloudRiderX
Succubus
Succubus
Posts: 808
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: USA

UbiSoft is Making Money

Postby CloudRiderX » Oct 31 2008, 19:01

Man, I have to laugh at myself a little bit. I'm really not a mean person (like all of my H5-bashing may suggest, I just can't stand it when I read the forum and I see things like "I love Heroes 5...it's perfect....couldn't expect more from Ubisoft...best Heroes game to date.." because it's sooooooo wrong. Wrong I tell you! (eye twitches)



I need to go take a nap...
"A Guardian is always prepared." - Galio, the Sentinel's Sorrow

User avatar
Asheera
Round Table Knight
Round Table Knight
Posts: 4506
Joined: 06 Jul 2008
Location: The Shadows
Contact:

Postby Asheera » Oct 31 2008, 19:09

"I just can't stand it when I read the forum and I see things like "I love Heroes 5...it's perfect....couldn't expect more from Ubisoft...best Heroes game to date.." because it's sooooooo wrong. Wrong I tell you!"

You know, I say the same about those that say things like "I love Heroes 3...it's perfect....best Heroes game in the series.."

They're sooooooo wrong. Wrong I tell you! :P
No matter how powerful one becomes, there is always someone stronger. That's why I'm in a constant pursuit of power, so I can be prepared when an enemy tries to take advantage of me.

User avatar
Salamandre
Genie
Genie
Posts: 1032
Joined: 13 May 2006
Location: France
Contact:

Re: UbiSoft is Making Money

Postby Salamandre » Oct 31 2008, 23:31

[quote="astral76minor" Some people don't even bother to tap the awesome features of the editor that came with the game. It takes some time, but you'll find the script functions in the H5 editor to be far better than any heroes game editor of the past..... [/quote]


Except WOG which was done specially for scripting, while HoMM V was released for money. I checked HoMM V scripts and they can done maybe 1% of what WoG can.

Asheera, HoMM V may be better than HoMM3 on certain aspects for sure. I love the layout, effects, creature design. It just lost the visual simplicity which is required for a pure strategy game. Where principal objectives have to be very easy to spot on both minimap and adventure map. Take for example that "dynamic camera": in HoMM3 we could just spread 8 heroes in a perfect positioning chain and only having a look at them imagine what to do on next turn. Now, once you rotated the camera, you lost your bearings, you have to start again your planning and such. If they continue in this way, HoMM VI will be played by very few people.

Back in time, ToH tournament had over 10k users who played HoMM3. Today they are about 100. Hardcore for sure, but so few. I understand so many people as you are bluffed by the beauty of the game, but...are you playing? I mean, do you feel the need to play it or just discover scripting possibilities. How many Extra large maps did you finish? Here is the problem.


Instead learning from WOG about what can be done in a scripting game, UBI choosed a easier way, where layout effects are splashed in player's eyes. Turn time increased from a maximum 4 minutes to 20-25 for about the same result while our eyes suffer even more from aggressive visual layout. Bad choice.

User avatar
Moragauth
Demon
Demon
Posts: 305
Joined: 22 May 2007

UbiSoft is Making Money

Postby Moragauth » Nov 1 2008, 17:28

"Oh yeah, (rolls eyes) I love having six different types of dwarves and then a dragon as opposed to, you know, mixed races of unique creatures and stuff. Faction structure...don't make me laugh. Making each faction based on a different race shows a lack of structure if anything. "



De gustibus non disputandum est. Look that up (it'll probably come up in a different word order.) I never was a major fan of HIII. Its factions did not appeal to me. I like WH and thus I like HV. Where's the problem?

User avatar
Zamolxis
Archangel
Archangel
Posts: 1406
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: still too foggy to tell

Postby Zamolxis » Nov 1 2008, 18:34

@Moragauth: The problem is that HV seems to appeal to many WH fans but to few fans of NWC's Heroes. By copying too much from WH, HV has lost its authenticity. I played HV for months. Not because I liked it, but because I hoped I would get to liked it, because it was supposed to be follower of NWC's games. But in spite of having lots of HIII elements copied, it still doesn't feel much like any of the previous titles (II, III, IV) for me. I think I'm not the only HIII "hardcore fan" who sees how obvious it is that the game is created by WH-lovers, who did their best to copy many elements from HIII to make it believable as a sequel, but could not escape forcing their WH vision of what the Heroes fantasy universe should look like. They copied HIII on the outside, but failed miserably in recreating the feeling, the "just one more turn" addiction of HIII, because they did not experience it.

