PDA

View Full Version : The Good, the Very Good, and the Plumb Ugly


-Comando-
30th March 2003, 22:36
I’m not sure if I have any clue, anymore, as to where the boundary lies between RPG and Strategy games. The distinction gets more and more blurred with each new release. What has changed is the increasing incorporation of the RPG cornerstones of character development, and interaction with NPCs, into Strategy games. There are certainly many “pure” strategy games remaining, (Myth III, Red Alert/Yuri, Starcraft, and TA come to mind as pretty good examples), At the RPG end of the spectrum Icewind Dale, Baldur’s Gate II, and Wizardry 8 have been outstanding examples of the best in RPGs.

But there is a growing middle ground of next-generation games blending the best of both. Games like Disciples II, Diablo II, and the impending Heroes of Might and Magic IV (HOMM4) are excellent examples. These “Persistent Hero Games” (PHGs) have become some of the most successful retail releases in years.

A bit of History

Few would question that Heros3 marked the beginning of the PHGs. The elements of character development were limited, and had relatively modest impact on the outcome of a game. (I still believe that “logistics” and “diplomacy” were by far the most useful HOMM3 aspects to develop.) HOMM3 still relied upon resource development and amassing large armies to succeed far more than character development. But this little addition, character development, was responsible for turning HOMM3 into one of the best and most successful games of the past decade.


Advertisement
Two years ago, Disciples I, somehow overlooked by many gamers, made a big jump forward and came close to being an outstanding game. Serious problems in replayability (partially addressed by the Disciples Gold release) and combat balance prevented Disciples I from moving into the very top ranks. But I am convinced that Disciples I was very well respected and definitely recognized by the other leading game developers. It got their attention. The pros in the industry saw the germ of an excellent idea. Diablo II probably owes far more of its success to borrowing (and improving upon) concepts from Disciples I than it did from Diablo I!
But Diablo II was the breakthrough game. They got the PHG idea pretty much right. The key was Persistent Hero development. It involved the player more. It allowed a ton more replayability (by trying other characters, or different development paths for a character you like.) It somehow made it more “personal.” Should I put the new attribute point into increasing my druids awesome frost spell? Or should I increase my mana regeneration ability? A whole generation of action and strategy games never noticed that they had been quietly snookered into playing something that looked like, smelled like, and talked pretty much like an RPG.

Two weeks ago I picked up Disciples II. Despite my frustration with some dumb UI blunders, it is an outstanding game. It has every potential to outsell even Diablo II. If they put out a patch to fix a couple minor issues, and add some more scenarios to extend replayability, then it will challenge for the top honors for all of 2002. Heroes 4 will have some very stiff competition.


And then there is Etherlords. Here is a game with promise, and some potentially excellent gameplay. Yet it is so bad that I had to force myself to play enough hours into the game to include it in this comparison. Save your money. This one will be selling for $9.99 in the “discontinued bargain baskets” up by the checkout counter by mid year.

Comparing the PHGs

The following model was used in order to rank and compare four PHGs:


Heroes 3 • Diablo II • Disciples II • Etherlords
Please note one bias – I really enjoy RPGs, and am soon bored by pure action games such as Doom. Both the model and my evaluations reflect that bias.

The initial goal for developing this model was to look at some of the games I have most enjoyed over the past few years and to see how these new PHGs compared, and to see if there was any pattern to what games were huge commercial successes. Surprise. There was a pattern. The biggest hits of the past couple years all shared three common denominators:

Character development
Replayability
Ease-of-use
Maybe the biggest surprise was that leading-edge “graphics” was not a major differentiator.

This chart (more detail in a moment) ranks games on a scale of 0-100. The blue part is the “final” score. Black extensions at the top of a bar indicate a higher ranking that would have occurred had it not been for some serious errors, design flaws, etc. For example, looking at the ranking for Wizardry 8, the chart indicates a score of 70, but it could have been 80 if not for a deduction due to a serious flaw (the horrible “retreating enemy” bug.)




The model was based upon allocating 100 points among 12 categories. Please note, again, that the weighting of the categories certainly reflects just one point of view!

(Should anyone wish to play with this model, shoot me an email at v. I will be glad to send you the spreadsheet so that you can change the weightings, include other factors, or rate games yourself.)

Once a game is rated, I deduct up to 20 points for glaring errors that detract significantly from the game.




So – how did the four games compare? The result that will hardly be a surprise to all of us who are 3DO fans, is that Heroes3, despite being released years ago and using pretty dated graphics, can still hold its own with the big boys. One reason is that Diablo2 and Disciples2 shot themselves in the foot and lost points due to interface flaws and errors, while HOMM3 overcame the drawbacks in graphics with strong scores in the most important areas of balance and maps.


Combat Balance

Disciples 2 made huge strides here. Disciples I had a major problem with combat balance. There were many final battles where a maximized hero and party simply could not defeat the enemy. The only answer, too often, was to save up your spell resources, and throw a couple golems per turn at it for a few turns to wear it down to a defeatable size. At first blush, Disciples 2 has the same problem, but it turns out that is only true when your strategy is flawed! For example, there are two major parts of one campaign where you cannot defeat the monsters that are thrown at you. It is absolutely a 100% loss. BUT! The point of these really well-constructed scenarios is that the win does not require taking on those no-win battles. (Any more detail would be a spoiler!)

-Comando-
30th March 2003, 22:38
http://www.strategyplanet.com/features/articles/goodnugly/IMAGE5.jpg <---- Nice pic check it out!

Diablo2 and HOMM3 were close behind. Diablo2 had too many “wars of attrition” where the key to winning was how fast you could hotkey healing potions.

