What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Talk about anything here.
Post Reply
Kith-Kanan
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 9:37 am

What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Post by Kith-Kanan »

I would like as much information as possible about what factors of Myth you loved the most. And what factors you liked the least. I will be using responses I get here in design decisions for a future game whose gameplay will be based on the style of gameplay found in Myth. This game will be developed by Rubicite Interactive, though likely not until 2014 or beyond.
Jon God
Posts: 1602
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2006 11:24 pm
Location: Here
Contact:

Re: What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Post by Jon God »

Stuff that makes Myth, well, Myth:

• I liked the depth of control for the units. It felt like you really had control over them. You could dodge arrows, psych-out AI and enemies.

• I liked the overall feeling of being fantasy, but not LOTR or J-Fantasy, it kinda was it's own thing. No dwarves with axes, no elven archers.

• The story is told in a unique way, you aren't the hero, and who knows, you sometimes almost feel like you aren't even working for the heroes.

• It's brutally violent. While this I would usually feel kinda disappointed about; since most games use it as a selling point, this uses it as a device to make everything feel that much more mortal. Seeing your army hacked to pieces holds a little more a gut twitching feeling when you see the limbs and blood. It almost feels like a WWII game or something, in how grity it is.

• It's colorful. Most games these days, and most other RTS games have a muted color pallet, but this game goes all over the place, uses all kinda of colors.

• The story is overall just good, lots of lore, backstory, hints at things, and such. Once you've finished the game, there's still a lot to think about, and discuss.

• The depth to the modding tools are amazing, and in terms of gameplay you can do almost anything.

• The music and voice acting are top notch, and set the bar (in my opinion) for every other RTS, a bar which I feel has never been pushed any higher.

• The game world is very interesting and leaves lots of places unvisited, which makes it feel like that much larger of a world.

• It is still just unique when it comes to gameplay, there are no other RTS/RTT games that feel anything like it. As close as some might say Company of Heroes is, I feel it's almost nothing like Myth, it feels more like a slightly more RTT version of every other RTS.

• Art style and creatures are imaginative, they manage to feel unique to this day, in my opinion.

•


Stuff that we could do without:

• Modding tools that only really effect gameplay. (No interface, control, etc. editing)

• Lack of some modern multiplayer stat tracking/Matchmaking, achivements, etc.

• No Split screen! - Joke, don't kill me!

• Bots would be nice too...?

• More multiplayer settings (custom gametypes, projectiles on/off, unit and projectile quick switch out, rounded games, switching starting places between rounds, etc.)

• Uh... Myth is perfect? :P


That's all I can think of for now.

I'm Jon God, and I approve this message.
Image
Image
PSN: Jon_God
XBL: J0N GOD
User avatar
Melekor
Site Admin
Posts: 2444
Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 12:10 am
Location: British Columbia
Contact:

Re: What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Post by Melekor »

In no particular order:

Good:
Camera controls
Explosions, particle fx
Wacky physics, randomness, weird rare events
Blood and gore, _permanent_ battle debris
Terrain matters for strategy
Unlimited micromanagement potential (dodging arrows, kiting, flinch locking etc etc)
Simple basic gameplay (complexity/skill is in the execution)
Sprites (3D would have looked awful in 1998, today it's borderline)
Non-Generic units, enemies and bosses. I don't think there's a single unit that doesn't feel "cool" somehow.
Long campaign with good level variety
Consistent look and style, bright yet natural colours
Hue change system & team colours
Storyline + professionally narrated intros
Acually meaningful difficulty levels
Ability to control game speed
Extensive Modding tools
Replays
Multiplayer

Bad:
Bad pathfinding
Units getting stuck on eachother
Friendly fire (when it's just dumb, like archers repeatedly shooting the guy right in front of them)
Single-level heightmap; poor, tacked-on 3D model support
No in-game music
In-game UI and unit controls lack modern RTS refinements
Game file formats not extensible
Cutscenes were mostly so short that they didn't add much (IMO)
Replays/Films can't be seeked or played backwards
User avatar
Fury IX
Posts: 254
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 7:37 pm

Re: What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Post by Fury IX »

1) Dead bodies and parts remain on the map
2) Units individuals, with different custom names, etc
3) Physics
4) Low requirements to play and smoothness > pretty

For replay value, of course multi player and modability are essential.

