Review: Master of Magic
Вставка
- Опубліковано 3 сер 2024
- Become a channel member to access perks:
/ @nightharrow
0:00 Intro
3:20 Starting Options
8:50 Making a Wizard
9:54 Races
10:57 Game Play & Combat
15:47 A Better Alternative: Planar Conquest (Start Options)
19:57 Species (Races), Magic, & Wizard Attributes
24:22 Game Play & Combat
32:54 Outro & TLDR - Ігри
I sorely wish I had seen your review before buying this game. I agree with all your comments in the first 8 minutes. I bought the game because I played the original in '94 and enjoyed it. This version is much harder. I have tried almost all the races (not dark elves yet) and all the main magic types on all EASY settings. I get over powered by AI stacks of doom all the time. I limit the number of neutral cities because if you set it for a lot, you will never be able to use your settlers.
So far, the best progress I have made is with the goblins (new) because they grow so quickly they can build cities in a nice amount of time. Dwarves never seem to get anywhere. The only advantage of high elves because of their slow growth is the amount of magic you can build. Halflings are good for their bonus food, but they dont realy have strong units. Slingers are nice, but I am not wowed. By thetime you can build them the AI already has faster, more manueverable units that wipe them out.
The game is a big disappointment to me and I regret buying it.
Yes I am still playing it to try different strategies to find what might work. I do not plan on moving up to "normal" anytime soon.
I don’t know if you have seen, but it looks like Age of Wonders next addition is going to be very much a Master of Magic 2.0 an actual improvement on the 20yr old game.
Git gud scrub
@@brentfriendshuh1852 You are not helping anyone
If you want the classic MoM experience, there is Caster of Magic for Windows. There is this guy Seravy, who put an insane amount of work into it. Balanced it nicely, and improved it. There is a learning curve, the same old graphics (320x200) and pretty confusing mouse controls. But it is definitely worth it! Difficulty settings are usable, you can work your way up nicely just by setting the AI level. I did even learn new things from them. Races are different, especially the Myrran ones, they do enable new tactics.
Hint: try ranged units :)
Yeah, Caster of Magic is the real deal, expanding and extending the spirit of the original game!! Hadriex here on UA-cam has lots of playthroughs on harder difficulty. But to see a grandmaster in action, search for Sapher (narrated only in Russian though) - he beats it on phantasmal difficulty.
Bro he hates on MoM systems, CoM has the exact same combat system!
I also think in this review there is a missing aspect of trying more to find out the reasoning behind what the creators had on their minds of what to achieve with this game. It has been known the goal was, as someone else said in a comment below, to produce a "verbatim" copy of Master of Magic. With updated graphics (since playing a game in 640x480 is pretty demanding these days (UI very limited in the original because of space issues and also pixelated nature of everything).
Along the way, the creators made a lot of decisions. New Graphics tone and style. Hexes instead of squares. But they also decided to keep everything regarding map creation, combat, diplomacy nearly (if not 100%) identical to the original. On purpose.
They also decided to keep a lot of randomness in the game (you criticize this as not being "beginner friendly"). But what it actually does is, sticking to the original. That includes things like unbalanced starting positions, and also being unlucky with lairs around your base. I consider this a conscious decision and probably a nod to the rogue-like genre.
But these decisions are probably all conscious decisions. As far as I know, the developers also considered to make the game moddable. Maybe this gives room for different interpretations, too.
I tend to agree about the price being too high. I think this might be due to Slitherine being a niche genre game producer after all (?). They knew they probably not get more than 1000 concurrent players on steam and not sell it like Dwarf Fortress in all likelihood, or not being covered on twitch like other games do.
They maybe hope if they keep it true to the original, fans from back then honour this game and buy it.
I got 10$ off for applying to the beta. Also, yeah, slitherine charges more than average. That's their right though. They also aren't charging a gigantic amount more than average, just a little, maybe 10-15$ too much often times, imo.
Thank you for the comment, I appreciate the feedback amd would definitely agree that my review could have been better. I’m sure I’ll get there in time, and comments definitely help with that, so again ty.
I will just push back on one thing here, and this seems to be a common thread. I’m not reviewing the creators intentions, I’m reviewing the game. And as you pointed out, they did decide to improve some things, and leave others. My point is that on the question of “is it fun and is it worth it for the price?” The answer for me is no, and that’s what this review reflects.
New player here, so probably someone your review is aimed at. I have been both delighted and frustrated with parts of this game.
I both agree and disagree with parts of your review.
You're on the money with things like price, user-interface, lack of explanations of game mechanics and the game generally feeling quite bare-bones. In particular, parts of the UI feel like they weren't contributed to by anyone who has extensively played a 4x in the last 15 years.
I also agree on your comments about how lair strength can make the game feel incredibly limiting in what you can do in the early stages. I feel like it could benefit from a better strength distribution as I often feel like there are 3-4 sites I can clear relatively quickly, followed by about 30 more that I feel I am absolutely nowhere near taking on. The progression doesn't seem smooth.
However I think you've been unfair on things like the combat system. It's not a 30% chance to hit, it's rolling a whole bunch of dice (often 20+ for multi-figure units) each with an accuracy (default:30% but can vary.) This sort of distribution usually leads to more consistent damage results, not less.
