[Computer Game]: Heroes of Might and Magic V, reviewed by bardbloom (5/1)

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/12/12228.phtml

Bard Bloom's Summary:

Heroes of Might and Magic was one of the best computer strategy/tactics game of its time for a decade or so. There's a new edition. Unfortunately, it's better on the eye candy than on the strategy and tactics. Which kind of defeats the purpose of a strategy and tactics game.

Go to the full review for more information.

[Kalor]

Are you aware that your review of this game completely disagrees with virtually every professional review I've read of it? In other words, I think you've let subjectivity get the best of you something hardcore. Namely, you put HoMM5 through the same gauntlet that HoMM4 went through: being unmercilessly compared to previous games in the series and not being taken on its own merit.

Sure, none of said reviews claim that HoMM5 is perfect, but they gave it far from a 1/5 or 20%. In fact, I can't think off the top of my head any review that gave it a rating of anything less than "average," and most have it higher than that!

I'm sure you'll say this is due to graphics or buy-off (probably more the former), but after playing the game myself since the day it came out I'd have to say you'd be completely wrong; I'm very much enjoying it, and apparently so did a lot of people who review games for a living. I'm sorry my friend, but your review is mostly subjective and hardly objective.

Your naked opinion counts, but not when submitting a public review. Your score could very easily frighten away people who don't have your personal, subjective expectations and would actually enjoy the game.

[Varangian]

I've had the game since it came out and I'm really enjoying it. I can agree with the reveiwer that navigation can be difficult, especially in the underworld, but it's a minor inconvience. Gameplay is solid, I've not had a single crash or freeze, and the campaigns are varied enough that I'm enjoying/being challenged by virtually every map. My biggest complaint is that the game shipped with so few single person maps (6 in the basic version). With no scenario editor (yet), the lack of maps will limit gameplay.

Varangian

[geelpete]

I'm glad the reviewer completely disagreed with the professional reviews. I personally put more stake in the opinion of a long-time series follower disappointed with the latest incarnation than in an industry hack who might be won over simply by the title.

As for the subjectivity of a review: An objective "review" would be a feature list. A review is evaluative writing, and therefore subjective. The problem with some reviews is that their criteria for subjectivity is not clear. This reviewer made the criteria very clear.

As for the game itself; sadly, I cannot play it. I downloaded the demo, and apparently my video card isn't beefy enough. Does anyone out there miss the days of 2d gaming? How come I can barely run Civ4? Why must turn-based games be so resource-intensive!?

Yeah, I will update the video card this summer, and I might even look into HOMM5, but probably only after it hits the bargain shelf. Or after the inevitable "gold" compilation surfaces, with the multiple expansions loaded into one, easy-to-carry package.

Thanks for the review!

Originally Posted by Kalor

Are you aware that your review of this game completely disagrees with virtually every professional review I've read of it? In other words, I think you've let subjectivity get the best of you something hardcore. Namely, you put HoMM5 through the same gauntlet that HoMM4 went through: being unmercilessly compared to previous games in the series and not being taken on its own merit.

Sure, none of said reviews claim that HoMM5 is perfect, but they gave it far from a 1/5 or 20%. In fact, I can't think off the top of my head any review that gave it a rating of anything less than "average," and most have it higher than that!

I'm sure you'll say this is due to graphics or buy-off (probably more the former), but after playing the game myself since the day it came out I'd have to say you'd be completely wrong; I'm very much enjoying it, and apparently so did a lot of people who review games for a living. I'm sorry my friend, but your review is mostly subjective and hardly objective.

Your naked opinion counts, but not when submitting a public review. Your score could very easily frighten away people who don't have your personal, subjective expectations and would actually enjoy the game.

[Kalor]

What I meant to say was this: I didn't feel that the reviewer "stepped outside of himself" enough. To step outside oneself requires, first and foremost, offering a game the benefit of the doubt and then going forward from there. Allow me to explain. I'll use the reviewer's comments on the 3D nature of the game.

Most of the his complaints were of the 3D environment (in fact, it was fully half of his review). How do I know how long he sat down and tried to get used to it? What if his monitor is poor? What if the game suffered from some weird sort of graphical anomaly on his PC? What if his mouse was bad for that type of game? Is his desk properly configured for playing a game with a lot of mouse movement? Is he color blind? These are things I'll never know, and his review made no indication to me that I needn't worry about such questions.

