for those remotely uninterested, my 'puter is still f*cked up.Guest wrote:well, i still plan on testing this issue...
(and i'll admit i've lost some interest in range stuff.)
Whoa....time out folks - My proposal
Okay, perhaps a bit late to reply to the first post, but anyway.
Is it possible to know *what* exactly has been reverted? What Myth 2 1.4 gameplay changes has been reverted to 1.3? I checked the 1.5 readme but absolutely nothing like that is mentioned in the change list.
3rd: Some facts: 1.5 started from life from the original Bungie 1.3 code base and was updated for XP & OS X from scratch. Then had a bunch of stuff from 1.4 was brought in. Next the vTFL/Myth II hybrid game play code was redone by isolated the vTFL code from the Myth II and replacing it with real TFL code. Then the Myth II portion of the game play was reverted back to 1.3 keeping only bug fixes like the archer walk bug.
Is it possible to know *what* exactly has been reverted? What Myth 2 1.4 gameplay changes has been reverted to 1.3? I checked the 1.5 readme but absolutely nothing like that is mentioned in the change list.
It's almost impossible to say because game play isn't neatly confined to a single function some where(or even just a few hundred lines in one place for that matter). What I can say is when playing the game it feels very much like 1.3 to me.
Some of the lack of documentation in the readme is because it's hard to describe the end user changes from a code perspective which out writing an entire paragraph on the subject. Iron can probably talk about certain game play items that he reverted more specifically, but I believe I can say that 1.5 feels very much like 1.3. I'm sure there are people who will disagree, we all have our own game playing styles, and some things only effect certain styles.
Some of the lack of documentation in the readme is because it's hard to describe the end user changes from a code perspective which out writing an entire paragraph on the subject. Iron can probably talk about certain game play items that he reverted more specifically, but I believe I can say that 1.5 feels very much like 1.3. I'm sure there are people who will disagree, we all have our own game playing styles, and some things only effect certain styles.
CIK wrote:It's almost impossible to say because game play isn't neatly confined to a single function some where(or even just a few hundred lines in one place for that matter). What I can say is when playing the game it feels very much like 1.3 to me.
Some of the lack of documentation in the readme is because it's hard to describe the end user changes from a code perspective which out writing an entire paragraph on the subject. Iron can probably talk about certain game play items that he reverted more specifically, but I believe I can say that 1.5 feels very much like 1.3. I'm sure there are people who will disagree, we all have our own game playing styles, and some things only effect certain styles.
Well, that's just it, people have different playing styles, and when you say "it feels like 1.3" that honestly doesn't tell me anything. Only pure facts can explain the real changes, and I just feel puzzled when I hear stuff like gameplay reverted back to 1.3. The only major gameplay change I can remember being put in 1.4 is the change with how ordering groups of melee troops to attack other groups works (attack those in front, instead of those in rear or random or however it worked in 1.3), is that something which has been reverted to how it was before? I'm just being curious, I've always wondered how things work in detail with the game.
By the way, did you get the email I sent you?
I do play Myth a lot. And I can't pinpoint any specific gameplay changes as a result of a revert back to 1.3. Besides, I think your argument is just pathetic to be honest, how do you think the Quake 3 community would react if id suddenly released a new patch where all they wrote "some gameplay changes reverted to an older patch"? Chances are they'd go berserk and whine like heck, people usually don't like gameplay changes in a game they've played for many years and gotten used to, but they *especially* don't like changes where they don't even know specifically what has changed. I'm going to assume that whatever changes there are they aren't major, otherwise I would say I'd have definitely seen a difference. I still like to know what's been changed though, the readme doesn't even mention any gameplay revert *at all*.qwerty2 wrote:the reason you probably cant tell the difference between 1.3 and 1.4 is because you don't play enough. If you'd played a lot more then you'd know what people meant by "it feels different"
Sectus, I'm not a programmer, and apparently you are, so I'm surprised you don't understand how these things can work. Some reverts to 1.3 are cut and dry, such as artifact behavior (which I believe is listed in the readme) but many aren't.
Take the CL/Archer walk bug for example. Attempts at fixing it caused a dozen subtle changes in what would seem unrelated areas of gameplay. Bungie had the same problem, which is why CL led to Archer Walk in the first place.