IMO the lack of understanding of the combat system is also evident in your comments about the race differences, where you state that a point or two of attack or defence is pretty meaningless in terms of difference. It can actually make a massive difference between how the different race's units perform.
I also don't agree on the Planar conquests recommendation - I found it boring and tedious. Lot's of options and complexity doesn't necessarily mean a more strategically deep experience.
Enjoyed listening to your review though - keep it up.
Hey Dean,
Thank you for taking the time to comment. I think maybe my combat experience was perhaps skewed by testing on fights with mostly 1-2 figure units then, and I definitely don’t have an in depth understanding of the combat system, so it could also be that.
Definitely learning a lot about where everyone is coming from though and will make some notes for next time. Lol.
Thanks again.
You can definitely change the chance to hit in combat with "+x to hit" modifiers from spells, weapon/monster upgrades or auras (Angels give stat boosts).
Yep, and I think elves start with an extra 10% right? I just meant in the early part of the game and through tactics and such. Like you can’t take high ground and get a bonus, flank an opponent, hide behind a rock from missile fire, etc… at least not that I could tell.
As others have pointed out, my Knowles of the fight mechanics is limited because the game doesn’t tell you much at all. You either have to learn from external sources or play quite a bit.
@@Nightharrow from what I remember, each sword has a 30% chance of causing a hit. And all of those hits are added up and applied to the defender. The defender then has a 30% chance of blocking a point of damage per shield. I know that sounds confusing but it makes sense when you think about it. So to make things a little simpler, an attacker with 10 swords will on average apply three hit points of damage to the defender. If the defender has 10 shields on average, it will block all three of those hits, thereby receiving zero hearts lost. I hope that makes sense.
If the attacker had a +1, then it would apply four points of damage to the defender instead, and the defender would most likely block three and receive one damage to its health.
The real dangerous guys are the phantoms because they're damage cannot be blocked by shields unless the defender is immune to magic. But phantoms have almost no hit points, so they are crushed by range attacks and magic spells. But if you conjure them right next to an opponent and have them attack quickly, they can shred anything. It's even worse if you have summoning reduction powers and a tank hiding behind city walls.
@@Nightharrow Actually in combat you can read an explanation of how combat works and gives a video visual aid. I will admit the games menus are not the most intuitive. Also combat is basic at first but gets very strategic later.
@@Nightharrow I thought you said you played the original game? You sound like you've never played it once. None of the things you listed changed the outcome of combat in the original game either.
@@stanleyclark923 indeed, several people have accused me of this as well. I don’t know what to tell you, it was almost 30 years ago. I was a huge fan. And I expected them to actually improve on the game. Which they did in some ways, despite some saying they where trying to remake the game.
I would encourage you to check out the new Age of Wonders. It’s not released yet, but you can see their last one and how the new one coming out looks, and then compare it to this. The contrast could not be more stark.
I actually like it. I mean it feels dated but that’s the point. Though I hope they keep up on it and support it.
Quite surprised that Planar Conquest was what you proposed as an alternative. I tried it but bounced off; somehow it didn't gel for me. But I'd be interested to see if you have a way of playing that makes more sense, or something. I'm inclined to favour Fallen Enchantress for the wizard game genre.
It’s got plenty of problems tbh. When I had originally decided to recommend it I had thought the price had fallen, and I felt it was a decent value for a beginner player. I’m kind of second guessing that now. Some of the other more obvious choices are just not as beginner friendly (*makes eyes at age of wonders*).
For me some of the fun of MoM was the cheesy exploits. I know it’s a base desire, but I can’t help myself. Lol. And I feel like planar conquest scratches that itch for me. I’ll have to give some of these other games a try though. I’ve played less than half the ones suggested.
You can increase your hit modifier. Either by leveling up or when you explore and win combats, units get buffs. There are spells to increase hit modifiers.
I would love auto explore and yes, you can use a AI to take care of your cities. Its like a bug button in the build area "managed by familiar". You can play undead or demons in Master of Magic. You just have to summon them or turn your units into demons or undead.
For example, I was playing gnolls and turned them in vampires and werevolves. I am playing dark elves now, and gave them wings and breath attack, they are basically inccubuss now.
I was thinking you were gonna recommend, Age of Wonders. I tried it first, didnt like it. Age of Wonders 3 I didnt like at all. And 2, I liked. But I enjoy master of magic more. I find it that it gives more options and also does look 20 years old.
It did take me a while to understand what to do in game. Until I found the 4 spearmen into houses for 10 turns starts. That allows me to get all the cities on the map fast, because they are far easier than the dungeons to take. And worth more.
The random map is way to random and you get no tools to influence it. Like I can get 2 power nodes easy next to me and get a huge spike in power. Or get nothing and have to farm cities.
Or I spawn on a continent and my race canot build boats so I am stuck and need to use magic or portals.
It needs more options, hot seat and multiplayer. I wanna play this with friends.
Just want to start out by saying, Dark Elf Succubi sound awesome! And thank you for the thoughtful comments and info. I’ll just elaborate on a couple of things for clarity here…
What I meant by the whole playing undead thing is that in planar conquest you actually have entirely different mechanics when you play undead. Like your cities function differently, you have different resources you can take advantage of, you have to spread corruption to be able to use those tiles for your city, etc… but I’m with you, transforming units you already have is pretty awesome rp.
