tain.totalcodex.net

Death's Avatar wrote:I'm glad to see Wallet and Cid are still around on the forums.

Say what you will about this project, but it really brought the community together.

<3

Scratch wrote:

Road wrote:...Minus anything else (and as I have mentioned to Renwwod) the first priority would have been to discuss a price range with Take2 for the rights and secondly talk to ProjectMagma....

It's hard to believe ANYONE would have started anywhere else.
How can you name a goal amount without knowing the cost of the product?

My impression was that perhapes he felt it would be best to "show the money" befor making any other promises.

:) Da Cid (: McCl wrote:

Death's Avatar wrote:I'm glad to see Wallet and Cid are still around on the forums.

Say what you will about this project, but it really brought the community together.

<3

Thats a good thing at least, it may have also reminded a few other lost souls what Myth was, perhapes a few new/old players will show. I dont know if anyone else has seen a pattern where Road dissipears for awial and then shows up when Renwood and Ooga are working on something. I drifted away from Myth mostley because the options in game play where stale due to the lack of people being able to host. One of the things that peeked my interest the most was possibly being able to develope a way to allow anyone to host without the issues of portforwarding and firewall crap.

I believe the greatest asset to Myth2 right now is ProjectMagma and they do deserve the credit for not only keeping Myth alive but also making it better than ever!

Heyaz Godzfire!

After reading over some of the responses and defenses posted here, I think I need to add a little something to my previous commentary.

First, let me be slightly less vague about my knowledge and experience: Right now I'm on a project (one of the principals) that's budgeted slightly over US$100-million. Our financiers would never have come to a table that was devoid of detailed budgetary information: How much, who, when, where.

Thus, I say again: Nobody with bread---minus the archetypical naive rich-man's daughter, or the like---is going to hand you said bread without a clearly articulated vision. Nobody.

I don't give a damn how many "other" people aren't providing budget information on their Kickstarters. So? That proves WHAT, exactly? And how's that working out for you guys? Only 449K short, I see.

Here's another example: One guy on our team raised US$20-million in 10 calendar days, to provide financing when another investor bailed on a project of his own. He provided investors with as complete a package as was possible to assemble, with every detail down to the nut and bolt. And, of course, he backed it all with a super-detailed budget.

He was, like you guys, well-known in his business. Did he go in and say, "You all know me, so just gimme the money"? No. He did the professional thing, and he convinced them thus.

Just reinforcing that I might know something about getting money for projects.

And with that, nothing pisses me off more than to watch a deluded amateur refuse to acknowledge they're on the wrong path. It's great to have a vision, and passion, and the talent to back it, but it's very bad to myopically stand there and defiantly insist that you're doing everything right, when you're not.

At best, it's delusional and childish; at worst it's arrogant and obtuse.

I wouldn't give you guys a penny. Your attitude is completely ass backwards, as if the world is here to serve your whims, and that you, of course, are gods to be cherished and worshiped, unquestioningly.

Well, people DO have questions. As people with your hats in your hands, you ought employ a bit more humility and self-searching when called to the carpet for having a bad plan, one poorly conceived.

The fact is, you guys really only have an *idea* of what you think you can do. You have no hard-coded ideas, period. It's pretty obvious. I'm guessing you're actually tactically *incapable* of creating a business plan, or budget, or any other sort of "adult" stuff that makes the world go around.

Having said all that, allow me to cut you a sliver of slack: While there's no doubt that "Pie-In-the-Sky" never paid anybody's rent, it's always a great place to start the hard work of chiseling your proposed ideas into a form that others (and yourselves) can scrutinize and digest and proof.

"Others" being the people you're asking to give you US$450K, of course.

And, I remember the days when I had grand ideas, and knew I could execute IF ONLY someone would give me, say, several hundred million to do it. Well, nobody's gonna do that unless AT LEAST you demonstrate, clearly, where that bread is going, how you will use it, when you will use it, who will be in charge of it, and so on.