And don't get me wrong - I don't bash Nival for bringing "new" ideas into Heroes. I would have been fine with that. I bash them for their lack of creativity for coming with something original, and instead copying ideas from another game.


@Asheera: You may have had a point there, if HIII & HV would have come out on the market in the same time. But HV came like 7 years later. Of course that brings improvements. But as a sequel, it should have learned from the H4 mistakes, but take the title into consideration when creating the basic concepts of the game. And not repeat some of them, make new ones, and insultingly almost ignore there ever was a H4 (which did have some good parts in it).

A game sequel can be considered successful if it only disappoints a limited number of fans, while satisfying the vast majority, plus making some new ones. It's a success if in the months/years after release the forums grow continuously with new fans or fans of previous titles rejoining the community. HIII pretty much accomplished all that, and we are still playing it after almost 10 years. People are still creating maps, mods & discuss it on forums. HV on the other hand, in spite of the growing (world wide) internet community, has less active forum users than HIII used to have (back in the days when not even half of us had internet). How many HV fans can say they're playing it day and night for months & years, like many HIII fans could say they used to? Not many.

HV made some new fans (WH ones mainly it seems), but look how many it disappointed: we don't have the a vast 90% majority praising it, and a small 10% minority bashing. It's more like 50-50 at best (for your "camp" let's say), and not thousands vs thousands, but more like 10-20 supporters vs 10-20 bashers. Where are all the others? It can't be that they're not on forums because HV is such a great game that they have no time for anything but playing it. The fact that you don't have here hundreds of players bashing at HV is simply because 90% of the people disappointed in a game, are naturally moving on actually, rather than sticking around for whatever reason. As for those praising the game, I would need to see at least hundreds of them (not tens), in order to accept that - although disappointing to me - the game is actually great in itself, only more for people with different tastes than mine.
'Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former' - Albert Einstein

'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind' - same guy

User avatar
Asheera
Round Table Knight
Round Table Knight
Posts: 4506
Joined: 06 Jul 2008
Location: The Shadows
Contact:

Postby Asheera » Nov 1 2008, 19:06

Of course H3 was more popular when it was released, since it had no 'serious' competition (like H5 has with H3). And of course there will be some conservatives who will prefer nothing new over it.

But we have to go on from the past and create new things. That's what 3DO did with H4 (but although it had some good ideas, it seems it had a lot of bad ones), and that's what Ubi/Nival did with H5 as well. The developers will never be able to please the conservatives (which won't accept anything else than a clone of H3)

But we need to move on. There's no sense in cloning H3. If the conservatives like H3 that much then they should play H3. But for other people we need to see something else and not the same stuff over and over again.
No matter how powerful one becomes, there is always someone stronger. That's why I'm in a constant pursuit of power, so I can be prepared when an enemy tries to take advantage of me.

User avatar
Zamolxis
Archangel
Archangel
Posts: 1406
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: still too foggy to tell

Postby Zamolxis » Nov 1 2008, 21:06

Sorry, but I disagree.

1. About H3 not having 'serious' competition, like H5 had in H3.

H3 did have 'serious' competition when it was released. H2 was a GREAT game, released only a couple of years before (not 7 like between 3 & 5). And some people where disappointed with some of the changes, but not the majority. So all that H4 & H5 had to do, was follow the example and take the game even further, focusing on what can be IMPROVED, not on what can be CHANGED (which is NOT the same with excluding change).

From that perspective, here is how the HoMM story goes:

- HoMM(1): first game in the series, with many elements inspired from the pretty successful King's Bounty

- HoMM2: created by ppl who knew/liked HoMM, by EXPANDING the universe and IMPROVING the features. Result: more successful than H1 - new/satisfied fans outnumbering the disappointed ones

- HoMM3: created by ppl who knew/liked HoMM2, by rehashing only a minimal part of the game concepts, but mainly again EXPANDING the universe and IMPROVING the features. Result: more successful than H2 - new/satisfied fans outnumbering the disappointed ones

- HoMM4: created by ppl who knew/liked HoMM3, but possible were getting a bit sick of it, as they chose to focus on CHANGING the game rather than IMPROVING, and for the first time CONTRACTING the universe, rather than EXPANDING it (in spite of all forums shouting for it). Add on top of that the pressure from 3DO for a premature release of a not sufficiently tested game, and you get a result which sold 3 times less than H3, in spite of a growing community of gamers in general. Disappointed fans outnumbering the new/satisfied ones (even those do form a notable community)

