Like Tears in Rain

[jeff]

What is equally true is the many of the younger gamers don't what the mental challenge that the older gamers preferred. They would rather run and gun.

WRONG!!!!

What has really changed is that more and more people have started gaming, so the ones that prefer thinking games are a smaller % now... gaming has just gone mainstream.

So economically it makes less sense to invest in the games such as a MM.

[hellegennes]

Excuse me, but was any of you born before the 90's? Because, as I recall, the majority of games before the mid 90's were simplistic arcade, platform and action games that required only reflexes and infinite patience. How much did Space Invaders required you to think?



The truth is, some products are good and some are bad. The characteristics "old" and "new" have nothing to do with it. For one, they only apply to people of your age; what is old already for you, is pretty new for older people and what is still new for you, is old for younger people.

I remember people complaining in the mid 90's for the quality of games.



As for you Dalai, you are still trying to pass your opinion as common sense. It's one thing to say that you dislike A and B and another to say it's wrong by some mathematical logic. That you also fail to prove, by the way. For example:



"2 clicks are better than 5. Done"



Heroes 3 took Heroes' 1 click and made it 20. So this is just nonsense. Making something more complicated and longer cannot be dubbed bad or good. There are just levels of complications that work and others that don't. You CAN'T really tell until you try. The designers of Heroes 3 made decisions A, B and C. All of them complicated the game. Was Heroes 3 a perfect balance? Did it hold any more intricacy? Well, first is a no and second is a yes. Of course you can add. I still like H2 and H4 more than H3. But that's just my opinion.



#Jeff Said:

"Sounds like a good mathematical theorem for all forums".



I actually devised it when I was a moderator in a forum. A 100-word starting post would stay on topic with 10 answers but stray off-topic after that. While a 10-word starting post would stray off-topic after 3 posts. Also the number of pages the topic reaches is inversely proportional to the cube of the length of the starting post :p

Of course, for Celestial Heavens you can change "words" for "lines". For example, this topic had an expiry count of 23 posts, though it lasted for a whole 30 :p

[jeff]

Excuse me, but was any of you born before the 90's? Because, as I recall, the majority of games before the mid 90's were simplistic arcade, platform and action games that required only reflexes and infinite patience. How much did Space Invaders required you to think?

I was born long before the 90's, and most games were arcade like Space Invaders. My comment is the tendency right now is in the Space Invaders direction. Instead of investing in a good AI, they just speed up the clock. Ok that is being simplistic. While Space invaders and its clones were fine on the Atari, Intellivision, Genesis etc. I had my share of those. I tended to play games like Starflight, Phantasy Star, the Wizardry series (that took a lot of thinking) the Gold Boxes and of course the MMs. So yeah, I do complain about the quality of games and why not? I play only turn based, really not into trying to out react the computer, and I dearly want to see another Wizardry or MM RPG. So my comments are on topic as the lack of these type of titles particularly in the MM universe do cause tears in the rain.

[ThunderTitan]

>>So economically it makes less sense to invest in the games such as a MM.<<

Never said it wasn't, just that your analysis why is wrong.

Because, as I recall, the majority of games before the mid 90's were simplistic arcade, platform and action games that required only reflexes and infinite patience. How much did Space Invaders required you to think?

Yeah, in the arcades and on consoles... that is why we're the PC Elitist Master Race...

[Dalai]

Excuse me, but was any of you born before the 90's?

If I was born before 80's - can we go on?

Because, as I recall, the majority of games before the mid 90's were simplistic arcade, platform and action games that required only reflexes and infinite patience. How much did Space Invaders required you to think?

You recall wrong. How about open ended game where you could fight, trade, choose sides, travel in universe with more than 2000 locations (per config, and there were 256 configs)? Modern analog. The game was released in 1982 (!). I hope you guessed this truly genius game. I devoted countless hours to this 48kb (!!!) masterpiece. This forum thread weights more! I had Deadly rating, acquired Cloaking Device, saved people from Super-Nova, fought Targons in sub-space. There were several real hard-cover books inspired by the game. Space Invaders? Really?

Another example - Laser Squad. The most "recent" analog I know of - Incubation. Tactical game, where you have to think about every move of your several team members, every turn, every clip, every grade of bulletproof vest. You have to consider explosive stuff around you, action points to close doors, weapon range, etc. Again, 48kb. Very smart AI. Impossible today, for some obscure reason.

One more example - Nether Earth. Absolutely mind blowing strategic and tactical game. No analogs whatsoever. Only one relatively modern allusion - some ground missions in Space Rangers.

