Greetings to all HoMM fans!

I wish to ask a question regarding the 3rd entry in the HoMM series.
I personally enjoyed the first and second games.
Addicting gameplay, strong use of strategy, the games were hard in a very good way, Graphics (pixel art), music, and easy to connect multiplayer.

I have all the 5 games in one bundle. I have mixed feelings with the 5th game. And the 4th one, ..., well I am afraid I won't be playing it due to the dumb-downing of everything I enjoyed in the originals.

I hear that everyone praises the third game. But for my self I can't see anything that would make it better than, how HoMM2 was better than HoMM.

The army units are poorly made in appearance. I can see that they used 3d models, and then they made sprites out of them. So they don't fit with the environment as the originals did. It looks to me like when Sinbad fought the statue of Kali, and in low resolution while standing 50 m from the monitor.

The menu: Maybe I'am getting blind or something. But can anyone explain were and how do I save my game while I'am in the world view? The only thing that I can do is quit the game.

It could be that I'am nit-picking, but What, Where, and How is HoMM III better than HoMM II?

Thank you for your time
gogwitcher300

If you enjoyed the first two games, there's a fair chance that you'll enjoy the third one, as well. The best way to form a solid opinion about HOMM3 is by playing it for a while. The graphics may not be everything you hoped for, but try seeing if the gameplay lives up to that of its predecessors. HOMM2 is very nostalgic for me since I played it first, but I still rank HOMM3 as my favorite.

I really like how the third game expands upon virtually every aspect (factions, towns, spells, combat, etc). I remember loading up the demo for the first time and being in awe at all the new building trees and Adventure Map locations. There's more depth to building up your towns, but it never feels like an unwanted departure from what came before. That being said, some very welcome innovations were added to the combat system. Most critically, the ability to have creatures Wait or Defend adds greatly to your tactical involvement in battles. Likewise, the addition of magic "schools" (secondary skills for Air, Earth, Fire, and Water mastery) is a nice way to revamp the existing spell system. Some players still view HOMM2 as the gold standard, so there's no guarantee that you'll agree with everything I wrote.

As for saving the game, look for the "System Options" button (it looks like a desktop computer) below the mini-map. More detailed instructions can probably be found in the manual file, as well.

You sound as if you don't know that this was commonplace in the late 90s and early 2000s. The computer icon in the sidebar is what you're looking for. Escape works too IIRC.

You sound as if you don't know that this was commonplace in the late 90s and early 2000s.

My bad,

I should have written that HoMM poorly uses the technique that was used prior and after it's release.

Age of Wonders (1999) Spiritually looks like HoMM2
https://www.hookedgamers.com/images/3177/age_of_wonders/screenshot_pc_age_of_wonders010.jpg

The Settlers III (1998)
http://www.getyourgeekon.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Settlers_III3.jpg

and HoMM III
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/gpnGbO__BN4/maxresdefault.jpg

This may seem as a personal taste in graphics, but the cover of a book isn't everything.
I am not saying the HoMM III is a bad game. I just don't understand the critical acclaim it has received. For me it just stagnated in the era of 1996 (HoMM2 release date).
Instead of going forward. It just stands still, tweaking this and that a little, and ultimately sacrificing the visual appeal, it's predecessors had.

Okay, now I'm a little confused. I was under the impression that you were completely new to HOMM3, but the severity of your verdict suggests that you're already reasonably familiar with the game.

Although you admit that graphics aren't everything, it sounds like your dislike of HOMM3's visual style is a major strike against the game. Fair enough, if that's how you feel about it. While I personally enjoy each game's graphics and animations, it's always been the addictive gameplay that kept me hooked. My rationale is that HOMM3 took the winning formula of its predecessors and improved on them in a variety of cool ways. You apparently disagree with this, citing an overall lack of improvement since the second installment. Ironically, I think this is truer of HOMM2, which sports a lot more "sameness" and recycled content than the third one. You'll need to clarify why you're underwhelmed by HOMM3's newer features. I just hope the graphics haven't tainted your ability to enjoy the game.

Heroes 3 has numerous little "quality of life" improvements over Heroes 2. In Heroes 2, it was your responsibility to remember which adventure map locations were worthwhile and when to visit them. In Heroes 3, the game will remind you, but only for those things that you could know if you had been taking diligent notes. If you select a hero and hover over a location that is once-per-hero that has already been used by that hero, the text along the bottom will remind you "(already visited)", so you don't make a trip for no benefit. If you hover over a once-per-week location that one of your heroes has visited this week, it reminds you. Hover over a Witch Hut and it reminds you the skill (if one of your heroes has visited that witch). Hover over a Shrine of Magic Incantation/Gesture/Thought and it reminds you what spell the shrine teaches.

Heroes 3 lets you choose to buy non-upgraded creatures from an upgraded dwelling, which could be useful if you want to merge them with a non-upgraded stack. Heroes 3 does a better job showing you the impact of a combat spell you are considering casting. Heroes 3 combat lets you page back through recent messages, which can be helpful if several events happen quickly (such as attack, special effect, counter-attack, special effect).

There are plenty of gameplay changes that you may or may not like, but in my opinion, the quality of life improvements are undeniably an upgrade. They mostly don't give you anything you couldn't do with diligent note-taking and manual-reading, but they spare you that effort so you can focus on playing the game.

HoMM3 did a lot of refining from HoMM2, but it didn't really have any breakthrough changes. In comparison, HoMM2 introduced two big changes from HoMM1: upgrading creatures and using spell points instead of discrete instances of a spell.

I like HoMM3 more than HoMM2 because of all the refinements and Quality of Life improvements.

The above posters have pretty said my opinion: and especially everything advowson said in Post 6, mostly summed up with the following:

HoMM 3 has a better AI, especially the combat AI, which is a big plus.
And with the Armageddon's Blade expansion a Campaign Editor was included, which I hope led to the making of good user made campaigns (I haven't got around to checking out yet).

From a graphical standpoint, I did indeed like the more stylized, cartoony approach that HoMM2 went with rather than the pseudo-realistic style that HoMM3 adopted. However, HoMM3 improved on a lot of other areas like army size, town diversity, artifact selection, skills and abilities etc. that I do have to hand the crown over to HoMM3 for the best game of the series, even though HoMM2 will always hold a special place in my heart.

You should call it fantasy/fairy-tale approach :)

> Is HoMM III good as people say?

No. it's better.

Take balance for example. Warlock is so much better than the rest in HoMM 2 that it's not even funny.

Ability to "Wait" instead of just "Skip" also changes the tactical combat dramatically.

Perhaps you would enjoy the Succession Wars modification if the graphics are your main concern.
It is supposed to be a HOMM2 visual treatment in the HOMM3 engine. Forums aren't letting me post links to it but I'm sure you can find it.

I played heroes 1 and 2 all the time when I was a teen. I stopped playing them when Heroes 3 arrived, I think it just made heroes 1 and 2 rather redundant. Even after I bought them on gog, I tried them once and I remember why I didn't play them anymore.

While I don't play heroes 3 anymore these days (since I have so many games on my backlog and don't want to stuck in nostalgia), I think the game aged very well. Once I play it I probably could forget other games exist.

I definitely enjoy Heroes 4, and I understand why it's considered the black sheep of the series, but I really love the feature of building your hero so it can get into battles.

I played heroes 5 briefly, but sadly, I couldn't like it, and I never finished a map or even bothered to learn the game's mechanic further. Clearly I am not interested to play heroes other than 3 and 4.

The thing that really killed my interst in HMIII was that you could only build your main character (by this I mean the one that would progress to the next scenario) up so much then in a lot of the scenarios you had to go hide them. If you took the risk of using them and happened to lose them in a battle end of scenario. You could always use save to get around this but I never liked the idea that I had gotten this bad ass high level (relative for each scenario) hero that I was hesitant to use.

@OP HoMM3 was a game of my childhood, I had a lot of fun with it. Yet once I tried H2, H3 suddenly became unplayable.

H2 had perfected the formula and H3 changed it for the sake of offering a different sequel. H3 battlefields are larger with more creatures which turns the core gameplay loop of fighting neutral monster stacks a very tedious chore.

H3's color palette and overall art style/town design is a massive downgrade from H2.

The soundtrack also does not compare.

Basically you are better off playing H2 and let me know if you want to play versus with the GOG multiplayer setup.