Heroes of Might & Magic 7

[Zeriel]

Thoughts:

Cabir looks awesome, even more so than the concept art suggested. Great work there.

Again, gargoyle looks better than the concept art. I still don't like the direction they went with it, but it looks a lot better in execution.

That carries across the whole Academy lineup really. They all look much better in motion as 3D models than the concept art suggested...



But what the hell happened with the necromancer lineup? Academy almost looks like what you used to see in their cinematics, pretty tight job overall, but necromancer is a mess. "Dark" creatures that look as if they're coated in shoe polish, weird design, shoddy modeling (the vampire especially looks like his face was taken verbatim from 5's model), and so on. The only one I legitimately like is the Grim Reaper.

Good news is that Academy went from "wow I'll never play that" to "holy hell I want this". Necromancers were one of my favorites throughout the series but going to give them a pass here.

 

[DollarSign]

I'm amazed how much people care about graphics here. It's a turn-based strategy game, there are game mechanics and campaigns to discuss. Graphics are tertiary at best.

and yet the worst thing about HomoVI was the utter disgrace that was its gameplay, and some of those dumbfuckeries (like the absurd zone of control stuff) will pass over to the next installment, making it pure shit by default.

So you considered HOMMVI to be utter shit. And you're convinced that HOMVII will be the same utter shity, despite no evidence to support your theory. And this is the overall consensus of this thread.

And then you spend twenty pages tearing apart every square inch of the upcoming utter shit sequel to utter shit sequel's graphics, which are nigh-irrelevant to its actual gameplay.

Makes total sense.

hoverdog
dog that is hovering

Oh.

I'm amazed how much people care about graphics here. It's a turn-based strategy game, there are game mechanics and campaigns to discuss. Graphics are tertiary at best.

Because most of the time in the game you look at units, not numbers, and it's nice to look at units that doesn't make your eyes bleed. It's pretty fucking simple.

Name one game where you don't spend most of the time looking at its graphics. I guess in every thread we should all be chattering non-stop about unit appearance, instead of silly nonsense like "what new things will the new sequel attempt", or "I hated the following mechanic in the other game, I've heard they're changing it in the upcoming title".

Also, if the units are making your eyes bleed, chances are, there's something wrong with your eyes. The units are perfectly fine, and no, the "my speshul snowflake tastes differ from yours" excuse doesn't fly here. If this

didn't make your eyes bleed, neither will that.

Rule of the thumb: when you walk into an RTS/TBS thread and its filled with nothing but people scrutinizing graphics, you've stumbled on a bunch of posers who don't/can't actually play the games they "discuss".

 

[Untermensch]

I'm amazed how much people care about graphics here. It's a turn-based strategy game, there are game mechanics and campaigns to discuss. Graphics are tertiary at best.

Nobody is complaining about graphics. We're complaining about the utterly hideous, overdesigned art style.

 

[DollarSign]

I'm amazed how much people care about graphics here. It's a turn-based strategy game, there are game mechanics and campaigns to discuss. Graphics are tertiary at best.

Nobody is complaining about graphics. We're complaining about the utterly hideous, overdesigned art style.

Which is idiotic, because it tells you nothing about how the units will look in the actual game.

 

[APGunner]

Nobody is complaining about graphics. We're complaining about the utterly hideous, overdesigned art style.

Which is idiotic, because it tells you nothing about how the units will look in the actual game.

I'm sorry, what? 3D models that will most likely be used in the game don't tell us ANYTHING about how the units will look in the actual game?
I'm not sure you worded that post correctly.

 

[Untermensch]

I'm amazed how much people care about graphics here. It's a turn-based strategy game, there are game mechanics and campaigns to discuss. Graphics are tertiary at best.

Nobody is complaining about graphics. We're complaining about the utterly hideous, overdesigned art style.

Which is idiotic, because it tells you nothing about how the units will look in the actual game.

They will look the way the artists model them. And since they will model them using that concept art, that's exactly how they will look.

 

[hoverdog]

I'm amazed how much people care about graphics here. It's a turn-based strategy game, there are game mechanics and campaigns to discuss. Graphics are tertiary at best.

and yet the worst thing about HomoVI was the utter disgrace that was its gameplay, and some of those dumbfuckeries (like the absurd zone of control stuff) will pass over to the next installment, making it pure shit by default.

So you considered HOMMVI to be utter shit.

yes.

And you're convinced that HOMVII will be the same utter shity, despite no evidence to support your theory. And this is the overall consensus of this thread.

they give me no reason to believe otherwise.

And then you spend twenty pages tearing apart every square inch of the upcoming utter shit sequel to utter shit sequel's graphics, which are nigh-irrelevant to its actual gameplay.

as others have pointed out, it's about the art style, not graphics. Actually it is better than HoMMV's - but that game had gameplay mechanics on par with the third part.

If this

didn't make your eyes bleed, neither will that.

confirmed for shit taste.

 

[Jaedar]

I'm amazed how much people care about graphics here. It's a turn-based strategy game, there are game mechanics and campaigns to discuss. Graphics are tertiary at best.

Nobody is complaining about graphics. We're complaining about the utterly hideous, overdesigned art style.

Which is idiotic, because it tells you nothing about how the units will look in the actual game.

Hello. Welcome to the codex. We like to complain about stuff, and the devs aren't posting about much else than graphics and art style. Therefore, complaining is done about graphics and art style.

 

[Zeriel]

I'm amazed how much people care about graphics here. It's a turn-based strategy game, there are game mechanics and campaigns to discuss. Graphics are tertiary at best.

Nobody is complaining about graphics. We're complaining about the utterly hideous, overdesigned art style.

Which is idiotic, because it tells you nothing about how the units will look in the actual game.

Hello. Welcome to the codex. We like to complain about stuff, and the devs aren't posting about much else than graphics and art style. Therefore, complaining is done about graphics and art style.

This, too. I'd love to talk about gameplay or whatever, but even when they post about it its way too vague and theoretical to sustain conversation beyond half a page of shitposting. This thread is going to be pure speculation until preview copies go out.

 

[DollarSign]

Nobody is complaining about graphics. We're complaining about the utterly hideous, overdesigned art style.

Which is idiotic, because it tells you nothing about how the units will look in the actual game.

I'm sorry, what? 3D models that will most likely be used in the game don't tell us ANYTHING about how the units will look in the actual game?
I'm not sure you worded that post correctly.

They don't tell anything relevant. Here's how HOMM VI units look on concept art/3D model presentation:

Does that tell me anything about what they look like in-game? Shit no, the top-down perspective and small unit size erases all of the "overdesigned" features, leaving behind a basic outline. And as far as basic outlines go, HOMM VII units look fine. Remember: we're not talking about technicalities, but perception. The goal is to make them look 1 identifiable in a crowd/motion; 2 conform to their faction's basic style. Both goals achieved.

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

DollarSign
I won't tell you a game where you don't look at graphics because I'm not the poster who bursted into a graphic discussion caliming that unit design is not relevant to the enjoyment of the game, so I don't understand why should I. As for your retarded argument. No, liking a nice art-style of old games won't magically make me like shit artstyle of the new game.

EDIT:
It appears that I made a mistake. You didn't post a screen from HoMM 3 but from some Wake of Gods. So no, I didn't play this since I want my games to not look like vomit.

 

[Cadmus]

Nobody is complaining about graphics. We're complaining about the utterly hideous, overdesigned art style.

Which is idiotic, because it tells you nothing about how the units will look in the actual game.

I'm sorry, what? 3D models that will most likely be used in the game don't tell us ANYTHING about how the units will look in the actual game?
I'm not sure you worded that post correctly.

They don't tell anything relevant. Here's how HOMM VI units look on concept art/3D model presentation:

Does that tell me anything about what they look like in-game? Shit no, the top-down perspective and small unit size erases all of the "overdesigned" features, leaving behind a basic outline. And as far as basic outlines go, HOMM VII units look fine. Remember: we're not talking about technicalities, but perception. The goal is to make them look 1 identifiable in a crowd/motion; 2 conform to their faction's basic style. Both goals achieved.

You're a retard.
The more shitty, overstylized details the characters have, the harder it is to tell what the fuck is going on in the game, the worse it performs and the harder it is to keep a coherent and tight style for each faction and the game.
"blah you can't appreciate the gameplay so you only talk about the graphics" you're a retard again. We know nothing about the gameplay except for "it's a return to the roots of the series but also new and exciting" which amounts to shit PR speak. Gameplay needs to be played.

It's apparently you who has no idea about the franchise because everybody liked the old graphics and style, it was a big part of the games and it made them memorable.

 

[DollarSign]

I won't tell you a game where you don't look at graphics because I'm not the poster who bursted into a graphic discussion caliming that unit design is not relevant to the enjoyment of the game, so I don't understand why should I.

It's very simple. So simple, in fact, I can't imagine how anyone with a functioning brain not understand it.

You said that you're picking apart every minor detail in concept art because you spend most of the time looking at the units in-game. Every strategy game in existence requires you to spend most of your time looking at units in-game. Ergo, if your assumption were true, then prolonged and detailed discussions of graphics would be a major part of every strategy game thread. But they're not, and never have been, being tertiary subject material.

Conclusion: you're full of shit and your argument is a weak excuse that tries to explain a specific anomaly by the use of a ubiquitous feature. Logic 101, you need it.

The more shitty, overstylized details the characters have, the harder it is to tell what the fuck is going on in the game

Moron doesn't understand "units in-game leave a completely different impression than their close-up 3d model screenshots/concept art" even with helpful pictures provided.

It appears that I made a mistake. You didn't post a screen from HoMM 3 but from some Wake of Gods. So no, I didn't play this since I want my games to not look like vomit.

Codextard logic: change the screenshot label from HoMM 3 to something else, and the same screenshot turns from magical etalon of good taste to vomit.

 

[Darth Roxor]

why are you guise arguing with drog

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

You said that you're picking apart every minor detail in concept art because you spend most of the time looking at the units in-game. Every strategy game in existence requires you to spend most of your time looking at units in-game. Ergo, if your assumption were true, then prolonged and detailed discussions of graphics would be a major part of every strategy game thread. But they're not, and never have been, being tertiary subject material.

I like what you've written because it perfectly ilustrates how faulty your thinking is. So my retarded friend, let me educate you. In most other cases there is no prelonged discussion regarding units design because in most strategy games art-style is nothing worth talking about. It's usually just OK. Artstyle in HoMM 7 on the other hand is far from "just fine" which is why it inspires discussion. It's that simple. It's actually pretty laughable that your brain just can't understand something like that. Heh.

 

[hoverdog]

why are you guise arguing with drog

it's 1eyedking more likely

 

[DollarSign]

I like what you've written because it perfectly ilustrates how faulty your thinking is. So my retarded friend, let me educate you. In most other cases there is no prelonged discussion regarding units design because in most strategy games art-style is nothing worth talking about. It's that simple. It's actually pretty laughable that your brain just can't understand something like that. Heh.

So you admit that HOMM VII has an art style that's way more distinctive/interesting/memorable than most strategy games. Good job shooting yourself in the foot.

And don't even try the infantile "it's memorable because it's shit" excuse. If something is shit, then it's shit, and there's nothing to talk about.

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

I like what you've written because it perfectly ilustrates how faulty your thinking is. So my retarded friend, let me educate you. In most other cases there is no prelonged discussion regarding units design because in most strategy games art-style is nothing worth talking about. It's that simple. It's actually pretty laughable that your brain just can't understand something like that. Heh.

So you admit that HOMM VII has an art style that's way more distinctive/interesting/memorable than most strategy games. Good job shooting yourself in the foot.

And don't even try the infantile "it's memorable because it's shit" excuse. If something is shit, then it's shit, and there's nothing to talk about.

Oh wow, a butthurt who complained about people talking about art-style changes subject after being proven that there was a reason why people talked about artstyle. This trick won't work with me. Just admit that you were wrong get the fuck out retard. And yes if something is shit, then there is a reason to talk about that. DA:I was shit and it still spawned long discussions.