I would say the only shortcoming myth has is how difficult it is to create new mods. The tools, especially loathing, are not quite robust enough yet to do what could be done, at least in a reasonable amount of time.
If it were me, I would spend most of my time making kick ass mod software, and letting the community create most of the content (the fun part).
Image
Image
GodzFire
Posts: 1773
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:37 pm

Re: What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Post by GodzFire »

It's difficult because JG and Mel took care of most of the stuff but I will at least try to highlight a few of the big reasons why at least I have been playing the Myth series since Aug '98:

- Great story
- Really in depth lore
- Extremely customizable
- Excellent longevity with additional plugins and maps

I'm hard pressed to find anything too negative about the series but if I had to nitpick:

- Outdated UI (no scaling UI, many hardcoded controls)
- Some very dumb Friendly Fire
Kith-Kanan
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 9:37 am

Re: What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Post by Kith-Kanan »

GodzFire wrote:I'm hard pressed to find anything too negative about the series but if I had to nitpick:

- Outdated UI (no scaling UI, many hardcoded controls)
- Some very dumb Friendly Fire
Could you elaborate on what you mean when you say "no scaling UI"?
Kith-Kanan
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 9:37 am

Re: What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Post by Kith-Kanan »

Jon God wrote:Stuff that we could do without:

• Modding tools that only really effect gameplay. (No interface, control, etc. editing)
Am I correctly rephrasing this to mean "the modding tools were great, but I wish they included the ability to edit the interface and the controls"?
Jon God wrote:• Bots would be nice too...?
Can you clarify what you mean by bots in this context?
User avatar
Tireces
Posts: 553
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 1:25 am
Location: (po)Land of Lag
Contact:

Re: What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Post by Tireces »

Kith-Kanan wrote:
Jon God wrote:• Bots would be nice too...?
Can you clarify what you mean by bots in this context?
Teams in multiplayer mode controlled by AI ? I wonder if Total War series has bots in multiplayer - proly yes if it allows to setup a 1vs1 game against CPU. Bots would be nice in something myth-like, especially in FFA - no more unfair 3-way games.
"As long as a single one of us stands..."
Eddaweaver
Posts: 1024
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:05 am
Location: M.E.

Re: What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Post by Eddaweaver »

Positives...

* Nearly all games today have in-game control screens that look daft with bits jutting out to try and be "cool" or something. Bungie didn't make that mistake.
* Like Marathon, Myth has an excellent music score. In most games the music is either fluff, kitsch, extremely melodramatic or trying too hard to be "hard". That they were not afraid to have sympathetic elements in the score is something few games' music tracks have with sincerity - most are trying to be some kind of heavy metal replacement.
* Storyline. Nearly all games either have no storyline, an unbelievable storyline, or one that is lousy and bolted in as an afterthought. TFL's had depth and had been carefully thought out and is the major part of the game.
* Myth doesn't have contrived resource / points collecting or click-farming like WoW or Diablo III.
* No cheating in multiplayer. Well not much anyway. Myth is almost unique in that respect.
* Games today all have a sweepingly dark approach to brightness and colour, kind like CSI where supposedly their labs are lit by 1 watt bulbs, in a lame attempt to set a "dark" mood". Bungie gave the whole spectrum of brightness and darkness instead of homogeneous dreariness.
* Gameplay isn't all over in a few hours like most games today.
* Natural touches such as fog, trees and animals.
* Fighting was balanced between realism and cartoonism. Some games today are practically photo-realistic murder simulators. Most games are made with a psychopathic mid teenage boy in mind but the percentage of gamers in that demographic has been shrinking fast.
* The voice acting isn't atrocious like most games such as Diablo III.
* The units are believable, personalitised and are not sameish.
* Animated cutscenes.