On the to hit thing, I was just overly brief. I meant that you can’t change that modifier by tactics such as high ground, closer range, flanking, etc… so you are kind of left swinging and missing a lot in many situations early game. This as apposed to something that scaled.
Age of Wonders is a great game imo, I just felt planar conquest to me has felt like the best spiritual successor yet to MoM. Even if it’s not without serious issues.
That’s interesting because other have mentioned they kept the map generator the same very much of purpose. I guess to preserve the feel? Well it seems like you are really enjoying it otherwise, so my fingers are crossed for you that some kidders help with the map stuff.
MoM:Caster of Magin on fair game diviculti is chanlging. But MoM was alway a game of survie not easy game play. This the main interesting aspekt of MoM. Ther is now fair but it is hard live. In my 1st MoM:CoM. game was really hard and required a lot of tactics and their constant changes. Not to say that in order to destroy the capital of the most powerful wizard I had to do a lot and spend 3/4 full armies so that my heroes barely defeated 2 AI heroes at the end. It's beautiful in this game.
Well, I think you found the only way Planar Conquest could come out as a winner in a comparison against Master of Magic... By only playing Master of Magic for 2 hours, and then praising all the aspects of Planar Conquest that are part of Master of Magic as well, but were not shown in your video.
I have both Planar Conquest and Master of Magic, and I have played both games. I have backed Planar Conquest on Kickstarter, and was beta testing Master of Magic.
I would agree that Planar Conquest has a better UI, and more attractive graphics, but the combat system of Master of Magic is IMHO much deeper, but becomes only apparent mid and late game.
I think where it excels is remaining interesting also late in the game by the extremely powerful spell combinations and magic items you can craft, and champions you can hire - something where a lot of 4X games fail. I mean, can anyone tell me another game where you can cast a spell that stops time for everybody except you armies? Or brings about the zombie apocalypse? In MoM you can.
Overall, Master of Magic is way more complex and ambitious then any fantasy 4X games on the market.
That is an interesting take, thanks for dropping a comment.
Really good review on both games. On a personal note I think doing a (I assume monetized) review on a game you returned is sketchy. But you did give a solid alternative so that was nice.
Now if you’ll excuse me Planar Conquest just finished dl…
Age of Wonders 4 is out now and it’s a AAA game I highly recommend. Just haven’t got around to reviewing it yet.
Thank you for pointing out Planar Conquest.
You are very welcome. I’ll be playing and reviewing some other 4x games in the near future as well, so keep an eye out if you are interested. I’m getting some feedback that I’ve missed the mark and their are better games out there, and I think they might be right.
Deity Empires is better than Planar Conquest imo. I tend to go to that one much more often in any case.
I agree with all of your criticisms of the current version of MoM, but then you've undermined your credibility by advancing Planar Conquest as an alternative. It's like pointing out the old Soviet Union as an example of failed Communism and then pointing to North Korea as one that works! ;)
exactly, a crudely made game that was very similar to MoM.
implodes mom deserves more attention
I respect that point of view. I certainly didn’t mean to imply that is was an amazing triple A game, just one I have found enjoyable and easy to play and get into. Sounds like there are some others I should be check out though, so I’ll give that a shot soon I think.
Thanks for the comment.
I don't think USSR was an example of failed communism.
The communism here worked as intended unril the very end.
I loved the original back in the day. This game succeeds as a verbatim copy, all right; it plays exactly like a game made in 1992. For those of us who are used to Total War Warhammer, though, this game gets dull...fast. I didn't return it, there is still hope that updates will improve it.
Definitely agree. The game was amazing for its time and made many games look mediocre by comparison for many years. Thanks for dropping a comment.
Planar conquest is kinda bland as well. I played it for about 30 hours I guess, and didn't pay too much for it so it's fine on that front. On the other hand, it doesn't scratch that itch either. I've chosen Deity Empires for this type of game, and have a few hundred hours into it now...heh :P I keep changing settings and it has huge impact on the gameplay, which makes it have a lot of replay value.
Oh nice, that’s one of the ones on my list to try. So far I haven’t found anything that I feel amazing about.
I will always love Master of Magic, and I think this remake is pretty much fine. I do not think it is worth $40 though, and as a huge fan of the original, I have some criticisms of my own, most specifically the AI behavior, art style, forgettable music, and the fact that the game is just slower and clunkier than the original.
Remaking this game was probably an unenviable task, as making a "faithful" remake required the developers to make the game deliberately obtuse and unbalanced. It also doesn't help that (as in the original) the default wizards are quite bad, and creating a new wizard would be difficult for a new player who doesn't know the mechanics. The game also just suffers from some design sensibilities that in my opinion haven't aged well.
For example, it is possible (and often necessary) to find yourself controlling an absolutely insane number of cities in this game, but there is no reliable automation feature (the crappy one it gives you barely counts) so you might find yourself micromanaging 50 - 100 cities yourself every turn. Worse, the new versions game engine can barely handle all these cities and armies, leading to slow turns. A system which allowed for fewer cities, which each city being more productive and important, might have been better, but might have angered fans of the original, so I get why they left it this way. A more configurable automation system, such as Alpha Centauri's "Priorities" system, would help matters a bit. At the very least, let us queue up nine units on repeat so we can build full stacks.