- HoMM5: created by ppl who DID NOT know/like HoMM, but only played it a bit to see how a sequel should look like. They knew/liked Warhammer and were lacking originality. So we ended up with WH concepts copied into HoMM. They did not focus on CHANGING (like for H4), but also not on IMPROVING (like for H2-H3). They focused on COPYING. Copying some H3 elements knowing that game was successful, and filling in with WH concepts, thinking the core fans of original titles will be that stupid to buy that as "original/fresh" ideas. Same as H4, they also sacrificed the variety, squeezing the creatures from 9 traditional alignments into less than 5 (so basically half), if we're not counting the WH creatures. Result: a game which sold little better than H3 ON PAPER, but if you take into consideration the new market realities (kids are buying nowadays 10 times more games a year than 10 years ago) and perhaps also the fact that the looks must have fooled many H3 fans into thinking it's a sequel to their expectations, in the end it's not that impressive. And forum activity is IMO a very good barometer to confirm the game is not really a success. The disappointed fans seem to slightly outnumber the new/satisfied ones. Though maybe now there are more than ever ppl with mixed feelings about it, as there are many good things about the game, yet so many things are either lacking or are simply messed up.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2. About conservatives not accepting anything but a clone of H3.

That's unfair to say and unjust. It can be your interpretation of things, but it is not true.

(a). Nobody (or very few) wanted a clone of H3. What we wanted was that they preserved what was best in that game, which in the essence it could have been as little as 50% of that game (so they could have had up to 50% room for creativity and also a bit of H4). They did copy 50% of H3, but they selected the elements to be copied BLINDLY, regardless of whether they were good or not.

(b). We did not want a H3 clone, because in spite of how much we love the game, there are elements in the game annoying the vast majority of us (like Witch Hut blocking a skill slot against your will, with Navigation on a map with no water). Such elements were reported by the players, taken into consideration by NWC for H4 (and by mods for WoG), and were saluted by the community when corrected. But Ubival, in their blind decision of staying away of H4 as much as possible, could not make the difference between and improvement and an experimental change.

(c). We also did not want a H3 clone, because we were realizing a clone will not bring more players into the HoMM universe (and of course most players want their favorite game to be recognized as the best out there). So we WERE hoping for original, fresh ideas - which would ideally appeal to new players, without altering key elements important to us. But instead of that we were given cheaply copied WH elements. And that wouldn't have been so bad if they would have brought WH concepts on top of the existing, thus enriching the universe (even if not in an original way). But the worst part is that the WH elements were introduced at the EXPENSE of traditional elements which were important for many of us.

H4 was an experiment only half-way gone bad. But there was still an elegant way out of it, which could have brought together at least 90% of the community. But Ubival lacked the vision on both sides, regarding what needs to be done to accomplish that. They aimed for it, but they approached it in a very superficial, short-sighted manner and ended up:
- leaving out good things from both H3 & H4
- copying mistakes from both H3 & H4
- experimenting w/o much creativity (cloning WH elements) for a developer which did not have yet the community approval (as NWC had when they did H4)
So no we have a 3rd Heroes (pseudo-)community, which personally I don't see it not even as strong as the H4 one used to be. And honestly now I don't see a way to bring the community together anymore. What H4 made difficult, H5 made (perhaps) impossible.
Last edited by Zamolxis on Nov 1 2008, 21:21, edited 1 time in total.
'Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former' - Albert Einstein

'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind' - same guy

User avatar
Asheera
Round Table Knight
Round Table Knight
Posts: 4506
Joined: 06 Jul 2008
Location: The Shadows
Contact:

Postby Asheera » Nov 1 2008, 21:15

"(a). Nobody (or very few) wanted a clone of H3. What we wanted was that they preserved what was best in that game, which in the essence it could have been as little as 50% of that game (so they could have had up to 50% room for creativity and also a bit of H4). They did copy 50% of H3, but they selected the elements to be copied BLINDLY, regardless of whether they were good or not. "
Define "good" features. It is extremely subjective. Believe it or not, there are people out there that favor H4 over H3, therefore they like those features.

Also, from what I've seen at the Altar at HC, fans can't agree on even the smallest of things. What would you consider a "good" feature then? What the so-called 'majority' decides? (I don't even know if it's the true 'majority', since many people do not visit forums)

Personally I hate it when only the majority is listened to, which is usually made of less 'quality' people. For example, the 'majority' is impatient, doesn't want complex games, and probably likes RTS over TBS. If we were to listen to them ONLY, we would end up with a HoMM RTS. Of course, this was an exaggerated example, but it still shows my point why I don't like the majority to 'decide'.

