Might and Magic Might & Magic X Pre-Release Thread

[Krivol]

Reported Krivol to the Alt Extermination Force™

But I am... uh... I was... a bit hidin'&stalkin', you know... Only few years...

 

[FeelTheRads]

I'm not surprised many people disagree with me. Nostalgia is one hell of a drug.

Feels like I'm on Bethesda's boards.

 

[Grunker]

I can't believe I'm getting berated for enjoying exploration, character progression and turn-based combat over generic SCI-FI Fantasy

Because I realised arguing with you is akin to arguing with Volourn.

Such a cop-out. It's a shame that some people can't argue anything outside of our comfy-zone. I suppose that's why we have one million discussions on what makes an RPG. Then we're sure never to really disagree.

I'm not surprised many people disagree with me. Nostalgia is one hell of a drug.

Feels like I'm on Bethesda's boards.

It sure does, with the way one side mixes ad hominem with arguments and the other solely relies on ad hominem.

Although, I don't suspect anyone on the Bethesda forums have actually played the games we're discussing. But perhaps it feels safer for you to accuse me of being a popamoler. That way you make sure to never actually argue about the actual games, just as was the case in the Fallout thread.

 

[IDtenT]

You are a popamoler. There is no accusation. It'd be like accusing me of being gay.

 

[Grunker]

I didn't know you were gay.

Popamole is a form of gameplay. It has nothing to do with disliking a shitty setting.

 

[FeelTheRads]

But perhaps it feels safer for you to accuse me of being a popamoler.

I'm accusing you of using the old and tired "it's just nostalgia" bullshit.

Why would you want Fallout to be isometric and turn-based? It's just nostalgia talking.
Why would you want so many resource types in HoMM? Let go of those rose-tinted glasses.
Why would you want Thiaf to be like Thief? Are you living in the past?
Why would you want any game to be like its predecessor? Get with the times already.

And so on. Bethesda standard logic.

That way you make sure to never actually argue about the actual games, just as was the case in the Fallout thread.

Did I actually discuss anything about Fallout with you? Can't remember, really. I do seem to remember you being one of the "the only way to play Arcanum is with a mage" types, though. Might be wrong.

It has nothing to do with disliking a shitty setting.

I thought you didn't care about the setting in these games? You seem pretty butthurt about it for someone who doesn't care.

 

[Darth Roxor]

I can't believe I'm getting berated for enjoying exploration, character progression and turn-based combat over generic SCI-FI Fantasy

You just don't get it, do you?

Which, incidentally, is the same as arguing with Volly.

 

[Grunker]

^ Of the two of us, I'm the only one arguing. You're just posting one-liners and images.

I'm accusing you of using the old and tired "it's just nostalgia" bullshit.

Why would you want Fallout to be isometric and turn-based? It's just nostalgia talking.
Why would you want so many resource types in HoMM? Let go of those rose-tinted glasses.
Why would you want Thiaf to be like Thief? Are you living in the past?
Why would you want any game to be like its predecessor? Get with the times already.

And so on. Bethesda standard logic.

It seems you didn't read the topic, unsurprisingly:

Fair enough, so the accusation of nostalgia is just as weak as the "go back to IGN" comment.

Did I actually discuss anything about Fallout with you? Can't remember, really. I do seem to remember you being one of the "the only way to play Arcanum is with a mage" types, though. Might be wrong.

Arcanum is probably the only Codex Classic that I think of as a bad game, though that has nothing to do with "the only way to play is with a mage", so I don't know where that comes from.

I thought you didn't care about the setting in these games? You seem pretty butthurt about it for someone who doesn't care.

Someone said it was a shame there wasn't sci-fi in the setting. I said that was hardly important. And so a trivial discussion on the nature of M&M's setting began. Welcome to the Codex, where we discuss irrelevant details of games that we like very much. Are you new here?

My butthurt has nothing to do with the setting, which can be whatever for all I care, but stems only from the fact that I am accused of some kind of race betrayal for confessing that I liked playing these games much more than I liked immersing myself in their teen-wank lore.

 

[Darth Roxor]

Of the two of us, I'm the only one arguing. You're just posting one-liners and images.

Yes. Because after I've noticed that your "arguments" are composed mostly of strawmen, generalisations, half-truths and stuff unrelated to the matter at hand, I've simply decided your dialectics are not worth my time.