But I think what I'm missing most are the little touches. The original was full of charm that just didn't translate to this version. Though the original's midi soundtrack was a bit grating on the overworld, every enemy wizard and many of the overworld spells also had their own theme songs and cutscenes. I miss seeing my wizard actually standing at the summoning circle, and watching my latest abomination rise from it. And I miss seeing the enemy wizard's face turn into a scowl and hearing their "angry" music during diplomacy when I saw the wrong thing. I feel like something could have been done to bring some of this charm to the game, but it wasn't prioritized in this version, which left the game to fend for itself on the merits of it's dated gameplay, which will be very hit or miss for modern strategy gamers.
I don't regret buying it, I do enjoy it, and I'm glad it was made, if only to show that there is an interest in reviving this game. But this game is not going to bring new players to the franchise in this state, and its sales will be fueled by nostalgia for the most part. I'm hoping that eventually there will be a true reimagining with the same wizards, same iconic spells and worlds, but maybe a few more new ideas.
I think you’ve got some interesting and well thought out points here. I wish as much time and care had been devoted to the remake. I would have been happy to see twice the time, and twice the money go into remaking this, and then gladly paid twice as much for it. But this kind of money grab has become quite typical tbh.
I don’t know if you’ve seen, but it looks like Age of Wonders next release in a few months will be fantasy themed. Idk if it will scratch that itch, but it does look promising.
This game is great. I just want multiplayer
Hope you get it!
Thanks for this review. I was really useful to get your perspective. I immediately returned the game on Steam and instead bough Planar Conquest for a fraction of the cost.
Awesome to hear! Glad to save you a buck. I know planar conquest has its bugs but at the discounted price, seems like a great deal to me.
I've played it for a while now and it's not that bad of a game. I think the biggest complaint I have with it is that none of the quality-of-life improvements that you seen in modern 4x games are implemented. Things like city spam, slow early game, and late-game micromanagement hell are not addressed as it is nearly a 1:1 remake of the original, just with updated graphics and hex tiles. If it wasn't for the Spell of Mastery, I would probably never be able to beat a game out of how slow games tend to become. I really can't fault Slitherine for it since every other Master of Magic inspired game has been extremely disappointing and it's probably not worth the risk to make a lot of tweaks, but I thought that some of the ideas from Caster of Magic would of made the remake a lot better (i.e. 3 settlers, more than 4 opponents, etc...)
I would agree with all of this. I just thought the asking price was way to high for that.
Planar Conquest is $1.99 until Jan 5 on Steam. 😄
Thanks. This game looks promising.
I saw this on 20 March 2023 and purchased planar conquest for $1.99 --- fall of the couch easy decision. I am d/l now and look forward to playing.
Hmmm... This is a tough one... On the one hand, a lot of your criticisms are somewhat valid. However, I think the Master of Magic designers wanted to keep absolutely as much from the original game as they could.
Let me ask you something important: did you like the original version of the game?
Oh yeah, I played a ton of it. I was also pretty young. I just expect more out of games now and don’t expect to pay such a high price for a game designed like 3 decades ago
All the thinks you mention are original masters of magic thinks. You had to scout to know wich lairs and nods to attack and build for it.
Yep, and I say that at a couple of points. Something to the effect of “I assume this is just a clone of the original master of magic, it just feels worse…” you know, because it’s 30years later. We have gotten a lot better at these things.
Sorry if you didn’t catch it or whatever, it just seems like a lot of people are mad at me for giving an honest review. My point was just kind of, what am I paying for? And I’m confused what that is. If I want to play the same game, well, we have always been able to do that.
I also keep hearing how they tried to just remake the original with updated graphics, but then some of those same people will point to updated systems and changes they made, so at this point I’m just confused. Lol. I know that’s not what you have said here though, I’m just kind of thinking out loud at all the angry comments I have gotten.
@@Nightharrow When you review a game with this kind of history you will definitely get pushback. They really wanted to update the ui but keep the core numbers the same. That to me was a tremendous task and is why it has updates to how the terrain looks but then gives no tactical terrain bonuses even tho it looks like it should. Seems to not make sense until you see the ultimate goal was to be able to play the game exactly like the original. Which it does pretty good.
I returned the game too.
I just got the game and I'm having the same experience you are talking about here. I love the original game and this doesn't cut it. I wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt when I was following the forums and what people were saying about the game. The art looks more like civilization. I was really hoping they would put some work into creating an updated look of Master of Magic. They didn't even try. I'll be going back to the original and returning this game. I so wish they had taken the time building this game. If you're an indy developer reading this please take note and do the work needed or else you will be just another company that fades away.
I had bought the original Master of Magic from GOG. I checked my library there and found there was a new download for the game. It is the 1.53 community patch. You get a launcher which allows you to play the original 1.3.1 or the game with the Community Patch, which is what I have been doing. For less than $5, you can't go wrong..
I tried this game and yes.. it's just not the original. The fog of war / view issues, no city window, etc. all these problems. Sound / music. All of these small QoL issues add up to make the game a chore instead of fun. I'm sticking with the original using the 1.53 Community Patch. You just can't improve on perfect and that's what the original was. A true classic.
