Might and Magic Might & Magic X - Legacy

[ilitarist]

How is that MMX didn't have exploration? How does it differ from other MM games?

 

[YES!]

How is that MMX didn't have exploration? How does it differ from other MM games?

It has better everything. Better combat, better whatever you can think of. MM6 -9 have really bad combat and very awkward controls. MMX remedies this and improves on everything. And to all the people that shit all over MMX when it came out, wouldn't you rather have supported it to make MMXI viable instead of having hissy fits and hate mongering and ending it? I hate RTwP games but I supported PoE and Tyranny because I would rather have PoE and Tyranny than not, shit challengless combat or no.

 

[Iznaliu]

Might & Magic under Ubisoft made sense for a limited amount of time as a Euro-ware popcorn game franchise, but it's now a sorely outdated brand.

HoMM isn't that outdated.

 

[Pots Talos]

better whatever you can think of.

Better non-combat skills?
I had about a couple of hours fun with MMX but got tired of the repetitive combat and of having UPlay on my computer.

 

[YES!]

better whatever you can think of.

Better non-combat skills?
I had about a couple of hours fun with MMX but got tired of the repetitive combat and of having UPlay on my computer.

Was combat in MM6-9 not repetitive? I'll take good TB combat that often requires you to think and change tactics over weird as RT where you can kill a powerful dragon with brand new characters by cheesing the strafe.

 

[Great Deceiver]

How is that MMX didn't have exploration? How does it differ from other MM games?

It has better everything. Better combat, better whatever you can think of. MM6 -9 have really bad combat and very awkward controls. MMX remedies this and improves on everything. And to all the people that shit all over MMX when it came out, wouldn't you rather have supported it to make MMXI viable instead of having hissy fits and hate mongering and ending it? I hate RTwP games but I supported PoE and Tyranny because I would rather have PoE and Tyranny than not, shit challengless combat or no.

The thought of someone who has actually finished MM6 thinking MMX had an iota of that game's exploration is absurd to me.

I played through MMX and thought it was okay. But the exploration was certainly not even on the same universe as previous M&M games.

 

[TigerKnee]

When we say better non-combat skills when comparing X to the older games, are we talking about Levitation / Flying / Swimming?

 

[YES!]

How is that MMX didn't have exploration? How does it differ from other MM games?

It has better everything. Better combat, better whatever you can think of. MM6 -9 have really bad combat and very awkward controls. MMX remedies this and improves on everything. And to all the people that shit all over MMX when it came out, wouldn't you rather have supported it to make MMXI viable instead of having hissy fits and hate mongering and ending it? I hate RTwP games but I supported PoE and Tyranny because I would rather have PoE and Tyranny than not, shit challengless combat or no.

The thought of someone who has actually finished MM6 thinking MMX had an iota of that game's exploration is absurd to me.

I played through MMX and thought it was okay. But the exploration was certainly not even on the same universe as previous M&M games.

I don't know about better, but it certainly was more sensible and enjoyable to me in MMX. And exploring dungeons was a million times better in MMX to me than any in 6-9.

 

[Great Deceiver]

I guess I should first ask, why are you comparing MMX to MM6+ and not to MM 1-5?

 

[fantadomat]

How is that MMX didn't have exploration? How does it differ from other MM games?

Well i love all the MM games from MM3 to MM8 and maybe a lil bit of MM9.All of those games just throw you in a world and said to you "Go find the rest yourself."They had a few side quest and a lot of optional dungeons and places to explore.The games made you explore out of curiosity.I still remember running around bashing walls to see if there is a secret behind it.MMX is just a corridor shooter that forces you to kill everything without having downed hero because you need the xp and downed characters don't get any xp.I played it until some forest and decided to just replay the old games that had better everything except inventory system.The people that made the game most like have never played an MM game in their live.They thought that old school means grid based first person party shooter.

 

[YES!]

I guess I should first ask, why are you comparing MMX to MM6+ and not to MM 1-5?

