A goodbye to HOMM! Heroes VI has ended my love for this game

The new Heroes games produced by Ubisoft. Please specify which game you are referring to in your post.

Moderator: Moderators

Heroes VI is a disappointment

Strongly Agree
25
21%
Agree
19
16%
Neutral
18
15%
Disagree
56
47%
 
Total votes: 118

User avatar
Mhorhe
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 25
Joined: 19 Oct 2011

Postby Mhorhe » Oct 21 2011, 15:45

SoRHunter wrote:First things first: I've read this whole thread from the beginning and didn't shy from any Big Wall of Text. I just point you to the title of the tread:
cjlee wrote:A goodbye to HOMM! Heroes VI has ended my love for this game

This whole stuff is to show why cjlee is disappointed with the series he loves - it is not to generalise why nobody should like it.


The title, yes. But look at his conclusion:
""""I am not predicting a failure for Ubihole. On the contrary, I believe Ubihole will make a profitable game. This standard of gamemaking is exactly what is in demand nowadays.

But it won’t beat HOMM III. It won’t make a real difference to the gaming world. It will be played now, but 5 years from now, it’ll be outdated. It is a well crafted quality game that will probably draw favorable ratings and command good sales. But it doesn’t hook. It doesn’t offer a really exciting new world to explore. No good stories; no compelling tales. Nor is it rooted in existing fantasy worlds. How do you expect a strong following to develop?

I’ve played so much Heroes in the past 16 years. Except for unusually difficult maps of the kind benbird or Salamandre write about, I have finished practically every famous map or user made campaign from Heroes II to V. Except for the Shadow of Death campaigns (Draco’s and Adrienne’s) which I felt were boring, I have generally finished all campaigns, usually on several difficulty settings. I have my black dragon and archangel scores.

Heroes VI should offer enough to many gamers for the next 3-5 years to ensure a decent multiplayer fan base. But it isn’t compelling enough for me to start playing, and I can tell it is definitely not compelling enough for many mapmakers to spend all that time working on new maps for it. Look at the plethora of maps for Heroes III and IV and you realize that, despite their flaws, these two games truly offer a lot that will keep gamers coming back and mapmakers exercising their creativity.

In the end Heroes VI will probably get a very modest independent mapmaker base, much like Heroes V. If you want to compete with others at the Conflux on Ubihole’s official maps, do go for Heroes VI. If you like playing through a great fan-made custom campaign or scenario, I suggest you wait for Heroes VII. Or stop gaming, as I have done. """"

Bolded parts are definitely not "this is why I stopped playing" but rather "this is why I won't play it, and you all shouldn't unless you want to play a mediocre game". The implication that playing HVI is playing that is pretty clear and has nothing to do with the personal involvement suggested in the title.

SoRHunter wrote:Please, don't insult me. I did read everything.


I am not insulting you at all. Here's the start of your initial post:
SoRHunter wrote:
Mhorhe wrote:Your post is far too long to break down and analyze by section, especially since most of my comments are focused on one thing - most of your grievances are, well, kind of petty. And most of the rest are pure personal preference, which is neither good nor bad.

This is the fundamental flaw in your argumentation: it all boils down to personal preferences, so your take on HoMM VI is as good as cjlee's.


What you called "the fundamental flaw" in my argumentation is included in the very paragraph you quoted to demonstrate my fundamental flaw. It is, furthermore, clearly stated in other parts of my initial post, I'll list them here again:
"That's of course, MY personal preference, so not anymore right or wrong than yours, but it doesn't make or break the game for anyone else. "
"You might not like it - again, personal preference - but that doesn't make it BAD. "
"The short version of it all is that you don't like it, because it's not like the olden days and you just don't like it. Which is fine, but it doesn't make it a bad game by any means."
How, then, do you expect me to believe you've read what I had written? Since you're saying exactly something I had said, and yet bring it up as a fundamental flaw?

SoRHunter wrote:Whenever I read a review, I know that I'm getting an informed opinion. Nobody can't simply abandon the framework shaped by culture and habits in order to give an "immaculate" view on the game - one way or another, "personal preferences" will show. It's only human. ;)


Mhm. Yes. True. And now, please show me where I attacked that?