@@jasonbourneistreadstone Absolutely!
I bought the original MS-DOS version in 1994. I look back now there were a ton of great dos games I played. One in paticuler was Silent Service. That was such a fun game!
I just got back into gaming and I'm looking forward to taking a deep dive into the games today.
@@shaunhall960 I played Silent Service II a lot back in the day on Amiga. I used to sink ships with the deck gun - why use limited torpedoes? I had a c64 first and then upgraded to an Amiga 2000. Master of Magic was one of the early games I had on a Windows PC along with Master of Orion, another SimTex classic, and Master of Orion 2 after that.
@@jasonbourneistreadstone What's wrong with the fog of war? What do you mean no city window? I've played the original since the day it came out. I dust it off every year or so and beat it on the highest difficulty just for GP. I decided a week ago to buy the remake and I think it's superior by far. The city window is different but I see nothing missing that might cause you a qol issue.
planar conquest with hexmap indeed would be better. but it hasn't. so it isn't.
I Think it is not a bad game, is quite enjoable even if Age of Wonders 3 is a faaar better than this one.
Thanks for enlightening me on Planar Conquest. However, I found you were unnecessarily harsh to the new MoM given it’s exactly what the community wanted: an updated MoM with modern graphics. You obviously forgot how combat worked in MoM when you played it years ago, as it includes the same kind of “d&d” style combat mechanics you rave about in Planar Conquest despite the mechanics being there and true to the original rendition of MoM.
Personally, I think if they do what other studios do with their initial launch of their 4X title, in this case MoM with a new paint of coat and opportunity abound, and release incremental patches to improve and add systems like online multiplayer and more to really polish off the title. I would not consider it a waste for any sincere fan of the classic MoM.
I’m assuming MoM wasn’t exactly your favorite game growing up. :)
Thanks for the comment Ed. I’m glad that the diehard fans are happy with the product, but my review was never meant for them. They are already going to buy the game anyways right? Or helped out with the play testing.
I think for the average person they look at the remake of an old game as an update. When game companies just want to update graphics, they tend to try to make that clear by saying “Remastered” or something of the sort and that indicates we are changing the graphics, and then as little as possible. Add in the price tag, and I think the average fan would expect more, or at least I did. I expected modern UI with tool tips that where helpful, I expected better balanced combat, I expected more/updates systems. If this was $20 or less, I would think differently.
Master of Magic was just one of my favortie games growing up and I just don’t know why someone would go to all the trouble to update the graphics and not change the game at all. I think og MoM with it’s blocky graphics is great, especially with many of the bugs removed. We already have that game though, it exists, so I’m just not sure who this game is supposed to appeal to besides the diehard fans that again, are going to buy it no matter what.
Having said that, I hope it turns out well for that community, and you guys get everything you’re hoping for.
@@Nightharrow planar conquest is abysmal. Also some of the stuff you are complaining about the game was already exactly like that in the original.
Of course there is better games than MoM, but planar conquest is not one of them. I would point you to Dominions and Eador for example, among others.
I’ll definitely check them out! Thanks for the info and taking the time to respond.
@@Nightharrow "Master of Magic was just one of my favortie games growing up and I just don’t know why someone would go to all the trouble to update the graphics and not change the game at all." And that's why you're getting flack in the comments. You claim to be such a fan while complaining that they didn't change everything. lol
@@stanleyclark923 yep, I think just about all of us who have not been following or continuing to play a 30 year old game regularly where expecting more. They updated more than the graphics, just not much more. And yes, I consider it a very bad value proposition. Kind of like wizards charging $1,000 for a handful on magic cards coming from the same era.
I’ve been told I’m anti-sentimental so maybe it’s just my taste. Either way im just trying to offer an honest opinion on an apparently divisive subject. Lol. Thanks for watching and I appreciate you taking the time to comment. As I mentioned before I’ll be playing the new Age of Wonders when it comes out, I hope you’ll drop back by and check it out.
Is there a campaign for this or no?
No, it’s a recreation of a 20yr old game with only minor modifications. Check out Age of Wonders coming out in a few weeks if you are looking for something like that.
CIty autobuild was obvious .. on the build screen and on the all cities screen
Much harder game than I remember but still fun. I'm just doing easy 1 v 1 and still have only won 2 game
Yeah the to hit system is a little ruff at first for sure. Age of Wonders is out today. It’s worth a look.
Did you forget to mute the sound of the other guy playing the game?
Lol can you hear me in the background on one of them? Guess I shouldn’t edit video late at night but I was just trying to get this out as quickly as possible.
@@Nightharrow Yep it's clearly audible. Btw sorry if comment seems harsh, I'm drunk. No bad intentions.
I agree with most of your review. It was extremely disappointing to me, especially considering I found out about MoM very recently and was hyped for it, watching vids, reading manuals... When I saw this I was as happy as a kid opening gifts on christmas, then finding a pile of stinking coal... For me it was the terrible amateur UI design, terrible uninspired animations, and no option of playing with friends, a 4X GAME! In 2023!
During idle talks I always tell my friends "judge books by their covers, especially CD cases of videogames!", and I'm usually scoffed at. Fun to hear you have a similar opinion on it.
