Talk:Dark Messiah of Might and Magic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dark Messiah of Might and Magic article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	CVG Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This article is on a subject of Low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
CVG To-do: edit  Gaming Collaboration of the week: Baldur's Gate series Expand: New CVG Articles, Normality, Pac-Man World 2, Operation Flashpoint: Elite, Call of Juarez, Galactic Civilizations II: Dark Avatar, Ford Street Racing, Betrayal at Krondor CVG Peer Review: List of F-Zero titles, Kya: Dark Lineage, Wii Remote, Dynasty Warriors 4, The Sims 2, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Kirby's Dream Land, Electronic sports, Fire Emblem, Dante (Devil May Cry), The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, Final Fantasy XII, Sonic the Hedgehog (16-bit), Classes in World of Warcraft Cleanup: Age of Mythology, Mario Kart: Double Dash!!, Betrayal at Krondor, List of Nintendo trademarks Merge: Deletions / Essential articles / Magazines Assess and Prioritise articles (Log)

Great effort, but rather questionable objectivity, parts of it sound more like an advertisement than providing real information. Could the author please review?

• I'm not the author, but considering that most of the information about the game was gathered from publisher announcements and game previews, it's hard to write something that would be 100% objective. Angelspit 12:32, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
  • A more objective wording would help though: "The publisher claims...", "according to the developer...". At the moment this article sounds too much like an advertising flier. Beef
• This is a wiki: there is no "the author". If you think that the text is too advert-like, go ahead and change it. BreathingMeat 01:21, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Release Year 2 Game release date 3 Continuity 4 Stop crying. Get over it. 5 The name - drop the "of" 6 Might and Magic Universe

[edit] Release Year

Someone got the release year wrong. It came out 2006 not 2005

[edit] Game release date

I see that October 2006 is listed as a release date. If I'm correct that is the Steam release date but Ubisoft's website lists the release date as 12/10/2006. Is this valid data or not? Vgamer101 05:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

The game just launched yesterday, October 25, 2006 (in North America). I think it's to be released worldwide tomorrow, October 27.

[edit] Continuity

Does anyone have any information yet on plot continuity between DMoM&M and the original M&M series? BreathingMeat 01:21, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

There is no plot continuity at all. Ubisoft has transferred MM (includes HOMM) into another world, Ashan. The storyline of MMIX and DMoMM don't match, and neither does the gameplay. DMoMM only allows control of 1 character, while the previous MM games allow control of a whole party. Hobowu 10:35, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stop crying. Get over it.

The "Release Problems" and "Critical Reaction" sections were a farce until I added some NPOV sense into them. And they were written by someone with an obvious agenda. The following text was posted to User talk:141.154.246.40 who seemed to enjoy skewing the article to suit his views:

“

"Do your research", what kind of cheek is that when you insert absolutely unsourced weasel words such as "most people..." into the article. You ignore the fact that the majority of publications have given DM a positive review, choosing instead to lead with the Gamespot review. The score, 6.7 is actually classed as fair, but following your absolutely biased quotes, it absolutely distorts the nature of the review. Maybe if you weren't so blatantly trying to rail against Dark Messiah, I'd refrain from things like calling you an ignorant cretin, but you even replaced the 2 IGN scores with the only one you liked. And then instead of quoting the PCZ and PCG scores directly, you just dismissed anything over 80% as rubbish. If you were actually familiar with PCZone, then you'd know that they don't just ignore bugs, they do not bow to the dictations of publishers, it's not like the Official Nintendo or Official Xbox magazine, they have no party line to toe. - Hahnchen 03:50, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

”

The post concerns the following diffs [1] [2] - Hahnchen 03:55, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