Negatives...
* Unit clumping in Myth II
* Dumbed down units in Myth II (Dwarfs' bottles, archers being blander than the fir'Bolg).
* The Myth II cutscenes were too Japanese-anime-looking.
User avatar
Melekor
Site Admin
Posts: 2444
Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 12:10 am
Location: British Columbia
Contact:

Re: What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Post by Melekor »

Btw, in case you haven't already, I'd recommend also posting this question on the MWC 2012 board (here: http://mwc2012.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general) to get a more complete sampling of the community's opinion.
GodzFire
Posts: 1773
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:37 pm

Re: What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Post by GodzFire »

Take care of the comments you receive there though. There's a lot of spamer/flamer/rankers who will just hijack the thread.
User avatar
juliocpaes
Posts: 1263
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 12:07 am
Location: Madrigal - Brazil
Contact:

Re: What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Post by juliocpaes »

MWC2012 - hilarious Forum myth , look it this happy guy wrote - "Dear Myth Diary", :shock:

" ... a dead video game from 1998. I don't understand why some people still use Myth forums but don't play Myth, to me this is so dumb, it's like they are embarrassed to get beat at the actual game or something, I can understand not having time to play Myth much on weekdays but the commitment to play once for an hour on the weekend is minimal, I think these people are full of shit when they say they don't have time."

:?

http://mwc2012.proboards.com/index.cgi? ... thread=509

Juliocpaes
User avatar
spongefile
Posts: 57
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 3:56 pm

Re: What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Post by spongefile »

Best things about Myth that make it like no other RTS / RTT game I know:

NO resource collecting, base building, point spending (except UT at the beginning of a match, but that's very different), no claiming bases that then generate more units for you, none of that crap.

It's focused only on the actual battle itself. Formations and use of terrain matter more than which units you can buy next to counter the units your opponent will buy next to bluntly mash against each other. In Myth, HOW you use a unit matters. You can't just count the power of the units left on both sides and predict from that who will win.

There's a random factor, implemented very naturally. Some charges fizzle. Some don't. Sometimes, when physics and randomness combine you get delightful OMG WTF moments, just when the outcome seems obvious something happens that surprises everyone involved.

It doesn't take itself too seriously, but it's not full-on cartoonish. It's beautifully balanced in this respect. There is intestines-left-on-the-field carnage which manages to be funny without being Adult Swim. The goals are serious, the physics feel real, the blood left on the field can tell you a lot about what happened there, but all the while there are a lot of subtle jokes and easter egg-like details that give you the impression that Bungie employees were having a ton of fun making it. The only other game I can think of that strikes this same balance is Odama, where tiny units will comment "tell my kids I love them!" as they are getting squished by a huge pinball: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odama

Those are the biggest factors for me.
HealwSteel
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:17 am

Re: What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Post by HealwSteel »

Definition of no life: I saw this 7 year old post and looked up Rubicite Interactive to see if the game was out. Well??? Hehe
What amazed me about Myth was the physics of the engine. I'm no programmer, but having elevation, sequence of firing, etc affect Archer proficiency left me in awe. The medieval setting and lore is nice too.
I didn't care for the lack of romance options....
User avatar
Blaac the Berserker
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2018 2:58 am

Re: What did/do you love and hate about the Myth games?

Post by Blaac the Berserker »

I just beat Soulblighter on Legendary difficulty with No Casualties (except for the deaths I couldn't control in Shiver or Twice Born). I managed to finally beat Soulblighter months after beating The Fallen Levels on Legendary with No Casualties (except for the deaths I couldn't control in Bagrada or Forest Heart). Here's my list of things I liked and didn't like about the Myth games.