There are a million questions you have to ask yourself before writing a review: it can't just be your experience; you have to give a game the benefit of the doubt and put yourself "outside of yourself;" try to see the game from the perspective of others. Maybe other people would enjoy the 3D environment. Maybe other people have better setups for the game. Etc., etc., etc.

It's only when a reviewer cannot in any way, shape, or form see how anyone on any setup could enjoy a design feature that he should trash it. If not anyone, then most people on most setups. This is what I call objective reviewing -- it's not just your experience and your opinion; you're attempting to put yourself in the minds and shoes of others.

As for following the word of a fan of the series over professional reviews, that has some merit. However, when many, many review sites agree, the game couldn't have possibly bought out them all. Furthermore, a game has to be taken on its own merit and not compared to previous games in the series. And take it from me, also a fan of the series since the beginning, it's a good freaking game.

[Darren MacLennan]

Originally Posted by Kalor

Most of the his complaints were of the 3D environment (in fact, it was fully half of his review). How do I know how long he sat down and tried to get used to it? What if his monitor is poor? What if the game suffered from some weird sort of graphical anomaly on his PC? What if his mouse was bad for that type of game? Is his desk properly configured for playing a game with a lot of mouse movement? Is he color blind? These are things I'll never know, and his review made no indication to me that I needn't worry about such questions.

Yeah. That's got to be the silliest critique of a review that I've ever heard.

There are a million questions you have to ask yourself before writing a review: it can't just be your experience; you have to give a game the benefit of the doubt and put yourself "outside of yourself

Uh, no, you don't.

It's only when a reviewer cannot in any way, shape, or form see how anyone on any setup could enjoy a design feature that he should trash it. If not anyone, then most people on most setups. This is what I call objective reviewing -- it's not just your experience and your opinion; you're attempting to put yourself in the minds and shoes of others.

No. No, you don't. I can't agree in any way, shape or form with your comments here.

What your comments sound like is "You didn't LIKE IT? Everybody LIKES IT! You just can't SEE IT FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE! Are you BLIND? Are you DEAF? Is your MONITOR MISCALIBRATED? I just can't imagine how you don't LOVE THIS GAME LIKE I DO!"

In other words, every perspective is valid as long as it agrees with yours.

-Darren MacLennan

[Extrakun]

The 3D is an issue, but it is not that big an issue that warrants dragging the Substance down to 1. I have fun with the game, once I turn the graphics settings down, employed some tricks to speed up the game and the "one more turn syndrome" soon overcomes me.

Now, onto some specific complaints:

Slower Gameplay: I honestly have to admit I don't find the core gameplay slower due to design issues -- but thanks to what a resource hog the 3d graphics is, things tend to get slow. However, the biggest offenders are Mages. Their spell-casting usually take 3-4 seconds. However, that an design issue, unlike the ballista, which is more of an issue of poor programming.

That said, the "close-up-view" of two units chomping each other is random, unless you have that dynmaic camera thingly on. Besides that, everything else is like in HoMM III. I can only think of those 2 instances.

AND wait, there's more! What the reviewer forgot that only NOT all heroes go and whack the critters on the field. The Demon Lord and Nercomancer blast them with eldrtich power, which is significantly faster.

Honestly, this is something of a presentation issue. It doesn't deract from the fun that badly, for me. At any rate, this is a turn-based strategy game, not a blazing real-time one, and it is not as bad as Guardians summon in FF8.

Hidden Stuff: Agreeded, the camera can be implemented much better. Here's the walk-about. Press HOME, and zoom out, and keep the camera consistent there. Not only it helps framerates, you can see better too.

Fewer Spells: Yes, there are fewer spells. But practically speaking, those cover the entire gamut avaliable. First, there's no Mass verison of any spells off the guild -- you gain ability to cast Mass Haste, Mass Divine Strength and what not from 'feats' or secondary abilities. That cut the spell list by half, already. And the significant spells, like Earthquake, Armmageddon, Fireball, Meteor Shower, Ice Bolt, Ice Ring, Curse, Suffering, Confusion, Blind and etc. are all represented.

They fold some spells into each other, and trim spells which are just weaker variant of a stronger one. For instance, in HoMM III, Holy Shout vs. Holy Word -- they the same spell, only they have damage calculated differently.

One more thing to consider -- HoMM V allows heroes to customise spells based on their abilities. Ice Expert, for instance, allows you to delay the initiative of the target creature slightly when you use Winter Ring or Ice Bolt. That's a nice touch which the reviewer didn't mention.