@@Nightharrow You seem to call this and that "bad design", or "this shouldn't be this way" etc. seems like you have forgotten that this is supposed to be Master of Magic, verbatim.
Right?! And for the price… nty.
And no worries, I know better than to not triple check my work after a late night.
Idk if you have seen it but “Caster of Magic” is also a thing. I haven’t messed with it, but might be worth looking into?
@@Nightharrow Yeah I've bought the DLC that you mentioned and the original game as a small protest on my end for this game's release. I'll be playing them tomorrow. Everyone says CoM is basically /THE/ version to play, but the manual written by the guy seemed so terrible it's hard to digest. I'm sure I won't be disappointed otherwise.
Ya, I and 3 friends played the original (yes, we are that old). We were SO excited for this release, and planned on playing coop for Christmas. Nope. It has no MP, at all. So much for "Modernized". Waited decades for nothing. :(
Yep, I feel the same way. I’m glad some people are enjoying it, but I couldn’t be more disappointed. Had more than a couple comments accusing me of not liking the original or not playing the game… all because I wanted it to be awesome and it wasn’t…
@@Nightharrow I think this game can be fixed because the design allows for it. The modding community will probably do the job. Let's hope.
Let’s hope indeed. It just seems to me that making it better the first time would have made this a lot easier, so even if the community does mod it, it won’t be as good as it could have been. And begs the question of what did we pay for? But I’m with you, fingers crossed.
A shame Planar Conquest is pretty much Steam only. Looks good.
Considerably more expensive but Age of Wonders new game is fantasy themed and looks great.
Yes, please do a Planar Conquest video because going by the Steam reviews it's not considered to be very good. So if you like it at least show enough actual gameplay so we can see what you're talking about. I agree that looking at some videos of the new Master of Magic, it is not interesting. Also any thoughts on Deity Empires or Wizards and Warlords?
Will do. And no, I have not tried those out but I’ll give it a shot. I plan to try out a few more as well.
I totally disagree with Your review. You point out stuff and mechanics that were in the original game, but that is what made it good. As far as I know the devs wanted to refresh the game, not to rebuild it completely. Exploring was the same, battles were the same (chance to hit, etc) and yes, there is autobuild. The ONLY problem with MoM is that it didn't get all the updates from "caster of magic" and You probably have no idea what it is.
So you feel all the improvements of Caster of Magic not being in the game is a small thing? I guess it’s just me but I would rather have a more advanced game with better mechanics, systems, etc… than one that looks good but is without those things. I guess I’m just old school like that. All these young kids just want life like graphics and it doesn’t matter what the gameplay is like.
I am glad that you guys like the game though. It seems like this could be a whole thing refreshing graphics on games. Maybe they’ll do Lands of Lore, Gauntlet, or something next. I would also probably try those for sure.
@@Nightharrow I didn't say it's a small thing, it's the only thing. Unfortunately caster of magic doesn't change the stuff that You mention in Your review (except nr of enemy wizards).
This is such a mess of a review. The whole section commenting on the effect of difficulty setting is just insane - "you can't really change the difficulty only the fun". A horrible player that boasts he like to play hard settings unlike his wife, and then complains the game is too hard. Totally ignorant player saying things like +1 doesn't matter? It does in MoM, you can't change the 30% hit? Hint try levelling, spells etc.
The variance of combat is huge and it keeps missing until it hits? In fact, the variance of MoM combat system is far less than most systems cos of the figures system which results in more rows = more stable results... So a 1 figure Spearman is 8 figures * 1 roll (each 30% to hit) not just one 30% chance. I can go on but you get the picture
Worse of all he recommends Planar Conquest. I've played that a lot basically because it's closest to MoM until the remake and trust me it's worse. How can someone who basically hates the system in MoM and turns around to recommend Planar Conquest which is very similar design with worse UI? There are reasonable critiques of the game, this one isn't it.
He totally misrepresents Planar Conquest which was by a hobbyist who in no way could buy the trademark for MoM. It was never meant to be MoM2, he is confusing it with StarDock's Elemental War on magic/Fallen enchantress which did indeed try to get the name.
Again I played Planar Conquest a ton. The whole 9 planes in Planar conquest was a silly gimmick, it sounds cool, but the planes are pretty much similar with superficial differences, so you end up bored. I do agree the settings options for Planar Conquest is decent, but check the latest MoM remake update it adds a bunch of settings including frequency of neuturals, min distance between cities, city population grow speed.
The thing he gets right is Planar Conquest main innovation is spells are divided into realms AND/OR schools of effect. But the spells themselve tend to repeat. The "disciplines" in Planar Conquest are pretty much the same as retorts/traits in MoM, the main difference is they have disadvantage effects. I do agree this part feels very MoMish.
Thanks for dropping by and letting me know how you feel. If things go well, I’ll be doing some more reviews in the near future, hope to drop back by for them.
Please do a review now. It's 12 months on , there is a ton of improvements, new content from DLCS
I can’t make any promises, but I’ll see what I can do. I think for me to be able to review it again with all the expansions, it would have to be a review copy, but I’ll reach out.
I joined the discord as well if you have thoughts on the improvements or anyone doing gameplay on it you think I should see. I think we both agree my first review could have been much better, regardless of my recommendation, and as always, I happy to be wrong.