The very reason I went through my entire history with Heroes, the ups and downs of it, was exactly that - a history of my own experience with the game. I was saying that, FOR ME, 1<2<3>4, 3~=~5, and 6 is great. That's why I still don't understand why you need to point out for me that IV was a good evolution for some. Of course it was, and I never contested any of that.

When reading a review, you have to accept that it's written subjectively (in fact, in case of official reviews, I'm thinking a whole lot of subjectivity..) For instance, a reviewer unfamiliar with Warhammer 40 k might call Space Marine a clone of Gears of War. It doesn't mean that I should accept that as fact.

SoRHunter wrote:This is a forum - a place to voice one's opinions and to promote discussion. It's just polite to read and comment on the ideas that are presented, even if those "are wrong for a whole variety of reasons". ;) Just point them (as you did)!
Finally, the "Silly" stuff had a smiley with it. ;) It was meant to provoke thought. ;)


It rather more felt like an implied accusation than to provoke thought :) especially since we seem to be on the same side here and I'm not exactly sure why we're arguing.

As for this case, the reason I said "for a whole variety of reasons" and not simply listed them is 2 fold - it wasn't on the topic of the current debate, and I simply didn't feel like doing it. I've already written extensively on the basis of the OP, and the author or anyone else has not attacked those points base by base. But fine. I'll do a bit of writing here then, especially considering the below quote:

SoRHunter wrote: You pointed flaws in cjlee's arguments, naming it "personal preferences" while counter-arguing with your own "personal preferences". ;)


I didn't point flaws in cjlee's arguments when they were personal preferences, I just called them personal preferences and said that they're right or wrong depending on the person not universally. We should really get this point straightened out, it's the 4rd time I'm writing it.. unless you can quote me with where I said personal preference was wrong for someone else and right for me, I think that's settled.

If I leave aside the personal preference parts, there are a few petty things that really shouldn't be a complaint. One is the "they made this game for money!" argument which I addressed and which is, honestly, a frequent one on boards.

Another is the Town Portal change. Which makes perfect sense from the balance view point.

Another is the "they didn't take into account some creatures would be helpless on their own!11!!!!" Which is.. He was talking as if the other Heroes all had creeps grouped up by efficiency, every time, all the time. Do I really need to say anything more here?

Another is the "Marksmen dilemma" Basically, what bothers the OP is that Marksmen cause friendly fire while being called Marksmen. If they had been called Magogs, it would have been fine.. because. It also bothers him because the upgrade is "useless".
What I said about the upgrade still stands, I'll not re-write it here. There is zero reason to complain about Marksmen if friendly fire doesn't bother you on Magogs. And if friendly fire bothers you, by all means, it should bother you on every ranged unit in the entire Heroes series! After all, firing fireballs, arrows, bolts of lightning or whatever in a packed melee is going to hit your own side, too...

And finally, the riflemen vs stealth bomber and humans vs ants VERSUS core vs champion creatures and the reason why it's wrong.

Reason number 1 I stated - balance. If you're going to make an Azure Dragon the equivalent of a human and the core creatures the equivalent of ants, then there is little to no reason for the Core creatures. Because you'd need tens of thousands of "ants" to take down the "human".

The only way to keep balance between core and champion would be to make the champion dwelling SO expensive, you'd probably never see them in a game. I'm talking MILLIONS in gold, and THOUSANDS in resources. Because if you don't do that, everyone will rush to their specific champion and thus the game would be that much poorer.

Reason number 2 the comparison itself is wrong. In real life terms, 1 000 riflemen vs a stealth bomber is like comparing apples and oranges. Both have their place and role, and both can do something the other one cannot. A stealth bomber can catch the riflemen in the field and flatten them with nothing for them to do - this is what the OP chose. But the riflemen can catch the stealth bomber at base, kill its crew, take it over, shoot its tires. A stealth bomber can execute a mission of precision bombing, but it can't take an embassy by storm and release some hostages. Etc etc. You never send a stealth bomber to do a rifleman's job, and viceversa.