6-9 used RT combat. 6-8 especially, using the same engine, were prone to cheese like circle strafing to be invincible against powerful bosses. If you fought them as intended in a straight up fight you would be slaughtered. 9 was streamlined into a pretty junky state for the time. But, seeing as rpgs were further and further dumbed down over the years, and blobbers, especially rpg blobbers with content like towns and npcs and dialogues and shops and quests (not contentless junk like LoG) it has aged into being decent. Kind of like how Reagan didn't leave the Democrat party, but instead the party left him sort of deal. I think the same happened with PoR:RoMD, since this game was public enemy number one for a while - but now it seems people look back on it fondly. I myself always thought PoR:RoMD was a pretty good game, and liked MM9 as much as 6-8. I just think was by far the best by leaps and bounds. WoX was okay, but little things stress me out like wondering if I missed a barrel with stat increases and reloading for chests over and over kind of sapped my enjoyment.

Speaking of Blobbers what the fuck is going on with Frayed Knights 2? Frayed Knights 1 was a good game.

 

[fantadomat]

I guess I should first ask, why are you comparing MMX to MM6+ and not to MM 1-5?

Speaking of Blobbers what the fuck is going on with Frayed Knights 2? Frayed Knights 1 was a good game.

Yeah it was fun game but the encounter system was annoying and it was a lil bit too grindy.

 

[Infinitron]

Might & Magic under Ubisoft made sense for a limited amount of time as a Euro-ware popcorn game franchise, but it's now a sorely outdated brand.

HoMM isn't that outdated.

It is for Ubisoft. Let me explain in further detail what I meant by "made sense for a limited amount of time".

At their essence, Ubisoft's Heroes games are "Euro-ware" products. Which means low budget, colorful, somewhat oldschool, pretty fun, if a bit janky and shovelwarey. When these games are successful, their colorfulness gives them a casual appeal that manages to transcend their low budget, oldschool turn-based nature. HoMM5 is the prototypical example of a successful Euroware release.

The thing is, HoMM5 came out in 2006, before indie development was really a thing. That meant a big publisher like Ubisoft could own that niche and turn a reasonable profit from it. But today, they're competing with dozens of indies and small developers who are all capable of making similar games. It no longer makes sense for Ubisoft to invest in it.

So if they can't make a colorful low budget Might & Magic game, their other option is to make an AAA RPG with it. But the Might & Magic brand doesn't seem suitable for that. I mean, look at the name - "Might and Magic". It's so cheesy, an obvious product of the 80s, when the idea that you could be "a fighter, OR a wizard!" was something that could excite nerds. And of course, it's also heavily associated with low budget turn-based games. Which is why if they ever try to make an AAA fantasy RPG, they'd probably create a new IP.

I don't know, maybe there is an alternate reality where a game like Arkane's Dark Messiah really took off and Might & Magic somehow succeeded as an AAA RPG brand. But even if it did, I have a feeling they'd end up downplaying the Might & Magic part, the same way Bethesda tend to downplay the similarly nerdy and outdated "The Elder Scrolls" in favor of their games' subtitles - people call it "Skyrim", not "The Elder Scrolls 5".

 

[fantadomat]

Might & Magic under Ubisoft made sense for a limited amount of time as a Euro-ware popcorn game franchise, but it's now a sorely outdated brand.

HoMM isn't that outdated.

It is for Ubisoft. Let me explain in further detail what I meant by "made sense for a limited amount of time".

At their essence, Ubisoft's Heroes games are your typical "Euro-ware" product. Which means colorful, somewhat oldschool, pretty fun, if a bit janky and shovelwarey. When these games are successful, their colorfulness gives them a casual appeal that manages to transcend their oldschool, turn-based nature. HoMM5 is the prototypical example of a successful Euroware release.

But the thing is, HoMM5 came out in 2006, before indie development was really a thing. That meant a big publisher like Ubisoft could own that niche and turn a reasonable profit from it. But today, they're competing with dozens of indies and small developers who are all capable of making similar games. It no longer makes sense for Ubisoft to invest in it.

So if they can't make a colorful indie Might & Magic game, their other choice is to make an AAA RPG with it. But the Might & Magic brand doesn't seem suitable for that. I mean, look at the name - "Might and Magic". It's so cheesy, an obvious product of the 80s, when the idea that you could be "a fighter, OR a wizard!" was something that could excite nerds. Which is why if they ever try to make an AAA fantasy RPG, they'd probably create a new IP.