So gj, you win or something.

brb gonna wash my nostalgia goggles.

 

[FeelTheRads]

It seems you didn't read the topic, unsurprisingly:

I did see that. Doesn't matter. Once you went the "it's just nostalgia" route, there's no forgiveness. You are marked for life. Embrace your shame, it's not gonna go away.

but stems only from the fact that I am accused of some kind of race betrayal for confessing that I liked playing these games much more than I liked immersing myself in their teen-wank lore.

No, you derided people for wanting a game in a series to follow its predecessors. You got what you deserved.

 

[Grunker]

Yes. Because after I've noticed that your "arguments" are composed mostly of strawmen, generalisations, half-truths and stuff unrelated to the matter at hand, I've simply decided your dialectics are not worth my time

Extremely ironic coming from someone who has expressed exactly one actual argument in this thread ("it was new and refreshing") which I falsified factually straight after - something you didn't even attempt a rebuttal to becuase you knew I was right. You've done nothing but call me names here, after your first attempt at trying to argue your case failed.

So don't whine to me about my arguments being composed of strawmen when you've spewed nothing but.

I did see that. Doesn't matter. Once you went the "it's just nostalgia" route, there's no forgiveness. You are marked for life. Embrace your shame, it's not gonna go away.

Guilty By Association is precisely as faulty an arguing technique as an ad hominem.

No, you derided people for wanting a game in a series to follow its predecessors. You got what you deserved.

Again you prove that you haven't even glanced at the thread. I questioned people who put value into a badly crafted setting over game mechanics, and I stand by that. I worded my doubt how many traits are shared by members of this forum. I thought what people mainly missed from the old games was a certain playstyle. A certain set of mechanics. A certain focus. Comments here made me doubt this. Hence my post. My doubt was pretty much proven true by the fact that challenging a generic SCI-FI-Fantasy setting's quality is enough to brand me an outcast.

 

[Infinitron]

Jaesun This thread requires your attention

 

[Jim Cojones]

doublepost, goddamn shitty wifi messing with my posts

 

[Jim Cojones]

Again you prove that you haven't even glanced at the thread. I questioned people who put value into a badly crafted setting over game mechanics, and I stand by that. I worded my doubt how many traits are shared by members of this forum. I thought what people mainly missed from the old games was a certain playstyle. A certain set of mechanics. A certain focus. Comments here made me doubt this. Hence my post. My doubt was pretty much proven true by the fact that challenging a generic SCI-FI-Fantasy setting's quality is enough to brand me an outcast.

You based your whole argument on a premise that there is some relation between someone's opinion on setting and someone's opinion on mechanics, on the idea that people who want setting of a sequel resemble one from originals don't care about game being turnbased. Not really surprising that you don't get responses in regards to specific arguments you used to build up on that.

 

[Grunker]

Again you prove that you haven't even glanced at the thread. I questioned people who put value into a badly crafted setting over game mechanics, and I stand by that. I worded my doubt how many traits are shared by members of this forum. I thought what people mainly missed from the old games was a certain playstyle. A certain set of mechanics. A certain focus. Comments here made me doubt this. Hence my post. My doubt was pretty much proven true by the fact that challenging a generic SCI-FI-Fantasy setting's quality is enough to brand me an outcast.

You based your whole argument on a premise that there is some relation between someone's opinion on setting and someone's opinion on mechanics, on the idea that people who want setting of a sequel resemble one from originals don't care about game being turnbased. Not really surprising that you don't get responses in regards to specific arguments you used to build up on that.

No I didn't. I questioned the importance of the game's setting and highlighted the importance of its mechanics, and asked the question whether people actually thought they were of equal importance.

I didn't propose there was a relation between the two, I reacted with surprise that apparantly what I perceived as shitty lore was regarded as a factor of import apparantly approaching the level of importance of the games played. When people responded that the lore wasn't shitty, I began arguing that it was.

Stop attempting to discredit the way I argue and start arguing instead.