By contrast, creatures in the Heroes game DON'T take different roles. Well they have shades (ranged, tank, melee etc) but their role is one and the same - kill the opposition. A Champion creature isn't a stealth bomber, it's a veteran rifleman with state of the art equipment and superlative training, while a Core creature is.. just your average rifleman.

Reason number 3 comparison between things in the real world and things in a game make little sense, especially when it's a game involving fairies and dragons and wizards. The real world is shaped by a set of rules, and a game by a whole other set.

Well maybe not a whole variety of reasons, but 3 good ones at least :)

User avatar
Soronarr
Pixie
Pixie
Posts: 117
Joined: 25 Aug 2010
Location: Croatia

Postby Soronarr » Oct 24 2011, 10:18

Yazman wrote:Overall I'm very happy with Heroes VI. After the astounding piece of **** that Heroes V was, Heroes VI, while not perfect, is a huge breath of fresh air.

From the stupid cliched, LOTR-esque generic towns of Heroes V


LOTR-esque? :|

Now, don't get me wrong here -case for the most part I didn't particualy like H5 design - but there was nothing LOTR-esque about it.
Also, people throw the word "generic" around like crazy...and most often completely wrong.

Personally the "nature" town I liked hte best from all heroes incarnations was Sorceress town from H2. It was colorfull, relaly ntural and everything fit well. You had (non-native american indian copy)elves, dwarves, druids, unicorns, faries, Phoenixes. Ad a treant or 1 or 2 more elf or dwarf units and you got a perect town - one I would gladly play.


I utterly HATE what they did with Academy/mage. I just don't think the arabian night setting/theme works. It's jarring.

User avatar
Soronarr
Pixie
Pixie
Posts: 117
Joined: 25 Aug 2010
Location: Croatia

Postby Soronarr » Oct 24 2011, 10:29

Mhorhe wrote:My pleasure :) I realize there was little point to it, but it just annoyed me enough to write that big ol' wall'o'text there. Just so many things that were incredibly small (like, the color of the Phoenix..what?) and yet were presented like this gigantic incredibly broken things that can and will devour the love for Might&Magic from your heart. Silly.


You got to relaise that many things are like toilet seats. Leaving it up is no big deal for you, but it drives your significant other insane, iritating her on a almost subatomic level.

"small things", especially if they pile up can ruin a setting or game. Design is key.

I do not like the color change of the phoenix at all. But I can surpress my dislike and soldeir on.
I do not like the academy design at all. But after H3 I practicly never play it, so I can get over that.
I do not like the naga faction at all - but I never planed to even look at it.
I do not like the blazing glories. But I can get over it..maybe.
Etc..I could go on.

Yet when you combine these things you end up with a game I'm not even sure I want to paly. Tehre is no faction thatI really like.
In H2, I played Knight(heaven), Sorcerres(Nature) and Mage(academy).

Now, only haven still has a bit of the appeal left, and even that is dwindling. It just saddens me. (and only 4 mission per side? MEh...)

Yazman
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 14
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby Yazman » Oct 26 2011, 9:55

Soronarr wrote:
Yazman wrote:Overall I'm very happy with Heroes VI. After the astounding piece of **** that Heroes V was, Heroes VI, while not perfect, is a huge breath of fresh air.

From the stupid cliched, LOTR-esque generic towns of Heroes V


LOTR-esque? :|

Now, don't get me wrong here -case for the most part I didn't particualy like H5 design - but there was nothing LOTR-esque about it.
Also, people throw the word "generic" around like crazy...and most often completely wrong.

Personally the "nature" town I liked hte best from all heroes incarnations was Sorceress town from H2. It was colorfull, relaly ntural and everything fit well. You had (non-native american indian copy)elves, dwarves, druids, unicorns, faries, Phoenixes. Ad a treant or 1 or 2 more elf or dwarf units and you got a perect town - one I would gladly play.


I utterly HATE what they did with Academy/mage. I just don't think the arabian night setting/theme works. It's jarring.