I don't know, maybe there is an alternate reality where a game like Arkane's Dark Messiah really took off and Might & Magic somehow succeeded as an AAA RPG brand. But even if it did, I have a feeling they'd end up downplaying the Might & Magic part, the same way Bethesda tend to downplay the similarly nerdy and outdated "The Elder Scrolls" in favor of their games' subtitles - people call it "Skyrim", not "The Elder Scrolls 5".

Well the name doesn't really matter,it is all about the presentation and the trailers.The MM universe is really good and have decent amount of lore in it.It will be problem if they name it MM 11 because most casual people won't know what is going on.They will think that this is some FF like shit.I could come up with good modern MM game and marketing,but sadly i don't work that shit.

 

[ilitarist]

I'd say Ubisoft marketing would be delighted if people think it's something like Final Fantasy - old high quality franchise where you could start with any installment. And it sorta is that way, at least starting from MM6 you can plug in any game and it'll be fine.

Infinitron is right about indie games covering that niche (especially with Japanese blobbers getting there) but I don't think Heroes 5 was ever a cheap game. Lots of models, cutscenes, music - and those town views are still not rivaled by any strategy game. I think it cane out during the era of self-fulfilling prophecy of death of PC games. RTS genre died and analytics thought other PC exclusive genres will follow. It probably looked like you need a franchise and dedication of Civilization and Total War to keep selling complex strategy games. It's still possible they look at success of Paradox and Firaxis (XCOM) and Amplitude (Endless Legend) and will try to make Heroes 8 with a proper schedule and budget. The message of the marketing campaign would be "ok noooow we get it".

 

[Infinitron]

The strategy genre is unusual in that being historically-based is a major selling point. The most premium strategy IPs - Civ and Total War - built their reputations on historical simulation. And then there's Paradox's catalog. HoMM even at its most successful was never taken as seriously.

 

[fantadomat]

Well it is different niche.Also japs are shit at making rpg or more complex rpg games.All jrpg are the same shit over and over again.As for marketing,well it al depends in what direction you want to take the game.You must make it in the way that appeals to newcomers "Flashy and interesting" and then make a game that appeals to the old guard.Most old school gamers won't pre-order or buy a game day one.Marketing for them should be more about word of mouth and reviews.

 

[B0rt]

The MM universe is really good and have decent amount of lore in it..

lol no, it's terrible

good gameplay is the only thing M&M has ever had going for it, the lore/world building/whatever has always been terrible (like, understood to be a joke since the 1980s) so how can you even pretend?

 

[*-*/\--/\~]

Might & Magic under Ubisoft made sense for a limited amount of time as a Euro-ware popcorn game franchise, but it's now a sorely outdated brand.

HoMM isn't that outdated.

At their essence, Ubisoft's Heroes games are "Euro-ware" products. Which means low budget, colorful, somewhat oldschool, pretty fun, if a bit janky and shovelwarey. When these games are successful, their colorfulness gives them a casual appeal that manages to transcend their low budget, oldschool turn-based nature. HoMM5 is the prototypical example of a successful Euroware release.

The thing is, HoMM5 came out in 2006, before indie development was really a thing. That meant a big publisher like Ubisoft could own that niche and turn a reasonable profit from it. But today, they're competing with dozens of indies and small developers who are all capable of making similar games. It no longer makes sense for Ubisoft to invest in it.

Which kind of suggests some indie dev could pick up the good parts and release "Strengh & Wizardry", giving us another MM6 / H3. :D

 

[Eggs is eggs]

Is the HoMM series dead as well? IIRC it peaked at around the third one and after that Ubi made JVC churn out one sequel a year and then development was moved to some Russian company.

 

[undecaf]

Is the HoMM series dead as well?

Probably. The last entry didn't do too well and the support for the game was cut off (along the devs apparently getting fired) for what looks to me as prematurely since there was quite a lot of work left on bugs and balancing.

 

[Great Deceiver]

I guess I should first ask, why are you comparing MMX to MM6+ and not to MM 1-5?

6-9 used RT combat. 6-8 especially, using the same engine, were prone to cheese like circle strafing to be invincible against powerful bosses. If you fought them as intended in a straight up fight you would be slaughtered. 9 was streamlined into a pretty junky state for the time. But, seeing as rpgs were further and further dumbed down over the years, and blobbers, especially rpg blobbers with content like towns and npcs and dialogues and shops and quests (not contentless junk like LoG) it has aged into being decent. Kind of like how Reagan didn't leave the Democrat party, but instead the party left him sort of deal. I think the same happened with PoR:RoMD, since this game was public enemy number one for a while - but now it seems people look back on it fondly. I myself always thought PoR:RoMD was a pretty good game, and liked MM9 as much as 6-8. I just think was by far the best by leaps and bounds. WoX was okay, but little things stress me out like wondering if I missed a barrel with stat increases and reloading for chests over and over kind of sapped my enjoyment.
.

My point was, why are you comparing apples to oranges (MMX to MM6-9) instead of apples to apples (MM1-5). MMX has far more in common with earlier games in the series (including the overworld exploration aspect, but also the turn-based combat), however it is inferior in that it is a lot slower to play, in my opinion. They tried to add depth to the combat system but this came at great cost to the playing speed, and I don't think the benefits outweighed the downsides. Blobbers in general, but especially M&M games, were extremely fast-paced to play. MMX, in comparison, is a slog.

 

[YES!]

I guess I should first ask, why are you comparing MMX to MM6+ and not to MM 1-5?

6-9 used RT combat. 6-8 especially, using the same engine, were prone to cheese like circle strafing to be invincible against powerful bosses. If you fought them as intended in a straight up fight you would be slaughtered. 9 was streamlined into a pretty junky state for the time. But, seeing as rpgs were further and further dumbed down over the years, and blobbers, especially rpg blobbers with content like towns and npcs and dialogues and shops and quests (not contentless junk like LoG) it has aged into being decent. Kind of like how Reagan didn't leave the Democrat party, but instead the party left him sort of deal. I think the same happened with PoR:RoMD, since this game was public enemy number one for a while - but now it seems people look back on it fondly. I myself always thought PoR:RoMD was a pretty good game, and liked MM9 as much as 6-8. I just think was by far the best by leaps and bounds. WoX was okay, but little things stress me out like wondering if I missed a barrel with stat increases and reloading for chests over and over kind of sapped my enjoyment.
.

My point was, why are you comparing apples to oranges (MMX to MM6-9) instead of apples to apples (MM1-5). MMX has far more in common with earlier games in the series (including the overworld exploration aspect, but also the turn-based combat), however it is inferior in that it is a lot slower to play, in my opinion. They tried to add depth to the combat system but this came at great cost to the playing speed, and I don't think the benefits outweighed the downsides. Blobbers in general, but especially M&M games, were extremely fast-paced to play. MMX, in comparison, is a slog.

I agree, but why keep bad combat? The combat in MMX, especially against bosses, was really the best I've seen in TB blobber. Especially the later ones where you were wore down pretty badly and didn't have good consumables and every turn was important.

Compare WL to WL2. WL2 DC improved on it in every way. Is making a game better bad? It isn't like going from FO1/2 to fake FO3 which changed everything for the dummies. Its like making a real FO3 and not allowing saving in combat and eye shot spamming until you get crits on reload, but having actual good combat. Or an Arcanum 2 with TB only and better combat, and feats and traits and etc. Better is better. Faster is just a boring grind. Thinking and trying and being involved instead of mindlessly attacking like in Elminage Gothic or MM3-5 (I've never played 1 and 2) is the way to go for crpgs. Mindless repetition and grind is for jrpgs.

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[V_K]

My point was, why are you comparing apples to oranges (MMX to MM6-9) instead of apples to apples (MM1-5). MMX has far more in common with earlier games in the series (including the overworld exploration aspect, but also the turn-based combat), however it is inferior in that it is a lot slower to play, in my opinion.

I think a far worse offence is the abundance of plot-gated areas. Given how small the overworld is, it makes exploration basically linear.