By the time all the unwanted sideeffects are found and fixed and we're back to what players want along with the original objective completed such as fixing the archer walk bug, the path to get to that point has been complex and winding, and would take a long time to describe in detail.
It's not that we're trying to keep secrets, but none of the programmers have the time to write detailed documents making every little thing they do transparent for the handful of curious players who could understand such a document anyway.
Take the CL/Archer walk bug for example. Attempts at fixing it caused a dozen subtle changes in what would seem unrelated areas of gameplay. Bungie had the same problem, which is why CL led to Archer Walk in the first place.
By the time all the unwanted sideeffects are found and fixed and we're back to what players want along with the original objective completed such as fixing the archer walk bug, the path to get to that point has been complex and winding, and would take a long time to describe in detail.
It's not that we're trying to keep secrets, but none of the programmers have the time to write detailed documents making every little thing they do transparent for the handful of curious players who could understand such a document anyway.
By the way, Sectus, regarding your idea for software filtering when moving the camera, this was actually done in 1.4.0 but changed back in 1.4.1 because of complaints of increased blurriness.
Most of us never play in software mode and Myrd wasn't around for 1.4.0 development and didn't know that, so he wound up trying again.
Not sure why this wasn't mentioned to you before, other than to say that while suggestions are all considered, there isn't always enough time for the programmers to explain why some of those suggestions are bad ones.
Most of us never play in software mode and Myrd wasn't around for 1.4.0 development and didn't know that, so he wound up trying again.
Not sure why this wasn't mentioned to you before, other than to say that while suggestions are all considered, there isn't always enough time for the programmers to explain why some of those suggestions are bad ones.
sectus ur wrong. u dont play enough ive never heard about u.
And just because *you* haven't heard of me that means I haven't played Myth a lot? I see no need to comment this any further.
Sectus, I'm not a programmer, and apparently you are, so I'm surprised you don't understand how these things can work. Some reverts to 1.3 are cut and dry, such as artifact behavior (which I believe is listed in the readme) but many aren't.
Take the CL/Archer walk bug for example. Attempts at fixing it caused a dozen subtle changes in what would seem unrelated areas of gameplay. Bungie had the same problem, which is why CL led to Archer Walk in the first place.
By the time all the unwanted sideeffects are found and fixed and we're back to what players want along with the original objective completed such as fixing the archer walk bug, the path to get to that point has been complex and winding, and would take a long time to describe in detail.
It's not that we're trying to keep secrets, but none of the programmers have the time to write detailed documents making every little thing they do transparent for the handful of curious players who could understand such a document anyway.
Well, yes, I do program. I might as well explain to you how I usually do things. I have one log file I keep updating for all changes I do to the code, so I can any time look through the log and read specifically what I've worked on. I also comment the things I do in the code, so I easily backtrack and quickly find out what I did if necessary. I also keep updating a file I call changes.txt where I quickly describe the changes I've done, and this will later turn into a file with the release which explain the changes since last version. This method I'm using isn't that much more work, and it's really useful if I ever need to quickly refresh my memory about something specific I've done, and most important of all it makes writing the list of changes *very* easy. Of what you write I get the feeling you guys either don't bother to keep any type of log of updates while you code, or you don't bother to write any elaborate changes list when you release.
And the release info doesn't need to be so detailed that only an other programer would understand it. As long as you just barely go over the changes so you barely understand what's changed, then that's enough. I just feel that I when I read something like "gameplay been reverted to 1.3" with absolutely *NO* explanation, and not even any mention in the readme for the patch then I think that's bad. If CIK had said "Gameplay has been reverted to 1.3 but most of these changes are only superficial and will have no noticable effect on actual gameplay" then I'd feel more comfortable, but that he says it feels more like 1.3 which implies even more that there's a lot of changes which has a noticable effect on gameplay, and still doesn't explain anything further. Then as a Myth gamer I really feel left out in the cold.
By the way, Sectus, regarding your idea for software filtering when moving the camera, this was actually done in 1.4.0 but changed back in 1.4.1 because of complaints of increased blurriness.
Most of us never play in software mode and Myrd wasn't around for 1.4.0 development and didn't know that, so he wound up trying again.
Not sure why this wasn't mentioned to you before, other than to say that while suggestions are all considered, there isn't always enough time for the programmers to explain why some of those suggestions are bad ones.