Note: I'm not saying H3 fans are like that! That was just a general view on this 'majority' thing.
No matter how powerful one becomes, there is always someone stronger. That's why I'm in a constant pursuit of power, so I can be prepared when an enemy tries to take advantage of me.

User avatar
Zamolxis
Archangel
Archangel
Posts: 1406
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: still too foggy to tell

Postby Zamolxis » Nov 1 2008, 22:49

"Believe it or not, there are people out there that favor H4 over H3, therefore they like those features."
My previous post was indeed too long, so I can see why you missed the part where I was saying EXACTLY the same thing, and taking it even further: not only that there are ppl out there that prefer H4 to H3 (I even know the proportion: 1/3rd as compared to those preferring H3 over H4), but also that people like me, who prefer H3, do acknowledge - not only individually, but also as a group - that some of the H4 changes were welcomed improvements.

So there are points people could agree on, as I've seen during the H5 beta. I've seen H3 fans fighting for features introduced only in H4, same as I've seen H4 fans admitting H4 had too much micro-management, and some sort of step back towards H3 would not be such a bad idea.

Regarding the 'majority', you are right in a way, but:

1. You didn't fully get my point, as there's quite a difference between "listening" to the majority (which could be suicidal) and "pleasing" the majority (that requires a bit of vision, which I insist that Ubival lacked).

2. There are cases when they have to listen to the majority, same as there are cases when they would do better not counting percents, but actually paying attention to the arguments given or listen to that small, but sensitive part of their potential public:

*Example 1: I mentioned above Witch Huts. In H3 you could have ended up "learning" forcefully Navigation, Scouting & Scholar (which on many maps can be of almost no use) from the first 3 Huts on your way, while your opponent could have learned in the meantime Logistics, Earth Magic & Air Magic for example (which are of great use on 99% of the maps). That was one of the most hated things in H3 (can't think of anyone except for JJ that liked that). And it also didn't make any sense: to be "taught" a skill against your will. This was changed in H4, and all H3 fans I know (online and in RL) saluted the change. This is an example of a double mistake from Ubival: choosing the wrong game to copy the behavior from AND not listening to the community when we asked for the change during beta.

*Example 2: 1 of the Warhammer cloned creatures I fought against during the development process, was the Inquisitor (copied from WH while there were more than 1 alternatives in the M&M universe, too religiously localized by name+cross+clothes, improper spells for what it represents etc). IIRC, a poll returned sth like this: 20% wanted to keep it, 50% were ok with it, but couldn't care less if it changed, 20% would have changed it with sth from the M&M universe, and 10% were finding it even offensive and/or totally unacceptable for the HoMM universe and/or the Haven alignment. There was a Jewish guy and a Protestant guy explaining why it was offensive to them. Something similar was also like 25% of my argumentation (though some tend to remember only that). But the 10% of votes on a restricted forum (so no clone accounts possible) prove there were more users finding it offensive, but didn't dare speak, due to the way those who dared where flamed with such a hate by some atheists on the forum, quite comparable with the hate inquisitors used to "flame" heathens in the Middle Ages. There were some horrible discussions, but this time Ubival did do the maths, saying: "70% are ok or like the unit, 30% don't or find it offensive, so let's screw them and their religious crap and go with the majority". Now this looks to me like they would have better NOT listen to the majority, as religion is a more sensitive issue. This did not compare with other threads where ppl were fighting over the design of the Angel, the Treant, the Phoenix and so on. Religion for some of us - even if just a few - is more than pure fantasy (regardless of what those who were the interface between us & Nival would think). So if it would be in my hands, I would have tried to avoid using sth offensive for even only 1% of my potential clients, even if their beliefs had nothing to do with mine. Not copying another Heroes game, they still had "Priest of Light" as perfect example of a creature from the Might & Magic universe, which would have fit way better next to Angels/Archangels, in an alignment specialized in Light Magic, on a unit able to cast Bless & Prayer (IIRC). Would that have offended anyone? No (actually, based on history it should be less offensive for atheists even). So why didn't they change it? I can think of only 3 explanations: stupidity, lazy ignorance, or the worst - drawing satisfaction from offending some religious "morrons".
'Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former' - Albert Einstein

'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind' - same guy

User avatar
Jolly Joker
Round Table Hero
Round Table Hero
Posts: 3316
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby Jolly Joker » Nov 2 2008, 8:41