They were generic as hell. They took Dungeon and Nature and turned them into stupid elf cliches. They turned Dungeon into a D&D ripoff (Drow?) and Nature had one too many elf units. I can handle one or two but three (almost half) is too much, imo.

I loved Dungeon in Heroes 3. Dungeon didn't have any elves at all like in Heroes 5 - they went from being an interesting, more unique team with manticores, minotaurs, troglodytes, etc to being a complete Drow ripoff! So bloody lame.

The re-interpretation of dungeon was, imo, the worst interpretation I've seen of any town in any Heroes game. Not to mention the abomination that was the so-called "fortress" town which was literally all dwarves except for the dragon. Absolutely boring and cliched.

User avatar
Mhorhe
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 25
Joined: 19 Oct 2011

Postby Mhorhe » Oct 26 2011, 14:21

Yazman wrote:They were generic as hell. They took Dungeon and Nature and turned them into stupid elf cliches. They turned Dungeon into a D&D ripoff (Drow?) and Nature had one too many elf units. I can handle one or two but three (almost half) is too much, imo.

I loved Dungeon in Heroes 3. Dungeon didn't have any elves at all like in Heroes 5 - they went from being an interesting, more unique team with manticores, minotaurs, troglodytes, etc to being a complete Drow ripoff! So bloody lame.

The re-interpretation of dungeon was, imo, the worst interpretation I've seen of any town in any Heroes game. Not to mention the abomination that was the so-called "fortress" town which was literally all dwarves except for the dragon. Absolutely boring and cliched.


Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not here to judge your preferences :) To each his own!

What I want to say is that, funnily enough, I liked the HV castles for the exact same reasons you disliked them! :D

Ever since HI, I liked that the Knight castle really felt like an actual army, while every other castle like a jumble of fantastic creatures with little rhyme or reason to be together. And the Knight/Haven castle kept that aspect through all its iterations - up until HIII EVERY unit was human, and since HIII generally 5/7 were human.

I totally disliked the HIII Dungeon, for instance, because it felt like a jumble of creatures with no glue to hold them together. Beholders I despise as the worst fantasy idea ever, Medusas with.. bows? seriously? Nothing better you could think of with a Medusa? And generally too many fantastic creatures all mixed together. Who's controlling the Manticores, the troglodytes? :S

Since HV (and to some extent IV even) the different castles were no longer a concept (Sorceress=Nature, for instance) but rather the ARMIES of a particular race. Haven was the Human army, Rampart the Elf army etc.

Since they're armies from a fantasy setting, they can and will include diverse fantastic creatures of a different race than the "main" army. But these remain additions, the auxiliaries if you will, while the main body is, quite naturally, made up of the troops of that particular race.

Best example being the Fortress. It's the army of the Dwarven race, with every aspect of it (infantry, ranged, cavalry etc) covered.

It's a system that's not illogical, and is used in many other fantasy settings. Like the Warhammer fantasy one. Or in Disciples for instance.

User avatar
Soronarr
Pixie
Pixie
Posts: 117
Joined: 25 Aug 2010
Location: Croatia

Postby Soronarr » Oct 27 2011, 10:40

Yazman wrote:
Soronarr wrote:
Yazman wrote:Overall I'm very happy with Heroes VI. After the astounding piece of **** that Heroes V was, Heroes VI, while not perfect, is a huge breath of fresh air.

From the stupid cliched, LOTR-esque generic towns of Heroes V


LOTR-esque? :|

Now, don't get me wrong here -case for the most part I didn't particualy like H5 design - but there was nothing LOTR-esque about it.
Also, people throw the word "generic" around like crazy...and most often completely wrong.

Personally the "nature" town I liked hte best from all heroes incarnations was Sorceress town from H2. It was colorfull, relaly ntural and everything fit well. You had (non-native american indian copy)elves, dwarves, druids, unicorns, faries, Phoenixes. Ad a treant or 1 or 2 more elf or dwarf units and you got a perect town - one I would gladly play.


I utterly HATE what they did with Academy/mage. I just don't think the arabian night setting/theme works. It's jarring.