 

[LeStryfe79]

To me, M&M has always been about making a quality party to explore a vast land filled with cites, dungeons, adventure, and other interesting things from a first person perspective. There are very few games that do this and even less that do it well. I agree with Grunker that the lore and especially grid based movement were not what made the series great. Furthermore, I think grids work fine in pure dungeon crawls and their like, but in an open world environment, it is a bit silly when dressed up in modern 3D graphics. I think they should have spent more time being old school with RPG mechanics and character building as opposed to their focus on nostalgic trivialities. Basically, I think they're creating a game that's destined to not quite hit the mark no matter who is playing it.

 

[Infinitron]

I believe you will be able to right click to free look, as in Grimrock, so the grid-based nature of the game really only applies to movement.

 

[Alex]

(...snip)Party progression? Practically non-existent in 3-5, a little bit more in 6-8 because it added running around maps seeking trainers every once in a while, which often even turned out counterintuitive and not fun (I'm looking at you MM7). Truly, a spectacular and strong feat.

I kinda liked hunting for skills in Xeen. And awards, even if they didn't do anything.

 

[groke]

No insanity portraits?!?!

 

[Crispy]

Free, open world movement has its place; Witcher 3 is going to be amazing, but it's a much more ambitious project. M&M X is a niche product and as such has to employ as many tricks as it can to avoid being seen and feeling like some obscure cell phone app, which it is still in danger of, IMO.

-- As already pointed out, grid-based movement is going to eliminate the desire to explore every nook and cranny. It adds a cleanliness and a tidiness to the game which will be necessary due to its relatively small size.

-- GBM also adds a dash of nostalgia which merges nicely with its overall scope. A turn-based game in today's market? Come on. Well, might as well go grid movement too. It will feel more synergistic that way.

-- GBM eliminates a lot of technical headaches along the way, naturally hiding any awkward fall-through-the-world spots that can take forever to find and patch in OWM games.

-- Framerate issues are virtually eliminated as well, another technical hurdle not needing to be cleared.

-- Automapping becomes an easier feature to implement.

-- Monster/combat spacing and other issues are greatly simplified, making again a cleaner experience, especially when combined with turn-based.

Judging from things like the character portraits and other factors, the very "clean" game seems to be the goal here. Just like with Grimrock, the less odd bugs there are the better chances that this game will turn a profit which is even more critical for a game of its nature. Ubisoft is taking a huge gamble with M&M X and they can't afford to have it blow up in their faces with problems normally associated with an open-world game, one which demands dramatically larger size, complexity, and thus more stringent QA.

Honestly, if M&M X weren't grid-based, I'd have a more blah attitude towards it. Time for something different and Grimrock was only a taste.

 

[Infinitron]

Hmmm, I wouldn't call it a "huge gamble" - I'm guessing it has a Kickstarter-sized budget.

The butthurt people on the forums are essentially right that Ubisoft is trying to capitalize on the success of Grimrock, but hey, so what? Standing on the shoulders of giants, etc.

And they're taking it one step further and making the game turn-based. That's incline enough for me.

 

[LeStryfe79]

- Pigeon Holed Party Creation!
- Final Fantasy Inspired UI!
- Overworld Maps Drawn By Ten Year Olds!
- Extensive Reuse Of Old Assets!
- A Ginormous 15 Hour Quest!
- Old School, New Rules!

The butthurt here is clearly an attempt to desecrate these sacred lands.

 

[Crispy]

LeStryfe79
Dork

 

[Sceptic]

Grunker, you can hate on grid movement, you can hate on M&M, you can hate on the setting, you can hate on whatever you want and I can deal with it, but please for the love of whatever is holy in your generic fantasy non-SF M&M setting, please stop pretending that you were presenting "arguments" when your sole argument was the famed nostalgia goggles.

 

[Varnaan]

Hmmm, I wouldn't call it a "huge gamble" - I'm guessing it has a Kickstarter-sized budget.

The butthurt people on the forums are essentially right that Ubisoft is trying to capitalize on the success of Grimrock, but hey, so what? Standing on the shoulders of giants, etc.

And they're taking it one step further and making the game turn-based. That's incline enough for me.

I doubt it has anything to do with Grimrock, if anything it's because of the success of the Obsidian/InXile kickstarters and even Shroud of the Avatar that showed there still is an interest in real CRPG and after a mediocre HoMM VI they're trying salvage the new M&M universe with a relatively low budget game that will, even if it bombs, not impact the company and if it sells will give them a lot of credit in what they're trying to do.