Increased blurriness? That sounds like a really weird sideeffect for just keeping a filter on at all times. No offense, but I still stand my ground about this change being easy to do. I'll bet there's just a simple code saying something like "if (camera_speed>5) filter=false;" and all you have to do is remove that code, or make an option toggle for it.
-
iron
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2006
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 1:21 am
- Location: diving out of the Sun at 10 o'clock high!
- Contact:
Sectus, the documentation methods you described are what we follow as well - they are common practice and make sense.
If you'll look in the release notes and changelog accompanying the patch you can see the document you just described with formatting & sorting to make it understandable.
When CIK said that "to me it feels like 1.3" he was describing the net effect of the changes listed in that document. If you're not satisfied with that level of documentation then I'm sorry to disappoint you, but we're doing this under a lot of pressure in our spare time & its the best we can offer. We haven't left things out & I believe what's there is sufficient to know what's changed.
That's not to say that 1.5 is 1.3 gameplay because it isn't. Don't confuse the word "is" with the word "feels like". In inferring that gameplay has reverted to 1.3 you are reading it wrong.
You see, 1.3 is what people were playing for so long, so they use it as a baseline for how they feel Myth should behave (1.3 bugs aside). When you click for your units to attack, you expect a certain behaviour - when you click for them to retreat you expect another. When the gameplay meets how you expect it to behave it feels right, and hence "feels like 1.3" as CIK said.
Lastly, ChrisP was right in what he said about software rendering. Yes the change is simple, but yes it did produce visually uncomfortable side-effects, which is why Bungie put a line like "if (camera_speed>5) filter=false" there in the first place.
If you'll look in the release notes and changelog accompanying the patch you can see the document you just described with formatting & sorting to make it understandable.
When CIK said that "to me it feels like 1.3" he was describing the net effect of the changes listed in that document. If you're not satisfied with that level of documentation then I'm sorry to disappoint you, but we're doing this under a lot of pressure in our spare time & its the best we can offer. We haven't left things out & I believe what's there is sufficient to know what's changed.
That's not to say that 1.5 is 1.3 gameplay because it isn't. Don't confuse the word "is" with the word "feels like". In inferring that gameplay has reverted to 1.3 you are reading it wrong.
You see, 1.3 is what people were playing for so long, so they use it as a baseline for how they feel Myth should behave (1.3 bugs aside). When you click for your units to attack, you expect a certain behaviour - when you click for them to retreat you expect another. When the gameplay meets how you expect it to behave it feels right, and hence "feels like 1.3" as CIK said.
Lastly, ChrisP was right in what he said about software rendering. Yes the change is simple, but yes it did produce visually uncomfortable side-effects, which is why Bungie put a line like "if (camera_speed>5) filter=false" there in the first place.
iron wrote:Sectus, the documentation methods you described are what we follow as well - they are common practice and make sense.
If you'll look in the release notes and changelog accompanying the patch you can see the document you just described with formatting & sorting to make it understandable.
When CIK said that "to me it feels like 1.3" he was describing the net effect of the changes listed in that document. If you're not satisfied with that level of documentation then I'm sorry to disappoint you, but we're doing this under a lot of pressure in our spare time & its the best we can offer. We haven't left things out & I believe what's there is sufficient to know what's changed.
That's not to say that 1.5 is 1.3 gameplay because it isn't. Don't confuse the word "is" with the word "feels like". In inferring that gameplay has reverted to 1.3 you are reading it wrong.
You see, 1.3 is what people were playing for so long, so they use it as a baseline for how they feel Myth should behave (1.3 bugs aside). When you click for your units to attack, you expect a certain behaviour - when you click for them to retreat you expect another. When the gameplay meets how you expect it to behave it feels right, and hence "feels like 1.3" as CIK said.
Lastly, ChrisP was right in what he said about software rendering. Yes the change is simple, but yes it did produce visually uncomfortable side-effects, which is why Bungie put a line like "if (camera_speed>5) filter=false" there in the first place.
I've read the release notes, I haven't seen any comments regarding any gameplay changes been reverted to 1.3, not even a little implication of such. To be honest, I've never been that impressed with the release notes of the patches. "Clicking to attack with melee units is no longer a death sentence." is good example of that.