As for you Dalai, you are still trying to pass your opinion as common sense. It's one thing to say that you dislike A and B and another to say it's wrong by some mathematical logic. That you also fail to prove, by the way. For example:
"2 clicks are better than 5. Done"
Heroes 3 took Heroes' 1 click and made it 20. So this is just nonsense. Making something more complicated and longer cannot be dubbed bad or good. There are just levels of complications that work and others that don't.

If complications are not mentioned - it is implied there are none. I thought it was obvious. But if you want it explicit - here you are: 2 Clicks are better than 5 to achieve the same goal, all other things being equal. QED.

Really, can you see any real difference between Architect in H6 and Governor in H4? Any added complexity and depth? If you can - please enlighten me. If you can't - compare the implementation.

You CAN'T really tell until you try. The designers of Heroes 3 made decisions A, B and C. All of them complicated the game. Was Heroes 3 a perfect balance? Did it hold any more intricacy? Well, first is a no and second is a yes. Of course you can add. I still like H2 and H4 more than H3. But that's just my opinion.

In many cases I can. I gave you an example, too bad you failed to see it.


I'm really amazed, these guys had all the possible resources in the world - time, money, brains. They could hire any talent and get a lot of free help. And they did... this.

They had some special group of "close circle fans" who could see the development process on early stages, criticize it and offer ideas. I would pay money without hesitation to see what they actually criticized and offered to add or change. I wish someone would save those closed forum threads and publish them after NDA is over.

[GreatEmerald]

They had some special group of "close circle fans" who could see the development process on early stages, criticize it and offer ideas. I would pay money without hesitation to see what they actually criticized and offered to add or change. I wish someone would save those closed forum threads and publish them after NDA is over.

Forum? There are bugtrackers for that!

[hellegennes]

Dalai, I fail to see how is it possible to think that there is an unquestionable, standard and objective way to create a game. You are discussing 100% subjective matters as if they were 100% objective, like "add to gameplay", "achieve goal", etc.



Anyway, we strayed too much off-topic and if anything you are only reinforcing what I said about being subjective because of nostalgia. If you are comparing today's complex AI with the primitive cheating dumb-machine, what else can I say?

[Dalai]

Forum? There are bugtrackers for that!

I'm not really interested in bugtrackers. Is there an ideatracker?

I wonder, did they actually discuss the town conversion idea? What were the pro and against arguments, and by whom? Did it require to change something else or was it a single independent decision? Questions like that on all old and new stuff.

Dalai, I fail to see how is it possible to think that there is an unquestionable, standard and objective way to create a game. You are discussing 100% subjective matters as if they were 100% objective, like "add to gameplay", "achieve goal", etc.

Of course you fail to see something from my posts which is not there, because you just attributed some random ideas to me.

I insist on you quoting my post where I proclaim "an unquestionable, standard and objective way to create a game."

Anyway, we strayed too much off-topic and if anything you are only reinforcing what I said about being subjective because of nostalgia. If you are comparing today's complex AI with the primitive cheating dumb-machine, what else can I say?

I never said anything about "primitive cheating dumb-machine", sorry. This is just another example of a random idea you attributed to me. Please read my posts before you hit reply button.

[hellegennes]

I didn't say you've said that. You implied smart AI, etc, and I am telling you it was nothing but a stupid, cheating routine and that you even compare that to modern games makes you 100% subjective.



Your idea of the game is not universal, try and accept this. It's irritating that you are passing your views are objective.

[Corlagon]

They had some special group of "close circle fans" who could see the development process on early stages, criticize it and offer ideas. I would pay money without hesitation to see what they actually criticized and offered to add or change. I wish someone would save those closed forum threads and publish them after NDA is over.

And I'd pay money without hesitation to let you, and we'd see if you could've made a bigger difference in the same position.

[jeff]

They had some special group of "close circle fans" who could see the development process on early stages, criticize it and offer ideas. I would pay money without hesitation to see what they actually criticized and offered to add or change. I wish someone would save those closed forum threads and publish them after NDA is over.

And I'd pay money without hesitation to let you, and we'd see if you could've made a bigger difference in the same position.

I may be wrong but I think his point was, were the ideas and criticisms acted on or was the development predetermined with little actually open for discussion. UBI solicited fan input prior to H-V and to be fair was swamped by the fans. However that created an expectation that could not be met. This was highlight when Fabrice commented around the time Tribes was released that he didn’t realize that fans were unhappy with the editor. So UBI has a history of asking and then ignoring or not listening to the inputs given them. I realize that as choices are made some fans will be unhappy.

[hellegennes]

You cannot just listen to all opinions. You cannot even quantify which decisions are going to have a negative or positive impact, even if it is the wish of the majority.