For what it’s worth, I really appreciate you reaching out again.
Sorry, but listening to you it seems to me that you don't know what you are talking about. This is just a remake of the original Master of Magic.
Wizard picks are not how many wizards you fight against it's how many points to allocate when you first start for example 10 books and start on the Myrran plane. Or I like picking Sage Master, Warlord, Conjurer, and 6 books if I remember correctly. As a person who played a bunch, you don't know about the F9 Grand Vizier feature? You're telling me you're a noob without telling me a noob. I give this review a -1 out of 10. Also, you do know in MoM you can also cast a spell to win the game, it's called the Spell of Mastery. 4 swords means D4 I'm guessing you don't know what a D4 is each unit in that square rolls a dice that's what the D stands for and it rolls a number from 1-4. The U.I. is almost the same. I don't think you played MoM at all.
I’m really glad you like the game and are passionate about it. I hope it keeps you entertained for another 30 years.
@@Nightharrow Sorry if I sounded harsh. Just don't like it when someone trashes a game and says don't buy something they know nothing about. If people buy it they might make a MoM 2 with all the things you want and more. If it doesn't make money they will drop the project. I was writing out of fear. I still play MoM to this day and would love a part 2 one day.
I mean, I get it, you guys have been playing this game for 30 years and really want a second one. It does beg the question, why didn’t they just make a 2? We need to buy a game we don’t want to eventually get a game we do? Or maybe this game was meant for those hard core fans that have been playing for 30 years? Seems like a small market.
I also keep hearing about how it’s just an exact copy of the original, but that’s not true, they did change some things. I’ve even had people tell me how they made an exact copy in the same message they go on to mention all the things they improved…
One would think tool tips would be one of the things they would have added if you expected anyone to play the game who hadn’t already. It is 30 years later, and the expectations of game design have gone up with the skill of programmers, quality of resources to make them, etc… all have.
Maybe they didn’t expect anyone new to play the game, maybe it was always just for the diehard fans playing a 30 yr old game on the regular, but if so, my review shouldn’t matter to much. Those people where already going to buy the game.
I do have to say that the constant “I don’t think you ever played the game” comments are pretty funny. Quite a long con if that’s what I did, since I’ve talked about having played the original and wanting to play this one when it came out for several months before. I just expected more, particularly because it doesn’t do a great job of advertising how it’s just going to be an copy of the original with few improvements. Typically a game would label itself a “Remaster” or something similar. But then again that’s not really great advertise. “Hey, we updates some things on a really fun, but originally pretty broken game from 30 years ago”. Might as well say “For diehard fans only”.
@@Nightharrow In the entertainment industry you have to prove yourself before they give you a chance. They have to prove to the people in charge that this game is worth the investment. I've read that people watching your video either didn't buy it or returned it. I'm the type of person that thinks every vote counts. Now if you said it's not worth the $50 dollars but if it's on sale it's definitely worth it then I would agree with that statement.
As for people saying that it seems you never played the game before is because of the things you said. That's like saying if I reviewed a remake of Knights of the old republic and said the game sucks because I can't fly a constitution class starship. I think the hardcore people would say " What the hell are you talking about" Or when people say I love Marvel my favourite movie is Batman. That's how you come across to the hardcore fans.
So, a couple of things…
Your very first complaint about how you think I misunderstood the game creation screen is incorrect. I did not get the number of spell books conflated with number of enemy wizards. Not sure where you got that idea from.
I appreciate you explaining how a d4 is defined and how the entertainment industry works, I had no idea.
As for my issues with the ui, if only I had one of you guys who have been playing the game for the past 30 years to explain it to me, I would have understood. Seems like a reasonable metric.
Steam gives a person 2 hours to try a game before they can return it. It’s true I didn’t give this remake a fair shake, instead I spent twice that, so I actually gave it more than a fair shake. If you don’t think that is enough time, please rage at steam or the publishers, not me. I don’t control that.
As for the hope of a new game in this style, we should have civ 7 and Age of Wonders coming out this year, so maybe the corporate overlords will see those games successes and decide a MoM2 is worth it. I’ll even do my part but purchasing them. May even make a review or two, so stop back by next time you want to hate watch something, I appreciate the engagement. In the mean time, I wish you luck in the true style of Star Wars, may your trusty winnebago never break down, may your faithful mog friend never leave you, and may all your huts have extra pepperoni.
imagine releasing a MoM remake and making all the races the same. wtf
Imagine remaking a game and not telling people that’s what it is. Not updating anything on a 30 year old and then charging AAA prices.
@@Nightharrow right???
Planar Conquest is buggy too. Please try "Caster of Magic: Warlods" (Mod of MoM of 1994) or "Fallen Enchantress: Legendary Heroes"!
Just go with Age of Wonders instead. [SOLVED].
Lol have you seen all my recent replies? Lol I’ve been saying that for a while now.
It’s really good. Wish I had more time to do a review!
Your understanding of this game is very limited, which made it an absolute waste of time to watch your review. In the beginning you mentioned nostalgia but it seems you are not familiar with the old version of MoM.
Thanks for the Planar Conquest recommendation though, I will check that out.
