..im actually much more impressed than i initially expected..
Blegh...
I'll end up sticking with 2 and 3 I expect. 5 is terrible, 6 is terrible, and 7 looks to carry on the tradition of raping the original factions. Where's my zombies and mummies, why do we have some stupid spider? I want my trolls back, damnit! 3 added so many great features, but 2 has the best factions, and despite using their evolutions, 7 isn't even close to having the character of the original six.
https://youtu.be/Ickt5_QM9mM?t=15m18s
Okay, that guy is just disturbing. Truly. My favorite class is some guy that was molested...
Evil incarnate, ruling over an army of slaves reaped from the dead of his enemies, reduced to an asshole with daddy issues, and replaced by whiny twats that seek to avoid the pain of mortality by killing themselves.
The poofter didn't get beat up enough in grade school.
the real game - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQhOkJ4Pf0o
(the map maker)
sk gets a shout out from venturebeat in the heroes 7 review:
"If you’re looking for a lighthearted turn-based fantasy-themed strategy, I recommend you take a gander at Stardock’s solid Sorcerer King — also not perfect, but a darn sight better-implemented and more entertaining than M&M."
http://venturebeat.com/2015/10/01/might-and-magic-heroes-vii-avoiding-this-epic-disappointment-is-your-best-strategy/view-all/
although it was obviously rushed for the anniversary, personally, i think h7 is great. reviewers are just bashing ubi for floating the franchise on a shoestring budget, which they deserve.
Looks like a pretty good review to me. It's in depth, from someone that knows the series but doesn't get hung up on their idiotic changes to the IP, and right in line with the last two scores if not for the rushed buggy state.
You might think the game is great, but great hasn't exactly been the normal reaction. Steam is mostly negative, and metacritic has a 5.5 for the user rating. 40 is a bit low, but most of the reviewers are being kind, users have been far worse on the game than the critics have.
most reviews ive read honestly dont make much sense... they say they enjoy the game but it feels unpolished = 50/100?
like i said it was obviously rushed for the anniversary, but this is the best launch of a heroes game since 3. 4 was rushed and incomplete to the degree of having deeply flawed mechanics and a horrendous ai (however the soundtrack and writing were superb, which, coupled with some great innovations like the hero class system, made for a game that i and many others actually quite enjoy). it took two expansions for 5 to get good, and even then the community had to mod the hell out of it to really bring out its shine. m&m: heroes 5.5 might just be the premium heroes experience atm. 6 plays more like a kings bounty game, a really poorly engineered one. at least 7 launched capturing the essence and mechanics of the original heroes games. this is the first one to foster user created factions right out of the box, and the most prominent gripe i see is regarding cut scenes... in a strategy game? ubi definitely needs to buy better ingredients for the cooks, however h7 just needs to go back in the oven for a bit.
a couple quotes from the hc:
"This is obviously my opinion, but at least with Heroes 7 I find the fun element in the game. Maybe it's the scaling of the map bringing the balance back to Heroes 3 level, maybe it's the better overall balance in combat and return of resource management, maybe it's the better writing and VA in the campaigns (despite the 3D puppets - they are creepy, but not a dealbreaker). In my opinon, there's at least something which can be salvaged here despite the bugs, graphics and animations. Fur Ubisoft, I say issue an apology for the broken release, and understand that either you kill the franchise altogether or put in enough money to get a polished interesting game which can be sold for 40EUR to a wider audience. If there's no marketing, no in-game tutorial and the price tag of 60EUR for a buggy release - well that's just poor project management and vision. So do what Stardock did with Elemental: Wars of Magic. Somehow these guys managed to apologise, spent a year fixing the game, improving every aspect of it, including the UI, graphics, bugs, balance, magic system etc., gave out expansion for free and still saved the franchise, found profit and made a well-received sequel."
"the m&m series and heroes 1 through 3 got progressively better as new world computing honed their skills and their understanding of where the franchise could go. heroes 4 and the rest of the franchise suffered as the company fell. heroes 5 through tribes of the east got progressively better as nival honed their skills and their understanding of where the series could go. heroes 6 was overly ambitious and suffered as black hole fell. m&m 10 is very good, and heroes 7 will most likely get progressively better as limbic hones their skills and their understanding of where the franchise can go. imo since nwc, thus far they have gotten the most right right out of the gate; especially with the mod tools."
http://heroescommunity.com/viewthread.php3?TID=41772
I think if you strip away the sub-par graphics, the uncoordinated UI, the somewhat empty maps... if I look just at the gameplay mechanics, think of it like a boardgame, then it's not too shabby. I think TotalBiscuit called it uninspired, and I agree with that. In the end it feels more like a bad remake instead of a sequel. Didn't we do this "resource type spam" already? And how boring is it to fight 3 stacks of identical mobs? This game was a waste of my time with Aow3 to play.
i quite enjoy them both *shrugs
http://heroescommunity.com/viewthread.php3?TID=41833
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