They were generic as hell. They took Dungeon and Nature and turned them into stupid elf cliches. They turned Dungeon into a D&D ripoff (Drow?) and Nature had one too many elf units. I can handle one or two but three (almost half) is too much, imo.

I loved Dungeon in Heroes 3. Dungeon didn't have any elves at all like in Heroes 5 - they went from being an interesting, more unique team with manticores, minotaurs, troglodytes, etc to being a complete Drow ripoff! So bloody lame.

The re-interpretation of dungeon was, imo, the worst interpretation I've seen of any town in any Heroes game. Not to mention the abomination that was the so-called "fortress" town which was literally all dwarves except for the dragon. Absolutely boring and cliched.


I don't like the native-american indian thing they did with Nature/elf town in H5, but I'd hardly call it generic.

Dungeon? Agree with you there. Frak dark elves. The old Warlock town would be been a million times better.


But please, stop throwing words like "cliche" and "generic" around like crazy. It de-values them when they're overused by every Bob, Dick and Harry.

I've herd such accusation so many time that I' have become alergic to those words. My default reaction to people over-using them is hate.

Yazman
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 14
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby Yazman » Nov 2 2011, 11:41

Soronarr wrote:
Yazman wrote:
Soronarr wrote:
Yazman wrote:Overall I'm very happy with Heroes VI. After the astounding piece of **** that Heroes V was, Heroes VI, while not perfect, is a huge breath of fresh air.

From the stupid cliched, LOTR-esque generic towns of Heroes V


LOTR-esque? :|

Now, don't get me wrong here -case for the most part I didn't particualy like H5 design - but there was nothing LOTR-esque about it.
Also, people throw the word "generic" around like crazy...and most often completely wrong.

Personally the "nature" town I liked hte best from all heroes incarnations was Sorceress town from H2. It was colorfull, relaly ntural and everything fit well. You had (non-native american indian copy)elves, dwarves, druids, unicorns, faries, Phoenixes. Ad a treant or 1 or 2 more elf or dwarf units and you got a perect town - one I would gladly play.


I utterly HATE what they did with Academy/mage. I just don't think the arabian night setting/theme works. It's jarring.


They were generic as hell. They took Dungeon and Nature and turned them into stupid elf cliches. They turned Dungeon into a D&D ripoff (Drow?) and Nature had one too many elf units. I can handle one or two but three (almost half) is too much, imo.

I loved Dungeon in Heroes 3. Dungeon didn't have any elves at all like in Heroes 5 - they went from being an interesting, more unique team with manticores, minotaurs, troglodytes, etc to being a complete Drow ripoff! So bloody lame.

The re-interpretation of dungeon was, imo, the worst interpretation I've seen of any town in any Heroes game. Not to mention the abomination that was the so-called "fortress" town which was literally all dwarves except for the dragon. Absolutely boring and cliched.


I don't like the native-american indian thing they did with Nature/elf town in H5, but I'd hardly call it generic.

Dungeon? Agree with you there. Frak dark elves. The old Warlock town would be been a million times better.


But please, stop throwing words like "cliche" and "generic" around like crazy. It de-values them when they're overused by every Bob, Dick and Harry.

I've herd such accusation so many time that I' have become alergic to those words. My default reaction to people over-using them is hate.


Yeah, nature wasn't so bad - I take that back. But what they did to Dungeon, and the Fortress town - those WERE generic. I think that's pretty hard to deny. Heroes V's Dungeon was ripped straight out of D&D, and Fortress was just a generic Dwarf town.



Best example being the Fortress. It's the army of the Dwarven race, with every aspect of it (infantry, ranged, cavalry etc) covered.

It's a system that's not illogical, and is used in many other fantasy settings. Like the Warhammer fantasy one. Or in Disciples for instance.


If I wanted to play Warhammer, I would just play Warhammer. If I wanted to play Disciples, I would play Disciples. The Fortress is the best example of what I hated about Heroes V. They weren't going for originality, they re-designed the game world and turned it into boring old overdone fantasy, instead of going for something creative and original. Every unit was a Dwarf of some kind! Every unit! Let's have something different for once! That's why I appreciated Heroes VI for being more creative. They had new and different units, and even an entire new team. Sanctuary was different and I liked it. Furthermore, it is still a coherent army but not every single unit was a naga. Only two of them were. Which is fine by me. Plus, they didn't just make it some sort of boring old overdone race! Nagas are unusual, different. Black Hole clearly took a more creative angle, while still being true to HOMM.

Nival didn't. They ruined Dungeon in their game. They could have gone for something totally different for Dungeon. Could have had them organised in a different fashion, run by a less common (or original) race, with a different culture altogether, but instead they just went with yet more elves. Lame as hell, and boring as hell.

User avatar
parcaleste
Pit Lord
Pit Lord
Posts: 1204
Joined: 06 Nov 2007
Location: Sofia - Vulgaria

Postby parcaleste » Nov 2 2011, 12:42

^ Your opinion. :)

User avatar
Sikon
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 542
Joined: 22 Dec 2005
Location: Russia

Postby Sikon » Nov 2 2011, 15:22

The creative aspect is not in control of Nival or Black Hole. They are just subcontractors. Worldbuilding is done by Ubisoft. Ashan and its factions are Ubisoft's creation.

User avatar
Edwardas 3
Pixie
Pixie
Posts: 125
Joined: 26 Jan 2008
Location: Stockholm

Postby Edwardas 3 » Nov 2 2011, 20:25

Sikon wrote:The creative aspect is not in control of Nival or Black Hole. They are just subcontractors. Worldbuilding is done by Ubisoft. Ashan and its factions are Ubisoft's creation.

yeah and theirs was also how much finances to invest into development
Lord Godwinson in BDJ mods for MM 6 and 7

User avatar
Mhorhe
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 25
Joined: 19 Oct 2011

Postby Mhorhe » Nov 2 2011, 22:36

Yazman wrote:If I wanted to play Warhammer, I would just play Warhammer. If I wanted to play Disciples, I would play Disciples. The Fortress is the best example of what I hated about Heroes V. They weren't going for originality, they re-designed the game world and turned it into boring old overdone fantasy, instead of going for something creative and original. Every unit was a Dwarf of some kind! Every unit! Let's have something different for once! That's why I appreciated Heroes VI for being more creative. They had new and different units, and even an entire new team. Sanctuary was different and I liked it. Furthermore, it is still a coherent army but not every single unit was a naga. Only two of them were. Which is fine by me. Plus, they didn't just make it some sort of boring old overdone race! Nagas are unusual, different. Black Hole clearly took a more creative angle, while still being true to HOMM.

Nival didn't. They ruined Dungeon in their game. They could have gone for something totally different for Dungeon. Could have had them organised in a different fashion, run by a less common (or original) race, with a different culture altogether, but instead they just went with yet more elves. Lame as hell, and boring as hell.


All I can say is this:
parcaleste wrote:^ Your opinion. :)
;)

Not that I'm trying to say your opinion is wrong, far from it - our opinions just sit at 180 degrees of each other :D I liked it for the exact reasons you disliked it. Just have to agree to disagree :)

Yazman
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 14
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby Yazman » Nov 7 2011, 6:31

parcaleste wrote:^ Your opinion. :)


This has got to be the most worthless, pointless post I've seen on these forums in a long time. Trying to validate your taste by reminding me that I only speak for myself, as if your opinion was in danger of being monopolised by mine. Everyone already knows it's my opinion by virtue of the fact that I said it, no need to restate the obvious you tool.

User avatar
arthureloi
Peasant
Peasant
Posts: 69
Joined: 05 Jan 2006

Postby arthureloi » Nov 7 2011, 10:58

Yazman wrote:
parcaleste wrote:^ Your opinion. :)


Everyone already knows it's my opinion by virtue of the fact that I said it, no need to restate the obvious you tool.


No need to call the guy a "tool" though. A little bit harsh, on my book.
One could only match, move by move, the machinations of fate and thus defy the tyrannous stars.

