|
|
Post by flatline on Sept 2, 2012 8:11:43 GMT 2
flats professional myth career was ruined by myrk No Myrk helped me take my professional myth career to a level that since that time I have never reached again. |
|
|
|
Post by samthebutcher on Sept 3, 2012 17:09:22 GMT 2
I know this is long. It just sort of happened trying to make my point. It is just there are some new ideas for Myth being introduced and as a community we are trying to attract and retain as many Players as possible. New ideas can help do that. But as long as we have people that just flat out reject anything new it is never going to happen, and we could all miss out on some great improvements and a larger Player base. So read this and answer the questions at the bottom, and really consider why you would reject any sort of changes to the game. The only semi-legitimate reason I can see is that their are some Top Players that feel that if any changes are made they would some how lose their spot. But even if that is what they fear I dont think it would happen. Being that these changes would give everyone better game control and the better Players should actually improve their game by them.
It seems to me that some people reject any changes to Myth just because they dont want change. Regardless if it is beneficial or not. To reject the idea of a further zoom just seems stubborn. And the reasons were out of fear. Fear that somehow a Top Player would lose an edge that they have. As if that one change would cause them to start losing to people they normally beat and that they couldnt even overcome it. Really? That means that they believe that the only reason they win is because they have a slightly better awareness of the battlefield? I just dont see it that way. And if they thought about it I would think that they wouldnt either. They win because they are better with whatever controls or options there are in Myth. Not because of one simple thing.
Note: When I am talking about fast clicking or repetitive clicking. I am talking about the need to do extra clicking to perform a certain task. Such as how Presets or Group Selecting works by eliminating the need to do a bunch of unnecessary clicking just to select a set of units. So that the SAME number of clicks done at the SAME speed can be used more efficiently to complete MORE actions in the SAME amount of time. That is how Presets work, my idea and this idea also. They just make actions more efficient which would actually have the potential for you to be even better.
With the rejections these ideas have received from some people I am sure that if Presets were something that Myth didnt have previously and was something that was going to be added now. The same people would come absolutely unglued. With the same exact arguments against it. Which since Myth does have them we know that it is a tool that most Top Players use very successfully that if anything further increases their edge VS other Players. So why wouldnt it be the same with additional tools and control options?
A question I have for the top players that reject (seemingly out of hand) any changes or really enhancements in unit control like my idea and this one is. Do you think that if these changes were made you will start losing to people you normally beat? I would think not. If the answer is no then why object?
If the answer is yes you would start losing to players you normally beat. That would mean you thought your edge or superiority lies only in faster repetitive clicking and camera movement. Not superior tactics or strategy. That if controls were more efficient as with my idea and this one (which would just allow Players to execute in less steps their tactical or strategic intentions) you would somehow start losing. I just dont see that happening.
To continue with the argument and following the logic that, removing some of actions and laborious button clicking involved in following through with a Players intentions "dumbs down" the game. Would mean that the ultimate show of skill would be to remove all control options such as Presets ect and make it that all actions had to be a single click on a single unit. That would be the real test of who is the best?
Which that leads to the question. Where should the real focus of Myth skill be? Should the balance be tipped to fast clicking (see note) and camera movement or should it lean more to tactics and strategy?
Neither one of these ideas handicap anyone. It is not something like "If a Player has a higher Rank then they get weaker units". They are additional tools and options for all Players to use, and each additional option or tool is another place that a better Player can gain an edge.
We can ask what was Bungies intentions? What did they want to be the most important, Tactics and Strategy or Fast and Laborious Clicking and Limited Camera control? To answer that we can look at what they did do. They did allow Players to select multiple units. They did set the game up to have Presets. They did allow the camera to zoom out. From Bungies descriptions of Myth and from reviews one of the things that was a feature of Myth and was highlighted was the fact that Players do have so much Unit Control and that the controls were intuitive allowing tactics to be executed easily. If you go back and read the different reviews you will see how Bungie set out to make the controls efficient and this is one of the things that considered to have made the game so great.
Why didnt Bungie include these new ideas in the original game? One reason would be that the need or benefits for these things wasnt recognized and only after time did they see the benefit. If you look at changes from Myth TFL vs Myth2 you will see that Bungie DID make additional camera controls and improved unit control. Another reason that these things probably werent included is because of computing power. Additional control options and the further a camera can zoom out the more computing power needed.
Why would we want to make any changes anyway? The game is great the way it is. Well simply to make it better and to keep the game evolving and fresh. One major issue we have as a community is that it is small and we would like Players to stick around and to also gain new Players. One good way to keep people playing and to encourage new Players is to improve the game and to keep it fresh. Additional enhancements like these ideas can do that. We have a group of very influential Players that so stubbornly reject any changes that Myth cant evolve. The game is stuck in 1998 with old technology and old ideas.