Pros:
*Being able to beat the levels on Legendary difficulty with No Casualties.
*Being able to destroy entire armies with a handful of units.
*Wide terrain levels which allowed for archers to hit and run more easily.
*Taking advantage of an enemy's bad tactics or overly cautious tactics to your advantage.
*Sniping enemies from a distance with your archers from a fair distance when they're distracted or can't see you.
*Being able to speed up or slow down the gameplay depending on your tactics.
*The handpainted watercolor-like 3D environments for the levels.
*The animated cutscenes: both the more cartoony style of the first game, and the more serious style of the second.
*The actor who narrated the journals.
*The actor who voiced Balor and Soulblighter.
*The Dwarves, the Archers, the Journeymen, and the Berserkers.
*The voices for the Dwarves and Berserkers.
*Causing enemies to explode with Dwarven molotov cocktails.
*The hero units for the special levels.
*The dwarven mortar cannon units.
*The Ents
*Being able to use the Trow and the Deceiver in Soulblighter
*The deer hunting secret level in Soulblighter
*The Ghol idol secret level in The Fallen Lords.
*The mass amount of Wights and satchel charges in the second Soulblighter secret level.
*Alric using Balmung.
*The manners in which Balor and Soulblighter were defeated.
*Being able to defeat Shiver in Myth II.
*The Deceiver's large amount of health, and being able to withstand the explosive attacks of the giant Myrkridia.
*Using the Deceiver's abilities to possess Myrkridia and Fetch to fight for you. The possessed Myrkridia are absolutely fun to use.
*The Deceiver's ability to paralyze and kill enemies gradually by touch.
*Being able to defeat The Deceiver level and With Friends Like These on Legendary in a few minutes with little trouble.
*The little scripted sequences that game developers integrated to further the narrative.
*The story itself.
*The quality of the writing.
*The atypical narrative device of Myth's story.
*The epic lore.
*The way Myth incorporates influences from The Black Company, The Lords of the Rings, Celtic mythology, and lots of other elements into its own well-written fantasy world.

And so on.

Now for what I didn't like:

*The Watcher level is notoriously hard on Legendary. It's cathartic when you know what to do and beat it with No Casualties, but it's a pain without archers or healers.

*Landing on White Falls on Legendary. The level needed a longer time limit, or at least allowed for the units to take their time once they got close to the fort. Once they got close, Alric should've moved his ship far away and let the soldiers handle the rest of the enemies on their own. I did manage to beat it on time with no casualties, and it was cathartic, but it took me months for me to get it right.

*Myth: The Fallen Lords penalizing you for the deaths of units you had not control over, like Bagrada or Forest Heart. Ruins your No Casualty score through no fault of your own.

*The same with Myth II: Soulblighter. Getting penalized for the Deceiver's death, and the death of all the units in Twice Born.

*Not allowing you to control the other armies in Twice Born, and getting blamed for their casualties even though it was the computer controlled commanders who were at fault. The game killed off all those valiant men needlessly, men who I bled and fought alongside with, and trained to survive any battle.

*Using the Warlocks, the Trow, and the mortar cannon dwarf units for only a couple of levels.

*Dwarves miscalculating their throws, and destroying their friends or themselves. Or taking to long to throw, and running away. Or walking straight into the enemy's forces when I told them not to.

*Units not moving their formations easily in the positions and directions I want them to follow.

*Not being able to see the Watcher in action before he was turned to stone. He was built up as this awesome and destructive Fallen Lord, and we barely got to see him, hear him, or fight him.

*Not having the dream duel with Shiver in The Fallen Lords be made into its own level.

*Not seeing or fighting the Deceiver in The Fallen Lords.

*The remaining Fallen Lords, such as the Lurker and the Faceless Man, being referenced but not fought in the first or second game.

*The Head not figuring more into the plots of Myth 1 and 2.

*Not enough animated cutscenes for either game.

*Bungie being all over the place in its background story bits, and not focusing on what the main vision of the background story was supposed to be about.

*Bungie not developing Myth III themselves (even though I like Myth III's story, writing, and some of its voice acting).

*Dumas is so eager and friendly in Myth III (which I liked), but he gave no hints to the personality he would have once he became Soulblighter.

*Bungie not making more Myth games set in Myth's fascinating historical lore.


I have yet to play Myth III on Legendary, so my views on Myth III are incomplete. I'm thinking of trying my hand at the Myth III plug-in for Myth II, which I've enjoyed playing on timid. The upside to beating both games on Legendary and with No Casualties, as well as saving videos of all those playthroughs, I won't feel guilty playing the harder levels again on Timid difficulty. Thanks guys for updating Soulblighter and making it possible to play Soulblighter on modern systems, as well as making it possible for players to continue playing The Fallen Lords on Soulblighter's engine.
"You fools! Where do you think you're going?"
"We're going to the shrine to pray for help!"
"Then you waste your time. The gods aren't listening."
Post Reply