--- Those are valid complaints. Even Ubisoft have acknowledged all those problems in their forum (which are full of complaints both tech and gameplay wise by their customers). The problem is that overzealous fans like you are skewing the overall quality of this broken product in a positive light in order to justify your year-long deluded hype. Guess what? This type of action by fans happen to every game that failed to live up to their hype (brute force, killzone, etc), but eventually their poor quality are accepted when the pre-release fans die down. It is pathetic that you had to resort to the 4 or 5 questionable foreign sources (including PCZone UK, which you happen to swipped with PCGamer UK) for the positive reviews, all of which oddly did not mention the technical problems at all. Early print review standards perhaps? And to think these 4-5 sources are what you consider the majority of reviews. Gamespot said they tested the games on many of their machines, all displaying the major technical problems. Also, the 7/10 score from IGN is the official score from them, so don't try to treat the other foreign one as an equal counter-part. Gamespy also gave this game a poor review as well. You overzealous pre-release fans need to get over it and accept that this game just isn't as good as you all hoped it would be.

If by "overzealous pre-release fans", you mean someone who hasn't even bought the game, and has neither participated in the multiplayer beta or demo, then yes that'd be right. What I'm not a fan of, is your inherently biased bullshit, maybe had you represented Gamespot's review fairly instead of claiming it smashed the game into pieces. Your "4 or 5 questionable foreign sources" is smack out of order, I did not include the PC Zone of PC Gamer references to begin with, they are not "questionable", they are fully reliable sources. If you look at WP:CVG/M, you'll see that we archive print magazines because of this. You fall flat, by treating the jokeshop half-assed gamespy review seriously, that's just an IGN b-review. No one actually follows the gamespy site for anything, it's used purely to host fan sites such as the 3d action network. You're like one of the jokers that values what playlouder has to say over the NME (because being foreign and in print, it's obviously questionable). For example, Edge have not reviewed the game yet to my knowledge, I would happily include a reference to an Edge review even if it stated that the game was a bag of shit and awarded it 3/10. - Hahnchen 14:38, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for supporting my argument by admitting to be an overzelous pre-release fan who didn't even try the game at all. I have no agenda other than to warn the potential buyers about the product's major problems. Your agenda, on the other hand, is quite obvious. You are just as despicable as those pre-release killzone fans that were flooding the wiki site with BS info on how amazing and flawless that broken game was, and how it was the consensus that it completely destroyed Halo. No matter how much you try to spin the reviews to make Dark Messiah much better than it actually is, the facts remains that the game is broken especially with its numerous technical issues. I ask any potential buyers to check out the official Dark Messiah forum to see how angry its customers are over this unfinished, bug-ridden game.

"Thanks for supporting my argument by admitting to be an overzelous pre-release fan who didn't even try the game at all" - I think that argument pretty much sums up how much of an idiot you are. And for those uninvolved, that's a lot of idiot. Why wouldn't a pre-release fan, who is already a Steam user not buy the game? Maybe these forum posts where I've stated I don't want the game are just the delusional ramblings of a crazed fan-boy. [3][4] I've absolutely shot down your arguments in the my previous post, especially regarding what amounts to a reliable source or not. I don't need to "spin" reviews to suit my view, heck I've linked to Metacritic, you can link to Gamerankings too if you want. My "agenda" here, as you can clearly see from my thousands of edits is to write an encyclopedia, yours is to cry wolf. Get yourself a blog. You pretty much lost me when you thought it suitable to include a disclaimer against the reviews that you didn't like. - Hahnchen 23:48, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Enough of this. "I think that argument pretty much sums up how much of an idiot you are" is a blatant violation of WP:NPA. - Sikon 03:38, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

There are definite problems with this game. I bought it and cant load anything. The "release problems" section of this article is completely valid and needs to stay. In fact as soon as i installed the game, all my other games started to glitch and have the same problems. When i uninstalled it, the problem stoped.

I have done a major rewrite of the section in question, and thought I should explain my background. I'm an occasional gamer, who has never played an M&M game before, had not heard of Dark Messiah before picking it up as part of a "buy 2 for £25" offer. The game did not work for me when I first tried it and I was quite annoyed by this.

Instead of ranting, as many Ubisoft forum members have, I went and investigated as fully as I could; reading through many MANY posts on the forums, as well as reviewing the tweak guides I have referenced in the article.

Having done this, I made a few simple changes to my system - reinstalling sound and video drivers, and making sure to turn off Norton before playing - and the game has worked absolutely fine ever since at the detail settings recommended by the game for my computer.

I've been back to the forums a couple of times since, and there are so many posts by people who are playing and enjoying the game, that I cannot think that the problems being suffered are insoluble or massively common-place. I've even seen some people complaining on the forums and saying that "why should they reinstall their video drivers" or "why should they not double clock their CPU" when official support and other gamers have all told them that this may be the reason the game is not working. There appear to be a hard core of disgruntled people who will rant for the sake of it.

I couldn't find the references for all of the things I've said about the issues with the game, and the solutions/alternative views, but they are pretty much all there on the forums somewhere. GDallimore 17:29, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm thinking part of the reason they're ranting is because they don't know how to reinstall their video drivers (it is a bit confusing). I've been playing since the open beta, and have had limited success with the game. I got about half way through the main campaign before dubbing it "absoultely too frustrating to play". I played mp for about 5 hours total, but moved on to BF2142 (since I realized it has more depth and is more rewarding). My problems with the game are almost always random. Usually, it's not a video/ in game problem, just bugs, quit to desktop, and various errors that seem to have no rhyme or reason. I for one believe it is a great game, but is severely crippled by its bugs (although the patches seem to help a bit). I have to say, I don't see anything wrong with the articles cited because, for the most part, I agree with them).Echo.brian 22:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Personally I feel the current issues section is to skewed towards aggresively bug ridden atm, the game did suffer from major bugs for quite some time and I agree whole hardly that the article should reflect that. It has however been patched and does appear to have a greater level of success rate of working now (the sources I could cite for that would be the only ones avaliable, forum posts), with many complaints of the game not working being resolved by re-install/patching I also realise that in itself should be seen as a problem but not as great of a problem. Also lowering the graphical settings does seem to reduce the instablity of the game and again this could be considered a negative but it is not a scathing *bug ridden* negative. There has also been several offical balance fixes and a mode added to multiplayer adding extra replayability and allowing the multiplayer to become more entertaining then at the games initial release. It's also unclear on how many people the game worked for as opposed to those it didn't, how many satisfied gamers would make posts on forums saying that it worked 100% people will complain a lot more then state that it works. Also the developers are working on eventually getting a SDK out, whether they'll succeed or not is unknown but that seems to be the offical developers standpoint. I feel the article should reflect the fact that several problems with the game have been fixed rather then holding to the ambiguous *It's unclear when or if these problems will be resolved.*.KaL YoshiKa 10:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure you're looking at the right version of the article? I removed the *It's unclear when or if these problems will be resolved* statement ages ago when attempting to NPOV that section of the article myself. If you feel it needs further amendment, feel free, but I'm not sure what more can be said except that some people are still complaining while some people have had the problems fixed. GDallimore 11:07, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The name - drop the "of"

On the box and in all the official sources, the title is "Dark Messiah Might & Magic", without an "of". 84.10.103.180 16:37, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

The press releases still refer to Dark Messiah OF Might and Magic, so my guess is that the box name change is a purely cosmetic thing. Angelspit 21:06, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Might and Magic Universe

Even though it probably is perceived as a fairly good game by many it probably will be a real dissapointment to MM fans. What used to be a exiting mind bogling game that would steal months of your life has been turned into a 15 hour linear plot. DDiMM does distinguish itself very little from any other first person shoot them up game. People who enjoy this sort of game probably wont be dissapointed. As of me as a fan of the MM univese I set my hope to "Might and Magic Tribute". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.250.201.235 (talk) 05:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC).

• This game had originally nothing do with Might and Magic. It would have been Arx Fatalis 2 if Ubisoft hadn't changed the game for pure marketing reasons. --Mika1h 21:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)