Page 3 of 3
Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 9:02 pm
by Scratch
Granted, on good hardware Myth 3 can be pretty damn good.
And yes, my OLD TiBook runs Myth 2 well enough.
The problem is despite the much more powerful MacBook Pro I now have, Myth 2 is unplayable. The game play is reaction laggy but the lobby and pregame stuff (options and saved films type stuff) is horridly bad.
I think what CIK means is since he has to bust out his Myth Fixin' Toolkitâ„¢ yet again, he might as well do it up right.
I'm all for it. It's probably overdue anyway.
If tossing a few bucks his (Magma's) way will help speed up the process, count me in!
As far as Myth 3 goes, I've got mixed feelings on it.
I don't doubt these guys can make it right, but will even that bring a significant number of players back to it?
I doubt it.
I'd love to see it happen, but with no promotion...... well, I dunno.
Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:03 pm
by CIK
GodzFire wrote:Myth 2 doesn't need a re-write, at least on the Mac side. I'm running a 4 year old Mac and it just glides. Personally, I agree with Zeph. Working on Myth 3's problems and then porting what we wanted there would be better. Myth 3 isn't as bad as people make it out to be and I wish more people would play it. I like it.
Actually there are portions of Myth that must be rewritten in order to work on future versions of OS X. When we carbonized Myth II(true for Myth III also) we used the carbon APIs that where shared between OS 9 & OS X. Which kept down the amount of work and kept the game playable on both OSes. Fast forward to 10.4, a # of the API used in the Myth code base have been depreciated in 10.4(which means that they will go away without fruther notice in some future OS update) The reason for the change is the old ones wheren't thread safe and the new ones are.
Other things I have in mind is using stuff like CoreGraphics instead of quickdraw to setup the graphics drawing. Use the Unix BSD sockets instead of OpenTransport and so on. While it's true that moving to the newer APIs won't do anything great for the game it will help make Myth a better OS X app and if we are really lucky it will run better and be more stable has a result.
As for Myth III: As of TFL 1.5, Myth II 1.5 & Myth III 1.2 all 3 games share a large base of OS code. While they contain a large portion of code specific to each game they share a huge "Core Library". For instance the non userinterface portions of the networking code is identical between all 3 games. The only difference is was build of the code they got shipped with(ie some have bug fixes that older releases don't).
Myth III does still have some anoying open issues with it but as a whole the real issues are more tag & community related then anything in the code.
Finally the biggest problem with doing a Myth revival around Myth III is the fact it was a flop and it is much harder to get ahold of copies of Myth III then it is of Myth II. Esp when Myth III CD's where platform specific.
That all said I have a alpha of Myth III that runs like butter on Intel boxes. But alas it isn't compatible with the current shipping version and it's not suitable to release. But it gives me 80% to 90% code wise of what I need to bring Myth II up to the same state.
Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:05 pm
by CIK
PS: Also keep in mind we have been restrained in what we did with the Myths over the years because we kept OS 9 compatability. But keep in mind there isn't anything we can do that will all of a sudden make Myth look 2 times better or run 2 times faster.
Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 11:19 am
by TarousZars
Just so long as the Universal Binary of M2 worked w/ 1.5.2 (even if it is only in compatability mode like 1.5.2 does with 1.5.1) I say go to town Magma.
Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 10:09 pm
by TheLurker
GodzFire you are obviously missing the entire point of this thread. You're on an old PowerPC Mac. We are talking about for the x86 Macs that are the future of the Macintosh platform.
And yes, Myth 3 is awful compared to the other two games. I just spent the last few days playing all three of them in order on my older PowerMac G3.
Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:07 pm
by Lugas
I agree about Myth 3, and I'm sure many others would agree also. I think that Myth 2 should be the first priority if there is going to be a Universal Binary. Myth TFL could be another priority after Myth 2.
Myth 3 might not have to be a priority, as long as it works fine under Rosetta.
Also, some people may have downloaded the Chimera expansion pack. I didn't 'cos I downloaded the Solo levels off The Package. Anyway, does Chimera replace the Myth 2 Application? If so, another UB patch would be neccessary for Chimera. I ask because Chimera automatically changes the interface.
Basically: Myth 2 and TFL will need UBs. Myth 3 won't if it works acceptibly under Rosetta.
Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 10:42 pm
by Pyro
Lugas wrote:Anyway, does Chimera replace the Myth 2 Application? If so, another UB patch would be neccessary for Chimera. I ask because Chimera automatically changes the interface.
Basically: Myth 2 and TFL will need UBs. Myth 3 won't if it works acceptibly under Rosetta.
No, Chimera is just another normal plugin... although it comes with a different interface graphics but no interface changes other than the look of it. I doubt TFL would be messed with since The Fallen Levels was made and vTFL for Myth 2.
Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 12:56 am
by CIK
You can get the interface graphics at http://myth.busybsoftware.com. While your at it picked the latest beta of 1.5.2
Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:01 am
by Lugas
Yeah I know. I downloaded the Chimera and TFL Interface a while ago. I played Pyro's Fallen Heroes and Magma's Frenzy with TFL interface cos it looks more realistic.
Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:48 pm
by TheLurker
*crickets*
Any developments?
Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:49 am
by Doobie
don't hold your breath, we're still finishing up 1.5.2.