Single player skirmish maps are not worth playing
Well yes, and preferences differ per person. That said though, I'd be more than willing to argue that even anyone who considers even picking up a turn-based game is in general more interested in the story than people who buy racing games, SC2 or Battlefield. In that sense the box might be 'misleading' to people who don't usually play TBS but want to give one a try, but I do reckon the larger part of the audience will buy a game like Heroes with the idea that they're going to get the bang for their bucks out of the campaign.
-
- Hunter
- Posts: 528
- Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Err.. I wasn't complaining about the mode of story-telling... but rather the overall coherence of the plot. It all felt very very rushed, IMO.
If they did it the Heroes 3/4 way, that's completely fine. Maranthea's swamp campaign was excellent and so were many others. Another important issue you did not account for is that Heroes 3 was not that heavy in the campaign and the skirmish mode was very well-done (I played Reign of Chaos and Brave New World all the time back then).
As well, Heroes 2 had a lousy campaign but it was a great game because skirmishes were fun.
If they did it the Heroes 3/4 way, that's completely fine. Maranthea's swamp campaign was excellent and so were many others. Another important issue you did not account for is that Heroes 3 was not that heavy in the campaign and the skirmish mode was very well-done (I played Reign of Chaos and Brave New World all the time back then).
As well, Heroes 2 had a lousy campaign but it was a great game because skirmishes were fun.
Mozared wrote:'Bad' depends on your benchmarks, though. I for one really enjoyed the story of Heroes 3. Heroes 6's way of storytelling is very similar to that, with added graphics and some cutscenes (however lame some of those might be). Most of Heroes 6's story is told through in-game events and conversation pop-ups, just like it was in Heroes 3. It's mostly reading.ywhtptgtfo wrote:I agree that Heroes 6's selling point is the story as one can see from the advertisements. While the concept is more original than Heroes 5's, the execution is quite bad... unfortunately. Even if one plays the campaign maps in sequence, there are a lot of wtf moments.
I'm not saying that you shouldn't expect improved storytelling now that we have improved technology (since when Heroes 3 was made), but it does sometimes get a bit tiring when people complain the story of the latest Heroes games suck because of bad cutscenes when we were perfectly happy when we had to do with simple windows with text.
Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I actually liked Heroes 2's campaign and campaign structure. Then again, I think I was 14 when I played it, so perhaps my opinion was, shall we say, unrefined...ywhtptgtfo wrote: As well, Heroes 2 had a lousy campaign but it was a great game because skirmishes were fun.
I'm in the same minority.Tale wrote:Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I actually liked Heroes 2's campaign and campaign structure. Then again, I think I was 14 when I played it, so perhaps my opinion was, shall we say, unrefined...ywhtptgtfo wrote: As well, Heroes 2 had a lousy campaign but it was a great game because skirmishes were fun.
"Not a shred of evidence exists in favour of the idea that life is serious." Brendan Gill
-
- Hunter
- Posts: 528
- Joined: 06 Jan 2006
It wasn't so bad based on the standards back then, but it's pretty lacking in narrative if you compare it with that of Heroes 3. I did, however, like little nifty things like Ogre Alliance or Dwarf Bane.Dalai wrote:I'm in the same minority.Tale wrote:Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I actually liked Heroes 2's campaign and campaign structure. Then again, I think I was 14 when I played it, so perhaps my opinion was, shall we say, unrefined...ywhtptgtfo wrote: As well, Heroes 2 had a lousy campaign but it was a great game because skirmishes were fun.
But even if the campaign lacked narrative, at least the maps were often well-designed and quite playable. For example, the last Roland or Archibald maps had an epic feel.
They wanted to make some cross-breed between king's bounty , Heroes and diciples and they failed misserably... kings bounty is all about a great campaign, Heroes is all about great strategy multiplayer (hot seat or not) gameplay(with some story/management) and diciples is a mix on his own, they combined parts of all games together to create a mess really...
Keep your friends close... And your enemy's closer !
Re: Single player skirmish maps are not worth playing
ywhtptgtfo wrote:I finally tried one today with aggressive A.I. turned on and hard settings. All the A.I. did was to turtle and leave around unclaimed resource piles. A few A.I. even had paralyzed heroes that don't move at all.
Somehow, the A.I. seems to have regressed since the demo, which is weird. I wouldn't recommend anyone playing single player skirmish maps until the A.I. is fixed.
Oh, and by the way, it seems that creature growth calculations are extremely buggy and that stretches beyond the special weeks. I literally saw growth numbers changing day to day when I simply click end-turn to test it.
I'd say this game is released at a much more sorry state than Heroes 5.
Wow, I must be a horrible player then because out of all the single maps I've tried, I've only beaten one of them, disagree with this statement!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests