Might and Magic Might & Magic X - Legacy

[Black_Willow]

Started this up today but will probably restart (just wanted to get a sense of how it plays and what classes were like). Any general tips in terms of party/class composition? Not looking for any min/max stuff, just want to know if there are classes/specs/talents/whatever that are broken and should be avoided. For example, I've heard ranged combat is fairly worthless.

Ranged is ok but don't expect it to be as good in melee combat as a melee weapon skill. Still, ranger can have grandmaster daggers and scout grandmaster axes, so they're both good classes.
As was said before, don't take the mercenary.
Oh, and there is one class that can make a huge difference - free mage. Only free mages can cast dark spells, which can help you find secrets early in the game or lifts buffs from enemies (and this is a big one, since said enemies may have something like 50% damage reduction buff on them).

 

[Metro]

Got a little further than I did the first attempt: cleared the Lighthouse and did most of the bandit cave. Still... I dunno... seems like tanks are relatively worthless (I've used a Crusader both times) early on as the taunt eats through mana and can often miss. Couple that with the fact they do feeble damage with a one hander and I think I'm better off with a couple of Barbarians for physical DPS (or a Barbarian and a dual wielder or something) paired with a couple of casters. The casters seem okay (have a Runepriest that casts firebolt 99% of the time and a Shaman that alternates between sparks and that earth heal) but potion chugging gets old. Not sure if I need to stack more points in spirit or just ignore that and goes with magic to increase damage.

Will probably put it aside and start over and forget about having a tank archetype. Oh... and as far as the people who were criticizing the looks of the game before... I'm actually going to have to agree. I dunno wtf is going on but visually the quality is lower than Grimrock 1. Granted Grimrock was mostly the same tileset and art assets but the textures here are muddy and the anti-aliasing... oh lord... I tried every option. It's not my system (770 card). I guess Ubisoft didn't give these guys any money at all. The artstyle is fine but it could stand to look a lot crisper/cleaner.

 

[Cyberarmy]

I used crusader as a cleric thanks to GM Light magic, mostly for that shield spell, so my other casters can focus on other spells. Rune master had fire and earth and Freemage had dark, air and a liitle bir water. My main damage dealer was elven blade master who one shoted enemies in higher levels (mostly herself too depending on enemy buffs...) Casters deal really good damage, earth and fire magic helps early, air and dark is mostly for late game.
Playing a "tanky" character not pays well, going for damage or support is much more better.


Edit: Party don't really matters that much, only speeds up the gameplay. I don't really think anyone can get near Blademasters damage at higher levels, so I recommend having one in party for first playthrough.
PS: Only select heroic voices for your characters...

 

[mastroego]

Thanks for the comments again.
I am somewhat intrigued, I might give it a go indeed.

Not sure about the difficulty level. Too easy ain't good, but HP bloat might be worse...

 

[Cyberarmy]

HP bloat no bothers that much if you upgrade your gear (pray to RNG gods ) and focus on GM skills. A jack of all trades not really effective in this game.
Buffs and clensing spells are the most need for later part. Also there are some large groups of enemies in laters stages, thats where the casters excel at with their spells. Some tornados here, fire rune there and you decimate 2-3 groups in same time.

 

[Davaris]

Did they close or move their website? This link is dead.

https://mightandmagicx-legacy.ubi.com/

 

[Metro]

Doesn't surprise me. As I said before it seems like they gave these guys little money and couldn't care less about the continuation of the traditional Might & Magic format. I eventually uninstalled after 20 or so hours. Boring slogfest brought down by the shallow nature of every facet of gameplay.

 

[GlutenBurger]

It would be interesting to see a retrospective interview with the developers at this point. Some of them seemed to have actual passion for what they were working on, and were probably not fully satisfied with the end product.

 

[Bubbles]

It would be interesting to see a retrospective interview with the developers at this point. Some of them seemed to have actual passion for what they were working on, and were probably not fully satisfied with the end product.

Should be no problem as long as the Ubisoft PR department okays it.

 

[Infinitron]

Since he brought the game up, here's Metro's Steam review:

Pains me to do so but Steam's inadequate yes/no recommendation system strikes again. I'm not entirely sure of the development of this game but I suspect Ubisoft just threw these guys permission to use the license and very little in the way of funding. The game feels extremely low budget. Worse than some indie games. Even looking past superficials like the unpolished graphics and lack of voice acting (things one would assume to be better with a AAA publisher) the mechanics are overly shallow such that most people will probably burn out on the excessive content due to tedium.