Etherlords “almost” had excellent combat balance, yet ends up scoring much lower here. The basic match-ups, number and strength of enemies, etc. seems well balanced. However, Etherlords makes available to you a randomized selection of spells from your spellbook during each combat turn (all offense is based upon magic) so you can have turns where there is nothing useful you can do except stand there and be hit. Worse, this detracts from all the effort and strategy you put into learning new spells, deciding which ones to keep, resource collection (runs and materials for the spells), etc.

Character Development

This is the area that has seen the most evolution the past few years. HOMM3 allowed you to develop some limited passive skills. Diablo2 added a well constructed skills tree that was a huge breakthrough in this category of gaming. Disciples2 has tweaked the model to improve it a bit more by combining a simplified (compared to Diablo2) skills tree for the hero with an enhancement of the original HOMM3 army development tree for the other one to five members of the hero’s army.

Etherlords might actually have a basic idea here that is the equal of Disciples2. However, the interface and documentation is so inept that you cannot really tell. (More on that in the “Deductions” section.)


Replayability

It’s funny that the venerable HOMM3 still leads in this category, by far. The sheer number of maps, ability to try different characters and cities, and differing starting cities means you can play these games over and over. There are a wealth of 3rd party maps available. To this day, HOMM3 (Shadows of Death) is my default game when I want to kill an hour or two.

You would think that Diablo2 would get a higher ranking here because of random maps and the different character choices you can make. But the advantage of the random map is really an illusion. You know what is going to happen, and where you need to go. All that happens on the map is “… the entrance to the cave moves a little to the left…”. The replayability comes from the enjoyment of trying a totally new character.


Graphics – Combat and Environmental

There is a lot less difference here than you would expect. Diablo2 is marginally ahead of the rest. Disciples2 lost a point in what could have been exceptional environmental graphics because they use such saturated colors and low contrast that items blend together (even on a calibrated monitor!). You simply cannot see some monsters against the background unless you remember to “turn banners on.” The perspective angle (plus the colors issue) makes it difficult to see some passages and paths available to you.

Despite being a new release, Etherlords is back one generation on graphics, and uses very simplistic artwork for environmental items. Bushes look like cartoons. Combat graphics are laughable.


Exploration and Maps

The Disciples2 maps are the best I have seen in any game. If not for the color/perspective issue, they would have gotten a rare maximum score for this category. The maps are extremely well crafted. There are strategic islands, passages, etc. that have to be the focus of your tactics. You have so many baddies trying to flank you that you are DOA if you don’t stop to base everything you do on your surroundings. These maps really contribute to the fun of the game.


Deductions

While the quality of the basic game went way up for Disciples2 and Diablo2, they each had serious drawbacks that make one wonder about the degree of play testing that went on. Some basic things seem to have been overlooked.

The Diablo2 inability to save outside the town was an amazing oversight. In some areas (the jungle is a good example) you could invest 6-7 hours of playing, and lose it all if you had to quit and hadn’t found the next transporter. That flaw, alone, was likely the only reason BG2 topped Diablo2 in many 2001 game-of-the-year polls.


Advertisement
Disciples2 has two irritating issues. One is during combat – there is no allowance for surrendering or ending the combat before it plays out to a conclusion. That’s true even if you stumbled into a dungeon where you are totally overmatched, and just want to quit and restore from a saved game. But a worse case occurs in certain kinds of battles (most notably ones involving enemies who could paralyze so that you cannot escape by retreating) where you are stuck in a 5-15 minute “do-nothing” battle and might as well go to the bathroom, make a sandwich, and clean the kitchen while waiting for it to end. I had one instance of werewolves facing medusas that required a hard reset to make it end! The second issue is that, unless you had played Disciples I, you might not have a clue what was happening in some battles. For example, a person retreating turns around with his back to the battle, while a person who is afraid simply leaves the field. Sounds fine – but that is because I figured out what happened. In Disciples I there was a clear word (like “afraid” or “retreating”) that appeared, and stayed, on the character portrait.
And then there is Etherlords. This one defies imagination. The game is almost unplayable due to a horrible UI, unreadable manuals, and dozens of buttons/features you either never discover, or if you do discover them there is no clue what they do. On screen explanations are in a butchered translation from some language that often make no sense at all. A description of a button normally is (invented example!) along the lines of “To choose a spell to summon use the small select button at the lower left of the middle combat panel on the central control console.” Now that is an invented example, but it captures the essence of the game’s idea of instructions. The manual is horrible. I run a small ad agency, and would be fired if I gave this to a client. The text is tiny – some charts are in 7 point type. Type is gray on a dark background! The type is set in some unique sans-serif condensed thin font that is almost unreadable. Several people in my office were unable to read some of the charts without getting a magnifying glass. Oh yes – if you were able to read a passage, it was in the same fractured English. You have to work very hard to figure out even basic game characteristics.

Final Scores

Put this all together, and the bottom line is two very good new games (the highest score I’ve ever seen by this model is an 83 for Icewind Dale), a solid old guy still hanging in there years after release, and one downright ugly PHG.




Disciples2 clearly made great use of their shipment delay to come up with a game that will be in the running for many 2002 “best-of-year” polls. With a patch (adding a “surrender” option and putting clear labels on battle portraits for “Afraid” or “Retreating”, etc.) and a few added scenarios (to increase replayability) Disciples2 will be a strong competition for games like Wizardry 8, Icewind Dale II, Warcraft III, and Heroes4 for the top spot this year.

If Heroes of Might & Magic 4 benefits as much from their four month shipment delay as did Disciples2, then 2002 will be an awesome year for Strategy, RPG, and PHG gamers.