Thanks for taking the time to leave a comment and let me know how you feel. Just as an fyi, planar conquest has plenty of issues with it as well. I just recommend it because to me it’s the closest thing to a spiritual successor that I have found yet. Despite all its faults.
@@Nightharrow People accuse you of never playing the original MOM because you seem completely unfamiliar with the game mechanics in this game, which are the exact same as the original. Also a remake of a game is not meant to be it's "spiritual successor." You keep asking, "what did we pay for?" The answer is graphics. When Blizzard remade StarCraft, what did people pay for? When they remade WarCraft, what did they pay for? They didn't change the game mechanics in either of those games, so obviously it was graphics. This isn't MoM2.
Master of Magic Classic review on Steam Overwhelmingly Positive (523)
Master of Magic review on Steam Mostly Positive (471)
Planar Conquest review on Steam Mixed (295)
I don't trust your review sorry.
This game is like a terrible version of age of wonders 3
Haha yeah, I think that’s what most of us where looking for. A bringing of an old game into the 21st century…
This is honestly a pretty bad review. You use a thumbnail saying not to buy this game, but you barely provide any comprehensive reason. You just incessantly express that you don't like this and that without really drilling down on why. I played the hell out of the original and I consider it a really great game and I was expecting your review to provide a comparison or even a standalone comprehensive analysis. Instead, you just threw out opinions of how you feel and what you think with barely any justification.
Glad you’re liking the game. Hope the new wizards are also to your liking as well. As for me, I think ill be playing Age of Wonders.
Thanks for dropping a comment.
@@Nightharrow I actually haven't played this remake yet. That's why I tried watching your review to see if I can get some insight as to how it is compared to the OG. But it seems you haven't played the original. If that's the case, I would understand your opinions on this game. The original MoM was not a very accessible game, and looking at this remake, seems like they tried to be ultra faithful to it.
I believe games were better, because they were designede better. Just like commercial products actually gets designede worse over time, cause it sells more and there is time for improvement. plus players cancer complain and have impact the game evolution, thay then get betyer store of the old versions
Kinda of hard to take this review seriously because you only played for less then two hours.
It was more like 4, but fair enough, if you want a game to take more than that to get into it.
I wish I saw this video before I spent the money on this slog of a game.😭
I have the impression that you started with a negative attitude and self-confirmed your attitude with every bit of the game. I cannot follow that reasoning. Maybe because I know the original and I think this is a great remake.
I can assure you that is not the case, and in fact I have talked about it excitedly on stream in past months. I was hoping to get to play quite a bit of it. I just really was that disappointed, and felt like many more improvements should have been made for the price.
I refunded this as well. It isn't a good remake at all. Owned it for 2 hours, played on myrran on hardest settings, with so many neutral cities, and the fact that gold resource is so plentiful, was able to set tax rate to 0, make 30 gold a turn, raise 4 sprites, build 2 swordsman and toss in a hero all without any difficulty in the first 15 or so turns. Every neutral, of which there were well over a dozen within 10 moves from my starting point, made that so much more unbalanced. The remake is a bad one. You couldn't even come close to doing all of that in the original. Plus all the free units. Found a city? free swordsman! Free magic spirit! Flush with cash, so you keep getting mercenary offers all the time. Yah, no thanks, this remake has 0 challenge to it, precludes certain playstyles completely and deserves the bad review unfortunately. I'm a big fan of the original as well, but this one doesn't cut it.
That being said, it can be salvaged. The system is there, but I won't be picking it up again until they fix it. If they don't, giving it a pass.
Good old game?
Lands Of Lore 1 !!
Haha I loved that game!!!
Terrible review, (imho)...not that I consider it one.
For those interested in more depth/info per the new MoM, check out DasTactic & a few others.
I, actually, think Planar Conquest is good with their last updates.
Maybe you should have stuck with just reviewing 'PC', as you appear to know something about this one.
Thanks for the feedback, and I would also recommend DaTactic. I haven’t had a chance to watch to much from him but he always seems knowledgeable.
Dastactic is a good dude but this one he rides on nostalgia, master of magic should have never been given to a team of 6 ppl with limited resources and time for a remake, then being sold at a ridiculous price, its more expensive than for Age of Wonders 3 on its release date, a game with superior graphics, sound, animations, UI and so on. Im not rooting for planar conquest but this remake of MoM its just bad and greedy.
@@warr39 Disagree on how bad this release is...opinion based on playing it.
@@eddieballgame I was a beta tester, i played the game too, not sure how can this be subjective, for 40 euro you dont even get tooltips, even age of wonders 1 has better animations and spell effects (darn we can say Elemental: War of Magic has better ones too....)
@@warr39 Got ripped off on Elemental, so don't go there. Tool tips for what? There is the in-game button for hex info & pretty much everything you click on gives detailed info. Again, this new version is good (again my opinion & I am not alone) & I expect it to get better in time via updates & modding.
I thought this was a good review, I think you made good points and yes games are fun because of the systems not the pretty graphics. That said I wonder what you think of Age of Wonders, a similar game I'm sure you played. Would love to hear your thoughts on it.
I really like it. Tactical combat is great, customization/various races on the last one was great, etc… looking forward to the next one on a couple months, will definitely be playing it. With that I also hope they improve the overland gameplay and make it feel more strategic on that front. But not something I have a ton of hours on.