If you reject these ideas either one or both and you are a Top Player I have some questions.
1) Do you think that if these ideas were added you would start losing to people you normally beat? If yes why? If no why not?
2) Do you use "Presets"? If yes why? If no why not?
3) Would eliminating "Presets" give you a greater edge against over other Players? If yes why? If no why not?
4) Would you reject the idea of "Presets" if they were just now being introduced? If yes why? If no why not?
5) Would you be able to accomplish more tactically if "Presets" were removed? As in attacking with more units or additional flanks ect. If yes why? If no why not?
6) If you could complete more actions than you currently can in the same amount of time would your level of play increase? If yes why? If no why not?
7) Would you improve as a Player and have an even greater edge over other Players if all types of Group Unit Selection were removed and the camera zoom option was removed so that only close up was possible? If yes why? If no why not?
8) Would you be happy if the overall skill level and level of play for everyone increased? If yes why? If no why not?
These are a few questions there are more that could be asked. I know that some people will want to just reject them out of hand, but really if you reject these ideas and others to improve Myth you should answer these questions. I would really like to see the answers to these questions from someone that rejects these ideas to enhance Myth game play. Otherwise it really does seem that you reject these ideas just because you are afraid of change, but have no good reason to be. The thing of it is that it would be good for Myth to evolve and if there is no good reason for it not to. Why not improve the game? Maybe attract new Players or have current Players stick around because something fresh has been introduced.
|
|
|
|
Post by myrk on Sept 3, 2012 18:15:51 GMT 2
This game's dead dude. It's never going to attract many new players no matter how much people *cruiser* with it. Noone's going to choose to play a barely known game from 1998 over any of the shiny new games out there. I can guarantee if drastic changes were made to Myth's gameplay, the number of people quitting forever would far outweight the number of new players. Myth today has the conundrum of being a great game with a shitty, tiny little community. The reason people come back to play it at all is because it's pretty much the same great game we originally loved and noone has ever created anything similar to replace it, so it still has its tiny little niche in the world.
As for your questionnaire:
1. If you dumb down the game enough, skill matters less so that obviously favors the people who lack skill.
2. Yes, because I'm a myth pro.
3. No, that would give the people who don't use presets an edge because they'd have had more practice.
4. The idea of presets just being introduced now is ludicrous. Starcraft 1 had them around the time Myth first came out, they're hardly a new idea. If they were somehow being introduced just now it would be after over a decade of everyone bitching that Myth didn't have presets.
5. Is this a serious question?
6. Myth already requires more actions to play "perfectly" than a human being can handle, which is one reason why it's such a great game. There isn't any realistic way to control myth units better short of someone developing a way to move units with just your thoughts, everyone's limited to how good they are with a keyboard and mouse. If you're talking about having the Myth AI control some things for you, that's just dumbing down the game.
7. Who knows, that game would suck so much I wouldn't bother playing it. I'm sure if I cared to I could adapt.
8. I'd love it it everyone played well. Might even log onto Myth in the off-season because this game would be more interesting. Unfortunately the people who aren't good at this point are unlikely to ever get better. People aren't going to raise their skill level by any patch Magma makes.
|
|
par73
Forum legend
Posts: 935
|
Post by par73 on Sept 3, 2012 18:49:07 GMT 2
If you reject these ideas either one or both and you are a Top Player I have some questions. 1) Do you think that if these ideas were added you would start losing to people you normally beat? If yes why? If no why not? 2) Do you use "Presets"? If yes why? If no why not? 3) Would eliminating "Presets" give you a greater edge against over other Players? If yes why? If no why not? 4) Would you reject the idea of "Presets" if they were just now being introduced? If yes why? If no why not? 5) Would you be able to accomplish more tactically if "Presets" were removed? As in attacking with more units or additional flanks ect. If yes why? If no why not? 6) If you could complete more actions than you currently can in the same amount of time would your level of play increase? If yes why? If no why not? 7) Would you improve as a Player and have an even greater edge over other Players if all types of Group Unit Selection were removed and the camera zoom option was removed so that only close up was possible? If yes why? If no why not? 8) Would you be happy if the overall skill level and level of play for everyone increased? If yes why? If no why not? 1) I think anyone can beat anyone on any given day. Even the unlikelyness of Jahral beating GKG in a 1v1 can happen, I think thats the beauty of the myth engine and a practiced and reinforced factor installed with my gambling addiction. I could care less who I'm beating, who I'm losing to, and of course I'd like to see the quality of the games increase... but those who aren't clicking or don't have the 'keen eye' to win now might not necessarily understand how to use these tools once they are provided anyway! 2) yes, it's easier to organize and executing what i'm doing in my brain and it's physical manifestations of clicking. sometimes i don't use presets though, sometimes i just drag here and there. sometimes I use presets for two different groups, i.e. splitting archers or melee in half for better odds of success and destrcution. 