Smaller Maps: The way the reviewer put it is quite subjective. I think they are of the same size of HoMM III, but honestly, I didn't pull out a measuring tape or something. IMHO, the maps are in HOMM V are often too big for the campagins. In the first campagin, there are 2 or 3 "adventuring maps" (which you travel from point A to point B" which are very big -- and you find yourself reaching the level cap mid-way, and have no incentive to explore the rest of the map.

Bugs:: About the reviewer's problem with gating, only upgraded Archdevils can summmon Pit Lords. There's a spellbook icon at the upper left hand corner of where the defence/game options menu are. Click there, and you will get to open a spellbook, and you'll see Gating.

Also, your hero needs a higher-level Gating skills for higher-tier creatures. For Pit Lords or Nightmares to gate, you must have Expert Gating. Arch-Devils can only gate after your Hero gets Ultimate Gating -- which can't be achieved normally.

Here are some more problems:

Poor Doucmentation: The manual that comes with the game is a joke. Some of my friends, after seeing the manual, say they rather get the game from file-sharing -- what's the point of buying an original product when the manual is thin, and there's no reference cards or such?

In-game Description Missing: Some artifacts in the game has missing in-game description. Okay, not some -- about 30 of them. There's a general sense of rushness about the whole product.

Corny Cutscenes: Inflicted with what I call the "Dynasty Warrior Too-Much-Drama" syndrome, where every character begins or ends every sentence with a swing of a weapon. It's here, in Heroes V. Characters speak halfway and cast spells, bang shields, swing swords and whatever EVERY sentence. It's annoying.

No Map-Editor out of the box: One is promised before August, but seriously, Heroes V smack of last minutes work with this sort of things missing.

The good points is that the gameplay is still on the ball, for me. There is no greater joy than gathering a stack of 30 Black Dragons, and drive your enemies to ruin :-)

I guess after a couple of patches, and maybe an expansion or two, it'll be the game it is supposed to be. Let hope that Ubisoft don't pull the plug off this one!

[Kalor]

Darren MacLennan, despite your comments, the fact still remains that every person up until this response has in some way, large or small, agreed with me. Furthermore, there is clear evidence of HoMM5 being much better than "1/5" in virtually every professional review (not to mention from the opinions of many people who are fans of the series).

This is not a case of "every perspective is valid as long as it agrees with mine;" you must have missed one of my earliest statements: "Your naked opinion counts, but not when submitting a public review." When submitting a public review, you must keep the public in mind.

And yes, that paragraph I wrote with the list of questions was rather silly. I admit that; I wasn't pleased with the wording much myself. But it was to illustrate a point by asking a few rhetorical questions I never really expected answers for. If you feel the need to mock me for trying to make a perfectly reasonable point in a calm and civilized manner, I'm forced to question your ability to fairly moderate these forums.

And I'm not looking for a fight: my main goal has been to defend the makers of HoMM5 who have produced a game that is almost universally considered good. These people put years of work into the game, and I felt that giving them a 1/5 for their efforts was like giving them a undeserved kick in the teeth.

[bardbloom]

Originally Posted by Kalor

These people put years of work into the game, and I felt that giving them a 1/5 for their efforts was like giving them a undeserved kick in the teeth.

I rated the style as 5; that's obviously what they worked the most on, and it's what came off best. One might quarrel with what is style and what is substance, of course.

In any case, one may work for decades and come up with something lousy, and not expect critical acclaim.

[Darren MacLennan]

Originally Posted by Kalor

Darren MacLennan, despite your comments, the fact still remains that every person up until this response has in some way, large or small, agreed with me. Furthermore, there is clear evidence of HoMM5 being much better than "1/5" in virtually every professional review (not to mention from the opinions of many people who are fans of the series).

Regardless, the man is entitled to his opinion.

This is not a case of "every perspective is valid as long as it agrees with mine;" you must have missed one of my earliest statements: "Your naked opinion counts, but not when submitting a public review." When submitting a public review, you must keep the public in mind.

Reviews can be entirely subjective and still be just as valid. You can't go out and poll the public to decide what your opinion is.

If you feel the need to mock me for trying to make a perfectly reasonable point in a calm and civilized manner, I'm forced to question your ability to fairly moderate these forums.

Questioning my objectivity because I disagree with your statements about the validity of reviews is pretty goddamn weak.

And I'm not looking for a fight: my main goal has been to defend the makers of HoMM5 who have produced a game that is almost universally considered good. These people put years of work into the game, and I felt that giving them a 1/5 for their efforts was like giving them a undeserved kick in the teeth.

They're big boys. They can take care of themselves.

-Darren MacLennan