Melee is very basic with only one talent tree and limited attacks. Range is pointless given the number of ambushes you face (and there's a penalty for shooting things at point blank/melee range). The magic schools don't feel sufficiently different and mostly consist of nukes plus a couple of superfluous buff spells. Yes, there are towns and quests and merchants and the occassional puzzle but all of it is very rudimentary. Itemization is terrible consisting of a few hand placed relics with the rest being randomized Diablo-style crap.

MMX Legacy should be more polished and deeper than Grimrock (and not merely a turn-based alternative). It isn't. Moreoever it is arguably worse in some aspects like level design, character progression, itemization, etc. You're better off playing the old Bard's Tale series as the graphics are only slightly worse but the gameplay is much deeper. But that was funded by Interplay, right? Well... this was ostensibly funded by Ubisoft. Apparently not. A shame. Had they given this the funding they put in other iteration of the M&M series this would have been a fantastic game. In its current condition it is mediocre at best.

Bonus points for graphics whoring ("only slightly better than the original Bard's Tale") and not realizing the "randomized Diablo-style crap" loot system is taken directly from Might & Magic: World of Xeen

 

[J_C]

("graphics only slightly better than the original Bard's Tale")

It is mind blowing how Metro can make up such shit.

 

[Darth Roxor]

Since he brought the game up, here's Metro's Steam review:

Pains me to do so but Steam's inadequate yes/no recommendation system strikes again. I'm not entirely sure of the development of this game but I suspect Ubisoft just threw these guys permission to use the license and very little in the way of funding. The game feels extremely low budget. Worse than some indie games. Even looking past superficials like the unpolished graphics and lack of voice acting (things one would assume to be better with a AAA publisher) the mechanics are overly shallow such that most people will probably burn out on the excessive content due to tedium.

Melee is very basic with only one talent tree and limited attacks. Range is pointless given the number of ambushes you face (and there's a penalty for shooting things at point blank/melee range). The magic schools don't feel sufficiently different and mostly consist of nukes plus a couple of superfluous buff spells. Yes, there are towns and quests and merchants and the occassional puzzle but all of it is very rudimentary. Itemization is terrible consisting of a few hand placed relics with the rest being randomized Diablo-style crap.

MMX Legacy should be more polished and deeper than Grimrock (and not merely a turn-based alternative). It isn't. Moreoever it is arguably worse in some aspects like level design, character progression, itemization, etc. You're better off playing the old Bard's Tale series as the graphics are only slightly worse but the gameplay is much deeper. But that was funded by Interplay, right? Well... this was ostensibly funded by Ubisoft. Apparently not. A shame. Had they given this the funding they put in other iteration of the M&M series this would have been a fantastic game. In its current condition it is mediocre at best.

Bonus points for graphics whoring ("only slightly better than the original Bard's Tale") and not realizing the "randomized Diablo-style crap" loot system is taken directly from Might & Magic: World of Xeen

more bonus points go to infinitron for continued shilling for this game despite still not having played it

 

[Zeriel]

The trolling continues. Truly, the legacy is strong.

 

[Davaris]

It would be interesting to see a retrospective interview with the developers at this point. Some of them seemed to have actual passion for what they were working on, and were probably not fully satisfied with the end product.

Looks like there were a lot of interesting articles by the devs, unfortunately the internet archive only saved a few.

http://web.archive.org/web/20131005010159/https://mightandmagicx-legacy.ubi.com/opendev/blog

 

[Grunker]

Since he brought the game up, here's Metro's Steam review:

Pains me to do so but Steam's inadequate yes/no recommendation system strikes again. I'm not entirely sure of the development of this game but I suspect Ubisoft just threw these guys permission to use the license and very little in the way of funding. The game feels extremely low budget. Worse than some indie games. Even looking past superficials like the unpolished graphics and lack of voice acting (things one would assume to be better with a AAA publisher) the mechanics are overly shallow such that most people will probably burn out on the excessive content due to tedium.

Melee is very basic with only one talent tree and limited attacks. Range is pointless given the number of ambushes you face (and there's a penalty for shooting things at point blank/melee range). The magic schools don't feel sufficiently different and mostly consist of nukes plus a couple of superfluous buff spells. Yes, there are towns and quests and merchants and the occassional puzzle but all of it is very rudimentary. Itemization is terrible consisting of a few hand placed relics with the rest being randomized Diablo-style crap.