3) erm no but i can see this game being more frusterating to be played, and perhaps my clicking speed going up if performing well was in my goals. 4) hell no, although some still do. presets are a great tool, a great asset. people who don't use presets are fools. 5) erm that is really up to the player, I think I would be moving a lot less things off my screen as easy as I used to 6) this is a given yes, except for the blatant obvious fact that, some actions are mistakes. some players can click fast and make lots of actions, but if they are the wrong actions and clicks it really isn't benefical unless the opposing player(s) have no idea how to take advantage of a disadvantage. 7) erm i think the only way you would improve is if suddenly those features returned and you had all that practice with using a hindered system. hence rocky jogging with concrete blocks while he trains to fight his nemesis. playing with handicaps isn't necessarily a bad thing. 8) yea sure! I mean who wouldn't really, I think it will take some more new players coming in, some older players forgetting everything they learned about myth and relearning how to play completely. Everyone isn't a lost factor, because the brain can be rewired and is constantly rewiring itself; while someone grows older this ability to rewire is less present and functioning. the key is newer players. we have players like PK and bagrada who maybe played for 1-3 years but actually know how to bc and play well now. i took about one year myself, and an upgrade from 56k to cable which really allowed that process to be even quicker; i guess you can also take that statement as a 'playing with handicap' reference. the key to the key, (the 'door' unlocking factor) is these players need to be not only playing with better players actively (and of course practicing what they learned against those better players, as well as the lesser skilled, less aware players, and seeing the results), but the 'better' players need to be willing at the very least to accept the fact that someone could be a handicap to them and their 'fun' for a while, and at the best be willing to teach them basic things like 'what went wrong' and 'what to do here'. the winter season is coming however, so most players should be used to the less abundance of quality games in the winter since about 2005; but this does not mean we couldn't have these quality, learning experience, working together team-based 'opportunities', aka good games, during the winter. edit: spaced for viewing pleasure, and terrible handwriting
-p |
|
|
|
Post by samthebutcher on Sept 3, 2012 20:47:55 GMT 2
The answer to my questions have so far been what I expected. That all honest answers would point to the fact that "presets" and other methods for ease of unit control is good. That having and using "presets" is an efficient tool that Pros use improve their game and gain an edge over someone that doesnt. Being that, that is the case all additional tools to make unit control more efficient would be an improvement and another way that Pros could gain an edge over the competition.
People say that these additions would "dumb down" the game. Actually it would be the exact opposite. The dumb part is the repetitive clicking needed for simple actions. Clicking this unit then that unit repeatedly for simple actions is the dumb part of Myth. Just like removing "presets" would increase the need to do a lot of mindless clicking. Without "presets" Players would be spending so much more time just clicking units (the dumb part) that they wouldnt have as much time for the actual part that takes thought, unit movement, executing attacks ect. And if people agree that "presets" are good for this reason then it stands that other options to reduce mindless clicking would also be good.
Like this zoom out further idea. Instead of needing to move your camera around as much (which it doesnt take much skill or thought to move the camera, it is really a dummy action it just takes time) you could focus on additional tactical actions that do involve thought.
Imaging trying to execute a flank with out "presets" or "group selection" of any type and a camera on minimal zoom. It would be so laborious to click one unit at a time and moving the camera that flanks would be probably none existent in Myth. So all of that mindless clicking and camera moving would get in the way of actual thoughtful strategy and tactics.
That is why ideas like these are good. It removes some of the "dumb parts" so Players can focus on the smart parts. If you reduce the time and effort that goes into executing a certain action (like flanking attacking, moving units ect) then you can complete more actions in the same amount of time. Instead of attacking with 4 units in 8 clicks you can attack with 8 with the same number clicks in the same time. Instead of sending 1 flank you can send 2 and actually see the both an control them better. These are the things that take thought and skill.
You cant tell me that if you gave a Pro Player the ability to see more of the map at one time, actually see the units of both flanks at the same time and control them quicker. That they wouldnt use that to their fullest advantage and be able make attacks that they could never do now to the same degree of effectiveness. It would open whole new attack options that just arent practical now because of limited camera and unit controls. Look what some Players can do now with just the mini-map to work with. Imagine if they could actual see and control units that they could normally only see on the mini-map or moving the camera back and forth. It would open things up for Pros especially to take their game to the next level. Just like if Myth never had "presets" and they were added later, removing the hindrance of all the button clicking needed to do what can be done with "presets" would let even the best Players get better. It would be like taking the governor off of a race car. Or if you raced bikes and you could now use a 12 speed instead of a 10 speed. It is going to improve upon whatever skill level you already have.