That NWC designers were some kind of wisemen which all of their decisions were good and balanced, is totally crap. The major element of AB had to be cancelled because most fans hated even the idea (I mean the Forge). Then, most of their decisions for H4 were heavily criticised. How can you distinguish which fan opinions have to be heard and which have to be not? Well, you can only trust your gut and your personal views and hope they are a match which what the majority will perceive as a good game. There's really no other way. Computer gaming is not a science, it's an art.

[jeff]

You cannot just listen to all opinions. You cannot even quantify which decisions are going to have a negative or positive impact, even if it is the wish of the majority.

I basically said that and agree, the problem is as with Fabrice's comments on the editor is when a company has asked and then says or pretends they didn't hear.

[XEL II]

The major element of AB had to be cancelled because most fans hated even the idea (I mean the Forge).

That "most fans hated the Forge" myth is totally crap. 3DO received around 200 letters overall, while HoMM III sold 750,000 copies. Even after the cancellation NWC didn't think that AB would have been boycoutted. ~200 people is far from the majority of HoMM fans and we simply can't know what all the others though. Also, don't forget that MM as a whole (including the core RPG series) had many fans, who wouldn't complain about the Forge because they knew the storyline.

The main reason Forge was cancelled was the death threats Greg Fulton received.

[hellegennes]

XELL, I've told you before that your reasoning is amiss. Only a small fraction of the fanbase voice their opinion. 200 letters means that probably the majority of the fanbase had a problem with it. In comparison, tell me how many letters did any other company ever receive about a similar matter.

[XEL II]

XELL, I've told you before that your reasoning is amiss. Only a small fraction of the fanbase voice their opinion. 200 letters means that probably the majority of the fanbase had a problem with it. In comparison, tell me how many letters did any other company ever receive about a similar matter.

That kind of logic is nonsense. The fanbase isn't just some collective consciousness, it consists of individuals, each with their own opinion. There is no way in the world to know for sure what exactly all the 750000 or the majority of them thought about the Forge. Those ~200 letters is especially nonsensical thing to conclude on the pinions of thousands of people around the world.

And, face it, HoMM (the original, HoMM 1-4) is part of the original MM universe, that means that story-wise and conceptually sci-fi is not an alien thing to it. NWC said so (see the last two answers in Fulton's FAQ) even after the Forge was cancelled. Forge was actually pretty neatly fitted into the AB storyline, and we didn't even got to see this town in-game.

P.S. As for the devil Kreegans, HoMM wasn't avoiding their sci-fi backstory, there just was no need to elaborate on it further, since the storyline of specific games didn't majorily concerned it. If you compare Kreegan's (i.e. 7th level Inferno creature in HoMM3, "Devil" mobs in MM 6-7 and 4th leve Necropolis creature in HoMM4) game models there are many similarities between them (legs, overall complexion, burning after death, horn/spikes, eyes glowing) and the Kreegan are called devils and demons in HoMM3 just the same way they're called that in MM 6-7 - by the colonists who didn't know their backstory. Kreegans are Kreegans, whether in MM or HoMM.

P.P.S. About "other companies". Many video game companies receive thousands of e-mails and letters about their products, both negative and positive. Not all fanbase voices their opinions, but "not all" is not "small faction" or just couple hundreds of all.

[ThunderTitan]

>> ~200 people is far from the majority of HoMM fans and we simply can't know what all the others though.<<

Except that statistics work pretty well by using a small % of the whole fanbase... and all those incredible negative responses show that enough of the fanbase wouldn't have liked it to matter...

[XEL II]

But it doesn't mean that many people wouldn't have liked it. As I said, Might and Magic as a whole had many fans. And all you Forge-haters prefer to see only negative views on the Forge, as if there were no one who actually liked the idea. And David Mullich clearly said in one of his interviews that the reason behind the cancellation was the death threat. Not some mythical "majority" of the fans.

And, of course, even considering that someone didn't like Forge, that doesn't make it anything wrong in the game world, that they didm't like it is those idiots' problem, their ignorance doesn't define Might and Magic world.

[ThunderTitan]

You don't understand, if it was just the death threat and no other negative response i doubt that they would have cancelled it...

And there's also the fact that obviously not enough people liked the concept to defend it hard enough for NWC to take notice...


And i'm not a Forge hater, as a concept it was interesting, and while the creature design was rather weak, so was the one for the Conflux and the neutrals we got with AB.

[XEL II]

My main point is not about that, but that those people's ignorant defiance of Forge doesn't make this concept anything wrong to the series. NWC said this outright even after the cancellation.