MMX Legacy should be more polished and deeper than Grimrock (and not merely a turn-based alternative). It isn't. Moreoever it is arguably worse in some aspects like level design, character progression, itemization, etc. You're better off playing the old Bard's Tale series as the graphics are only slightly worse but the gameplay is much deeper. But that was funded by Interplay, right? Well... this was ostensibly funded by Ubisoft. Apparently not. A shame. Had they given this the funding they put in other iteration of the M&M series this would have been a fantastic game. In its current condition it is mediocre at best.

Bonus points for graphics whoring ("only slightly better than the original Bard's Tale") and not realizing the "randomized Diablo-style crap" loot system is taken directly from Might & Magic: World of Xeen

more bonus points go to infinitron for continued shilling for this game despite still not having played it

more bonus points go to darth roxor for still being severely butthurt about it

also:

D:OS was successful and Blaggardz is getting a sequel [...]

 

[Metro]

("graphics only slightly better than the original Bard's Tale")

Bitch, plz. I played with EGA 16 color graphics card.

Infinitron Just think you could have quality reviews like mine gracing the Codex if you cheap fuck-o's would cough up a review copy.



N-e-wayz, Darkest Dungeon has better combat.

 

[Darth Slaughter]

("graphics only slightly better than the original Bard's Tale")

Bitch, plz. I played with EGA 16 color graphics card.

Infinitron Just think you could have quality reviews like mine gracing the Codex if you cheap fuck-o's would cough up a review copy.



N-e-wayz, Darkest Dungeon has better combat.

This EGA version of yours truly has more than 16 colors...

 

[Naraya]

So what's the conclusion on MMLX? All Ubisoft games are currently heavily discounted on Steam but I hate to be forced to use the uPlay crap... I guess it can't be avoided?

I mean, should I for example get LoX instead?

 

[undecaf]

So what's the conclusion on MMLX?

It's a fun game for a grindy blobber; and even despite the grindiness, the combat feels fairly light weight and fast to play. Carries well for at least one or two runthroughs. Get it. Just don't expect any narrative intricacies.

 

[bloodlover]

Has this game been patched and optimized a bit? I remember constant crashes, memory leaks and high end PC having problems running it, especially in later areas.

 

[undecaf]

I believe it was a complaint that they stopped supporting the game before it was properly optimized, but I might be confusing things here since I never had any problems of that sort with it myself (aside from slight stuttering in the mountains).

 

[Sceptic]

It's a fun game for a grindy blobber; and even despite the grindiness, the combat feels fairly light weight and fast to play. Carries well for at least one or two runthroughs. Get it. Just don't expect any narrative intricacies.

Narrative intricacies in my M&M?

Has this game been patched and optimized a bit? I remember constant crashes, memory leaks and high end PC having problems running it, especially in later areas.

I don't about crashing because I never had that problem, but the patch reduced the interminable load times. It's still not great optimization, but it's better than it used to be.

 

[Metro]

Game runs fine on my system (i5-4670 and 770 card) and I don't recall experiencing a bug or crash in the twenty or so hours I played. As I mentioned before, as much as I enjoy blobbers I found this tedious and uninspired. Nearly all aspects of the game's design are too shallow. You're better off playing an older title.

 

[Eggs is eggs]

I guess sales weren't that good? I bought a copy during the Christmas sale but haven't played it yet and I am a HUGE fan of the series. It seems like Ubi gave them a small budget to make the game and they released it + a DLC and then Ubi pulled the plug financially soon after its released even though there are still plenty of bugs and optimizations they should've implemented. Still, it got generally good reviews from what I've heard. A shame that just like EA, another big publisher butchers a classic franchise.

 

[Xorazm]

I guess sales weren't that good? I bought a copy during the Christmas sale but haven't played it yet and I am a HUGE fan of the series. It seems like Ubi gave them a small budget to make the game and they released it + a DLC and then Ubi pulled the plug financially soon after its released even though there are still plenty of bugs and optimizations they should've implemented. Still, it got generally good reviews from what I've heard. A shame that just like EA, another big publisher butchers a classic franchise.

It's a shame that Ubi didn't put a bit more investment into the project, but I think you've got to at least give them a little credit for digging into their niche/mid-market properties. They've been sitting on the Might & Magic license forever, and while the game they released wasn't perfect by any means it was a solid, meaty and expansive follow up on the Might and Magic legacy. For those of us with fond memories of Xeen and the ability to overlook the occasional gameplay quirk, the game was fucking divine.

If EA would release Command and Conquer, Syndicate or Dungeon Keeper games that were anywhere near as true to the legacies as Might and Magic X, I'd be a pig in shit.