It isnt like some AI thing that takes control of your units so you dont have to think about anything or be fast.
|
|
|
|
Post by asmo on Sept 3, 2012 21:04:37 GMT 2
2x wouldn't change the game very much, i vote for 2x max in-game mb more for replays. how about we stop letting insecure rank-h00rs keep this game mired in 1998? add a new feature and there's such a large group who don't want to play it they don't have to upgrade, they can continue to play Myth v1.7 - that's what they want - the game to never change. give them what they want and let the rest of non-neanderthal mythers have something new and fun. hell these luddites are tards, if they REALLY felt so strongly abot all the changes beign so bad and thought it changed the gameplay they'd still be playing on 1.3 or 1.5 or whatever version they think is closest to what bungie created. but they don't so they are hippocrits. and so stuypid they don't even realize it. 2x as many mwc forum audience vote to put zoom in game, loudmouth minority shouldn't be allowed to prevent progress of myth. I felt like this needed to be reposted. |
|
|
|
Post by waywardone on Sept 4, 2012 1:29:31 GMT 2
The stupidity of controls in a game is something that inadvertently provides a challenge. Remove that challenge and the game becomes less interesting. Remove it without increasing the complexity somewhere else and it becomes less interesting.
Good players enjoy optimizing inefficient GUIs.
|
|
homer
Forum elite
Posts: 686
|
Post by homer on Sept 4, 2012 4:22:25 GMT 2
nothing can be less interesting than 10 pages of zoom chat.
|
|
|
|
Post by samthebutcher on Sept 4, 2012 17:30:42 GMT 2
The stupidity of controls in a game is something that inadvertently provides a challenge. Remove that challenge and the game becomes less interesting. Remove it without increasing the complexity somewhere else and it becomes less interesting. Good players enjoy optimizing inefficient GUIs. That is exactly it Wwo. These changes by removing wasted button clicking by making the same actions more efficient with less button clicking. Would free people up for more complex tactics. The same number of clicks at the same speed accomplishing more actions thus more complex tactics would be possible. Just like how "Presets" work now. |
|
|
|
Post by tirri on Sept 4, 2012 19:23:09 GMT 2
sorry all you silly newbs, you lost i lost over half of my precious exalts due to this post but i regret nothing |
|
|
|
Post by adrenaline on Sept 4, 2012 19:38:42 GMT 2
we have players like PK and bagrada who maybe played for 1-3 years but actually know how to bc and play well now. PK was Mortimer -CK- and has played myth since TFL... but there are definitely a bevvy of old players who have dramatically improved in the last few years... probably as a result of the current myth environment. If you play nothing but 2v2,3v3, etc with good players, you learn fast. Unless your name is Spike. |
|
|
|
Post by honkey on Sept 4, 2012 19:52:33 GMT 2
Sorry adren...
players do not learn playing against good players.... they learn to get frustrated and never want to play the game again as they will not have the patience for such a vast learning curve, nor the tolerance to deal with waiting in a lobby for the CHANCE at a game, only to get their shit pushed in. Someone like me who has always been an average player def improves playing with better people. But I have some sembelance of how to do shit.
You guys all speak in hypotheticals, but here is a real life example:
I have 3 gamer friends that are all very good at video games. The reason they wont play myth? the fucked camera control and the fucked stupid alt to select presets bull shit. I have even heard them say "when ur battling you should be able to zoom out more to see the map better". So conclusion: the iffy controls DO deter players from wanting to learn. If learning 100 different unit types, Different game concepts etc, isn't enough you also expect someone to spend god knows how long learning a crazy camera and preset system, and then we wonder why people wont start playing?
and to disagree with myrk:
There is a huge opportunity to add new players to games like this. Fact of the matter is when they sign on and try to play its so *cruisering* ridiculously hard that they cannot even begin to think of where to start. I alone could get 3-5 people active on this game, and I am sure many other people on here could also recruit a few friends, and get them playing, some would stay some wouldn't. (see absolut and his old roomate he used to play with). But some of this nit picky bullshit needs to be fixed in order for people to stay around long enough to learn what a big puss is.
|
|
|
|
Post by adrenaline on Sept 4, 2012 20:08:25 GMT 2
i didn't mean NEW players. i meant players who know the basics, and are competent with their controls already. and you have not always been an average player... you were a terrible player until the last couple of years, in which you reaped the benefits of playing with good players, and became an average player yourself. same story for many many other players, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by enculator on Sept 4, 2012 20:22:41 GMT 2
adrenaline~a red trow can beat 4 green mauls
|
|
|
|
Post by adrenaline on Sept 4, 2012 20:35:14 GMT 2
enculator, u had a mort too. was clearly trying to get your mort to auto into your mauls. host dropping like that was a bitch move... go ahead and justify it any way you want, i suppose.
|
|