Might be time to hire a Project Manager, guys, or somebody who's at least heard of an app called "Excel".

::kicks dead horse::

Hopefully we all learned something from this!

William Wallet wrote:Hopefully we all learned something from this!

Well, speaking personally I learned 3 things:-

1. I like lists
2. Purple is not a food
3.

and lastly...

eh eh eh Iron, very funny but, let's close this topic technically.
I know/understand/ and learned even more the following: maps, plugins, units, textures, colors and everything else related to our good old myth: -Everything has to be free!

forward !

Julio

Mostly off topic:

In this video at 9:50, one can see a zoomed-out battlefield with far more than the usual 400 units at once. I am wondering now, is it planned to raise the visible unit limit in any upcoming updates? (More likely, the additional units are just scenery objects, which would explain their inertia.)

Phex wrote:I am wondering now, is it planned to raise the visible unit limit in any upcoming updates? (More likely, the additional units are just scenery objects, which would explain their inertia.)

No plans that I know of, so I agree with your guess that it's just scenery.

Phex wrote:Mostly off topic:

In this video at 9:50, one can see a zoomed-out battlefield with far more than the usual 400 units at once. I am wondering now, is it planned to raise the visible unit limit in any upcoming updates? (More likely, the additional units are just scenery objects, which would explain their inertia.)

I think they had a version of loathing that didn't have limits but I could be wrong.

But either way, doesn't matter

*shoots the dead horse deader*

DarthRevan555 wrote:I think they had a version of loathing that didn't have limits but I could be wrong. But either way, doesn't matter

The visible unit limit is, as far as I know, not an issue of Loathing but of the Myth engine itself. I will not comment on the topic of this thread. However, I am a bit curious about future updates.

Looking like it won't even make 1% of the goal.
I hope that at least this might have a humbling effect and encourage a couple people to perhaps be more honest in the future regarding their achievements. etc.
Not you road, I think you are a victim in all of this.

Phex wrote:The visible unit limit is, as far as I know, not an issue of Loathing but of the Myth engine itself. I will not comment on the topic of this thread. However, I am a bit curious about future updates.

That's correct, the limits are currently hardcoded in the engine. I also agree with your guess about the video using scenery. There isn't any plan to increase the monster limit for 1.8.

In general - while it looks kinda cool, I don't see massive amount of units working that well in Myth. You'd need to change the UI/controls, pathfinding and AI to make large groups easier to manage. The focus would shift from micro tactics such as dodging arrows, to something more like a typical RTS.

Melekor wrote:

Phex wrote:The visible unit limit is, as far as I know, not an issue of Loathing but of the Myth engine itself. I will not comment on the topic of this thread. However, I am a bit curious about future updates.

That's correct, the limits are currently hardcoded in the engine. I also agree with your guess about the video using scenery. There isn't any plan to increase the monster limit for 1.8.

In general - while it looks kinda cool, I don't see massive amount of units working that well in Myth. You'd need to change the UI/controls, pathfinding and AI to make large groups easier to manage. The focus would shift from micro tactics such as dodging arrows, to something more like a typical RTS.

in other words, too many units = suxor

Couple of random sleepy thoughts:

1. The number of people here FURIOUS (instead of bemused) that others are promising to do things in a rather disorganized way, currently unlikely to succeed, seems to indicate that people actually care, and wish that someone would do a renewal project for Myth properly.

2. I've been wondering, if this kind of project actually went through as-is, could it be enough of a red flag to Take 2 that they might actually make a decision regarding the franchise? If, for the sake of argument, a project like this got fully funded, what would Take 2 do? Would they notice? Would they sue? Then what?

3. Or: If Take 2 DOESN'T care, does that mean that one could make a Myth knockoff the way Gameloft makes constant knockoffs with impunity? (Halo->N.O.V.A, etc)

4. Would a Kickstarter clearly and only devoted to buying Myth rights and making them open for all to use as they wished have a chance? (Again, I still wonder what the possible price range might be.)