 

[APGunner]

Sometimes it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.

 

[DollarSign]

Oh wow, a butthurt who complained about people talking about art-style changes subject after being proven that there was a reason why people talked about artstyle. This trick won't work with me. Just admit that you were wrong get the fuck out retard. And yes if something is shit, then there is a reason to talk about that. DA:I was shit and it still spawned long discussions.

You're descending into dementia at this point, and I'm not even sure how your reply relates to anything I've said in this thread. You've been proven wrong, tried to make a dart for the opposite extreme, and were caught contradicting yourself. You've lost, bob.

DA:I was shit and it still spawned long discussions.

DAI spawned relevant discussions after it came out, everything that came before was just your run-of-the-mill codexian retardation that had nothing to do with the actual game.

Nobody in the pre-release DAI discussion was able to predict that the game would be shit due to an overabundance of copy-pasted shit-quests.

Nobody knew that the game would look like a single-player MMO.

Everyone thought it would be filled with SJW crap, when in reality it was such a tiny part of the game, it wouldn't even be worth mentioning on its own.

There's a difference between those who mindlessly shit all over anything that isn't from their neckbeard glory days, and those who actually understand why a game deserves praise/scorn. Neckbeard morons < informed players.

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

Oh wow, a butthurt who complained about people talking about art-style changes subject after being proven that there was a reason why people talked about artstyle. This trick won't work with me. Just admit that you were wrong get the fuck out retard. And yes if something is shit, then there is a reason to talk about that. DA:I was shit and it still spawned long discussions.

You're descending into dementia at this point, and I'm not even sure how your reply relates to anything I've said in this thread. You've been proven wrong, tried to make a dart for the opposite extreme, and were caught contradicting yourself. You've lost, bob.

I've been proven wrong? Where. You are the one who went from "artystle doesn't matter" to "it's good because you've are discussing it!". No, changing subjects whenever you are proven wrong is not winning a discussion.

DAI spawned relevant discussions after it came out, everything that came before was just your run-of-the-mill codexian retardation that had nothing to do with the actual game.

Well behold, we are discussing unit designs after they were revealed and not before. Nobody says that the game is shit, just that the artstyle is shit.

 

[DollarSign]

I've been proven wrong? Where. You are the one who went from "artystle don't matter" to "it's good because you've are discussing it!". No, changing subjects whenever you are proven wrong is not winning a discussion.

Art style does indeed not matter. Which has nothing to do with whether it's good or bad. The subject from the start was "why would anyone without any vested interest in playing the game spend so much time discussing the art style?", and you provided a logical explanation - because it is distinctive/memorable/interesting enough to warrant a discussion on its own. Which still has no relevance to the actual game, because in-game units will appear different.

Basically, you're just lying at this point, and getting quite boring.

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

I've been proven wrong? Where. You are the one who went from "artystle don't matter" to "it's good because you've are discussing it!". No, changing subjects whenever you are proven wrong is not winning a discussion.

Art style does indeed not matter. Which has nothing to do with whether it's good or bad. The subject from the start was "why would anyone without any vested interest in playing the game spend so much time discussing the art style?", and you provided a logical epxlanation. Basically, you're just lying at this point, and getting quite boring.

Nope, you are the one who've jumped from discussing whenever it matters or not to discussing it's quality, stop lying.

 

[Pope Amole II]

It appears that I made a mistake. You didn't post a screen from HoMM 3 but from some Wake of Gods. So no, I didn't play this since I want my games to not look like vomit.

Actually, that's not from the WoG - that's from Horn of the Abyss, the inquisitor town (which is upcoming in one of the future installments, probably on the next thursday). And it looks much better than your average WoG sprites - the art style may be a bit questionable in that installment as it's kinda way too disciples, but in terms of sprite quality it looks almost as nice as the original (especially considering it's an unpaid, zero-budgeted fan effort).

 

[Tehdagah]

The overdesigned art style is highly cancerogenic. Not as much as in HoMMV, though.

Still, I gave up all hope on this. Another fantastic franchise down the drain.

"overdesigned"