That's not to say that 1.5 is 1.3 gameplay because it isn't. Don't confuse the word "is" with the word "feels like". In inferring that gameplay has reverted to 1.3 you are reading it wrong.
I've read wrong? I'll quote what CIK said which gave me the impression that there's been gameplay changes for 1.4 reverted to 1.3: "Then the Myth II portion of the game play was reverted back to 1.3 keeping only bug fixes like the archer walk bug."
There's few ways that can be misinterpreted.
Lastly, ChrisP was right in what he said about software rendering. Yes the change is simple, but yes it did produce visually uncomfortable side-effects, which is why Bungie put a line like "if (camera_speed>5) filter=false" there in the first place.
Can you explain these side-effects? It's weird there would be any side-effects at all. I was just looking at how it's done right now, when moving the camera or rotating it the filter is temporarily turned off. But there's one type of motion where it's not turned off and that's zooming, and I can't see any side effects when using that.
[quote="Sectus"][/quote]
Sectus, the quote in this particular thread by CIK was, "but I believe I can say that 1.5 feels very much like 1.3." As for what you read on PlayMyth's forum awhile ago, CIK also goes on to say many things were added after restarting with 1.3 as the base.
I don't have the readmes any more, but I do seem to recall a few specifics about gameplay changing back to 1.3. The artifact thing for sure, as I remember wondering how that would effect Mazzarin's Demise, which was built with 1.4's style of artifact behavior.
"Clicking to attack with melee units is no longer a death sentence." You're right, that's not a great description. Most experienced players know, however, that in 1.3, if you take your melee and click on enemy melee it is a death sentence - meaning your melee units die because they will lose every time you attempt this in an otherwise even battle. More specifically, 1.3 melee targeted units in the back of the enemy cluster - where they could not reach them - and so while milling around trying to find a path to the back of the battle, they would get slaughtered by the enemy front line troops (provided your opponent didn't also do the "click of death".)
The way around this non-intuitive behavior was to move up as close to your enemy as possible. As long as you didn't actually click on your enemy, your melee units would make much better targetting choices, i.e. the enemy units right in front of them. The change in 1.4 was to make the targetting AI behave so that if you clicked on the enemy, it would also make more logical choices like attacking the nearest unit instead of making virtually the worst possible choice by trying to attack the ones farthest away. There, now you have it explained to you.
If you want to see the effects of the software rendering filter not being turned off, find someone with a copy of 1.4.0. Someone might have it if you ask around on uDog HL. Project Magma, having tried it once in an official release (because yes, at the time it did sound like a good idea) and then having to remove it later because of complaints, I highly doubt you'll ever see it in a future release.
Sectus, the quote in this particular thread by CIK was, "but I believe I can say that 1.5 feels very much like 1.3." As for what you read on PlayMyth's forum awhile ago, CIK also goes on to say many things were added after restarting with 1.3 as the base.
I don't have the readmes any more, but I do seem to recall a few specifics about gameplay changing back to 1.3. The artifact thing for sure, as I remember wondering how that would effect Mazzarin's Demise, which was built with 1.4's style of artifact behavior.
"Clicking to attack with melee units is no longer a death sentence." You're right, that's not a great description. Most experienced players know, however, that in 1.3, if you take your melee and click on enemy melee it is a death sentence - meaning your melee units die because they will lose every time you attempt this in an otherwise even battle. More specifically, 1.3 melee targeted units in the back of the enemy cluster - where they could not reach them - and so while milling around trying to find a path to the back of the battle, they would get slaughtered by the enemy front line troops (provided your opponent didn't also do the "click of death".)
The way around this non-intuitive behavior was to move up as close to your enemy as possible. As long as you didn't actually click on your enemy, your melee units would make much better targetting choices, i.e. the enemy units right in front of them. The change in 1.4 was to make the targetting AI behave so that if you clicked on the enemy, it would also make more logical choices like attacking the nearest unit instead of making virtually the worst possible choice by trying to attack the ones farthest away. There, now you have it explained to you.
If you want to see the effects of the software rendering filter not being turned off, find someone with a copy of 1.4.0. Someone might have it if you ask around on uDog HL. Project Magma, having tried it once in an official release (because yes, at the time it did sound like a good idea) and then having to remove it later because of complaints, I highly doubt you'll ever see it in a future release.