*Sigh*
The only trouble with your whole postings is that they are only an excuse, a pseudo-rationalization of the simple fact that you don't like the setting of the game amd especially Haven.
It doesn't help that you seem to have no idea about what the Inquisition was in fact all about. Not "flaming heathens" - that's generally what the missionaries' job was. Inquisition has had to do with rooting out witchcraft and demon-worshipping - and calling the level 5 upgraded unit Inquisitor is quite fitting in a world where demons are pretty real. Which seem to be the problem then.
Should someone think now, no, that were all just excuses for whatever worldly reason they had to deploy such a terror unit, I might add that "priests of light" today are still doing exorcisms and that the church is explicitely allowing this and has governing laws - and not only the Roman-Catholic ones, mind you. Which means they (still) believe in demons humans can become posessed of, which is the reason why exorcisms may be necessary and needed.

And people are religiously offended if a unit in fantasy game is called Inquisitor? Give me a break. That's pathetically absurd.

Right is of course, yes, they used many Warhammer ideas. For those who the WH universe that's pretty obvious. Is that wrong? Yes, if you prefer towns with a plethora of unconnected fantastic CREATURES. I wouldn't argue. While it never was consistent in HoMM with towns having a theme like humans and undead and others not, I just wouldn't argue. If you find that better, fine. Ubival had other ideas, though.

Anyway, the main problem with the game is simply the fact that it took 18 months from publisihing the basic game to bringing it up to shape, while some parts of the game could still need polishing. To sum this up, the game was published at least half a year too early.
This is what *I* find a major flaw. Nowadays it seems that companies put games out while they are still in the works and continue to put out franchise over a long time, until, years later, the game is quasi-finished, mainly due to the fact that the sequel comes out. On the other hand, with a view on modding, games aren't finished anytime anyway, so wtf? Still, I don't like that. I don't like buying things that are still under construction. I like a finished product, that maybe are missing some finishing touches.

Alas, I won't get them anymore. The times they are a-changing.

P.S.: Yes. I didn't think the Witch Hut needed treatment considering what was amiss at that time. Yes, I even find it better the way it is. You can either gamble or you can make sure and check with a secondary. Nothing wrong with it, actually. Of course you may like it better the other way round. However, it's not broken the way it is.
ZZZzzzz....

User avatar
Pitsu
Round Table Hero
Round Table Hero
Posts: 1828
Joined: 22 Nov 2005

Postby Pitsu » Nov 2 2008, 11:35

JJ said"
And people are religiously offended if a unit in fantasy game is called Inquisitor? Give me a break. That's pathetically absurd."

-----------------

Although annoying less people it is the same problem as it was with Forge. For some people some things just do not fit. If the cavalier upgrade would have been called defense squadron would you as german translator actually translated it as Schutzstaffel?


Jj said: Yes, if you prefer towns with a plethora of unconnected fantastic CREATURES. I wouldn't argue. While it never was consistent in HoMM with towns having a theme like humans and undead and others not, I just wouldn't argue. If you find that better, fine. Ubival had other ideas, though.
-----------------

And this is again one of the Ubival ideas which leaves for players and mapmakers less space to redefine the story and powers. With a mix of creatures mapmaker/player could define any of them as the backbone of this town. With the major race defined alternative fantasies are suppressed.
Avatar image credit: N Lüdimois

User avatar
Asheera
Round Table Knight
Round Table Knight
Posts: 4506
Joined: 06 Jul 2008
Location: The Shadows
Contact:

Postby Asheera » Nov 2 2008, 11:36

I'll just tell you that I don't like the Witch Huts as well, but they're not that game-breaking either. I mean, can't you just test with your secondary scout hero what it is inside? :P
No matter how powerful one becomes, there is always someone stronger. That's why I'm in a constant pursuit of power, so I can be prepared when an enemy tries to take advantage of me.

User avatar
Zamolxis
Archangel
Archangel
Posts: 1406
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: still too foggy to tell

Postby Zamolxis » Nov 2 2008, 12:19

@Asheera: and that is called micro-management, which we all love sooo much.

Not to mention that I always play on the Hardest difficulty level, so I can rarely afford a 2nd hero in the beginning of the scenario. And once I have it, there are better things to do with it than walk behind the main hero to test Witch Huts. ;)
Last edited by Zamolxis on Nov 2 2008, 12:25, edited 1 time in total.
'Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former' - Albert Einstein

'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind' - same guy


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest