Why were the Journal pictures cut from TFL?

Khadrelt · Post by **Khadrelt** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 1:12 pm

Oni had a WHOLE bunch of stuff left out when it was released. Like multiplayer

Cobalt 7 · Post by **Cobalt 7** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 5:55 pm

Actually a great deal of stuff has been patched for Oni, and even some features like Glass Damage.

However all of it has been done through reverse engineering so to speak. No one ever got the sourcecode to Oni, so they can't upgrade or fix things like ProjectMaga or other source teams can. If they had the kind of access Magma had, as well as some of the same types of individuals running the show, I'm sure they could have added Multiplayer to Oni

Khadrelt · Post by **Khadrelt** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 pm

If only...

Tireces · Post by **Tireces** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:58 pm

Something like late 2005 I have read that some group is working on "Oni" multiplayer. I am not sure if project was abandoned or they are still tying to do something with it...

Khadrelt · Post by **Khadrelt** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:00 pm

There's a sort-of-like multiplayer arena thing, but it's just multiplayer-like bots that are more intelligent than normal, not really player-versus-player, from what I understand. But maybe you're thinking of something else...? I haven't heard of any real multiplayer if there is one.

The Elfoid · Post by **The Elfoid** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:33 pm

There was outrage from some players when Magma changed melee system a bit for Myth II v1.4. It also upset WWIIers somewhat, forget why cuz I never WWIIed much at the time.

I think if a game's updated gameplay shouldn't change much. Unless its something most people weren't happy with (Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker had changes at the ending for the European version due to rants about it sucking. To be honest, most of it still sucked even though the game rules). If its an updated port e.g. if someone updated Halo for the 360...graphics aren't a major enough change to satisfy me so I'd demand something more.

Cobalt 7 · Post by **Cobalt 7** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:24 pm

-The Melee system was changed? How so?

-How was WW changed?

-Myself, I would be fine with a updated graphical tweak to Halo, so long as they fixed some of the problems, and maybe updated the AI. Then again, when you get into that territory it's sometimes better to leave it as it is, and just fix the graphics.

-Hypthetically, would TFL be better off left untouched in it's entirety, or would it enhance the game to add in the images? I know it's easy to go to Myth.Bungie.Org, this is just hypothetical. For instance, if Myth somehow got a graphical update 3-5 years from now (I know I know, remember this is hypothetical), or even 10 years from now, would it be a universal update? Would it be better to breathe in the old-skool graphics, or to try things out with new hawtness?

AblitERateOR · Post by **AblitERateOR** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:57 am

personally i thnk the images should be left out.. maybe they were there, but bungie left them out for a reason, adds to the suspense n all ya. If its to be a true conversion it should strive to be just like the original... i know with some games a gameplay fix would be good, but on the whole, apart from the very few minor niggles, myth itselft has been a solid game for all 9 years of its existence. Adding the images changes the feel of the story.. maybe not much but we all know how great the myth storyline is.. so why bother even touching on it

The Elfoid · Post by **The Elfoid** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:09 am

Cobalt 7 wrote:-The Melee system was changed? How so?

-How was WW changed?

WWII was just a bi-product of the way the melee system was tweaked or something I think, nothing intentional.

It was reverted for 1.4.something or 1.5.x I believe anyway. Whatever, Myth is Myth at the moment.

-Myself, I would be fine with a updated graphical tweak to Halo, so long as they fixed some of the problems, and maybe updated the AI. Then again, when you get into that territory it's sometimes better to leave it as it is, and just fix the graphics.

Yeah but graphics aren't what is most important to be honest. It adds a community divide having two games instead of one and graphics are one of the least important factors - that's why I still like TFL, SB, my Nintendo 64...the days when because graphics weren't realistic you had to make more of an effort in producing a good game.

-Hypthetically, would TFL be better off left untouched in it's entirety, or would it enhance the game to add in the images? I know it's easy to go to Myth.Bungie.Org, this is just hypothetical. For instance, if Myth somehow got a graphical update 3-5 years from now (I know I know, remember this is hypothetical), or even 10 years from now, would it be a universal update? Would it be better to breathe in the old-skool graphics, or to try things out with new hawtness?

Myth III used 'real' 3D units instead of pixels. 'Nuff said.

And if the images were added I would not jump for joy and think 'WOW THAT IS SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO COOL' everytime I saw them.

Cobalt 7 · Post by **Cobalt 7** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 1:00 pm

I'm not saying better graphics are more important than quality gameplay. It's just one of those nice things that are great to have WITH Quality gameplay.

And yes I'm familiar with Myth 3's "real" units. I'm merely proposing hypothetical questions to endorse discussion. Stop dead panning it Elfoid.

Remember all the talks about High-res units?

Khadrelt · Post by **Khadrelt** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 2:14 pm

I'm not adverse to improving game graphics. Looks at Marathon. Great game, great story, just one of the all-around best games ever made - but also look how much cooler it looks with the new high-res textures and OpenGL graphics. Same great game, just better-looking. Of course, I'm an extremely visual person. I do agree with that gameplay should not be sacrificed for the sake of graphics, but, as Cobalt 7 said, if you can make the graphics better without hurting the gameplay, that's great.

The Elfoid · Post by **The Elfoid** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 4:59 pm

Graphics improving can be nice, but I prefer (sometimes) a more 'rough n ready' type look. Its why I love Zelda OOT's look - everything's for a purpose, no extra curves.

Cobalt 7 · Post by **Cobalt 7** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 6:59 pm

Your being far to utilitarian in your thoughts Elf. Gameplay is just the skeleton, the graphics, Sound, and storytelling are what help it breathe. Of course without a good skeleton it all just falls in on itself (Cough* Prey)

Ocarina of Time was a very good game, however the technology is the inhibiting factor, not the desire to keep things simple.

The Elfoid · Post by **The Elfoid** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 11:25 am

Soundtrack I agree is vital - the mid-90s saw decent quality sound appear and a lot has come of it. Storytelling I agree too - its the only reason I liked Enter the Matrix but it kept me happy.

Ocarina's gameplay was so much deeper and more complex that it picked simpler graphics over other things.

Cobalt 7 · Post by **Cobalt 7** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 1:28 pm

Personally, I was more a fan of WindWaker's design and execution.

webcomic Fanboys-online.com is doing a zelda week, everyday has an analysis of a particular Zelda game. Today's is WW's, It summarizes my views quite clearly, why don't you check it out?

The Tain

Why were the Journal pictures cut from TFL?