User avatar
parcaleste
Pit Lord
Pit Lord
Posts: 1204
Joined: 06 Nov 2007
Location: Sofia - Vulgaria

Postby parcaleste » Nov 7 2011, 12:18

Yazman wrote:... Everyone already knows it's my opinion...

Which you are not trying to imply in any way on everybody here?

Despite bashing THE GRAPHIC DESIGN of the units why not try to focus on them abilities in the game? The AWESOME skill system and racial abilities? The interaction between units from a race and the hero from the same race?

Yes, the game is having it's flaws, but is still keeping me busy from time to time till this day on, so instead of bashing it with "Ooooh, this race is having too many elves, this one too much dwarfs, this Demonic one is too red, what the **** are doing these skeletons in the Necromancers army?" - and so on and so on, try to focus on the GAME itself.


And I'd rather be a "tool" than a stubborn poo poo doodie head. :proud:

User avatar
Corlagon
Archangel
Archangel
Posts: 1421
Joined: 03 Sep 2007
Location: HC/CH

Postby Corlagon » Nov 7 2011, 14:17

Yazman wrote:This has got to be the most worthless, pointless post I've seen on these forums in a long time


Not half as worthless as a post that apparently can't manage to convey its message without chastising another poster as being hardware.

User avatar
arthureloi
Peasant
Peasant
Posts: 69
Joined: 05 Jan 2006

Postby arthureloi » Nov 7 2011, 14:24

Corlagon wrote:
Yazman wrote:This has got to be the most worthless, pointless post I've seen on these forums in a long time


Not half as worthless as a post that apparently can't manage to convey its message without chastising another poster as being hardware.

*Chuckles*
That insult conjured on my mind stuff like hammer, nails, screwdrivers etc and not hardware!
Yazman should clarify what kind of tools he was referring to. This could cause mass confusion!
One could only match, move by move, the machinations of fate and thus defy the tyrannous stars.

User avatar
Mhorhe
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 25
Joined: 19 Oct 2011

Postby Mhorhe » Nov 7 2011, 14:46

Corlagon wrote:
Yazman wrote:This has got to be the most worthless, pointless post I've seen on these forums in a long time


Not half as worthless as a post that apparently can't manage to convey its message without chastising another poster as being hardware.


:D

User avatar
parcaleste
Pit Lord
Pit Lord
Posts: 1204
Joined: 06 Nov 2007
Location: Sofia - Vulgaria

Postby parcaleste » Nov 7 2011, 15:46

arthureloi wrote:... This could cause mass confusion!

Ouch. :shh:

RollingWave
Peasant
Peasant
Posts: 79
Joined: 25 Mar 2006

Postby RollingWave » Nov 8 2011, 8:41

Overall, while I'm annoyed by the bugs the game is much more interesting than H5 IMHO. I think some balance issues exist of course but I for one enjoy being able to use basic creatures all game. (though I do generally agree that given the horrendous cost of Champion buildings they should be given a general buff right now. most of the time my champion creatures end up being much less useful than my core / elite because they're so much more numerous.) The skill sets and magic and special abilities are better thought out this time around. and the story theme is much stronger for those of us that havn't played a ton of the RPG versions of MM

I'm somewhat dissapointed in the lack of resources , i liked all those different types of resource theme before. and I think some detailed aspect could be better (for example older HoMM you use to have a neat little story for everything from finding old skeletons to touching a statue to finding an artifact etc..). but the former is an opinion thing and the later is an annoying but not game killing decision.

But still, as a whole I like HoMM 6. it's not a total masterpiece like H2/H3 but certainly better than HoMM V.
The river of time wash away all heroes

ywhtptgtfo
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 528
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby ywhtptgtfo » Nov 9 2011, 3:10

I haven't touched the game since I finished the final campaign and a skirmish map a while ago. Personally, I don't see the possibility of a patch that can really make it a good game.

My impression is that a lot of the flaws we see are integral to the game's design, from town conversion to balance, and to skill system.

I whole-heartedly disagree with how the game's better than Heroes 5. A key difference I observe is that I am actually excited about level ups and getting buildings in Heroes 5 but I was like "meh" when I do the same in Heroes 6.


Return to “Heroes V-VI”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests