This tactical emphasis has several ramifications on the overall game design. First,
by not needing to worry about developing a resource exploitation system, Jones was
able to focus on making the combat model as good as it could be. This resulted in more
sophisticated and detailed combat than was found in any other RTS game at the time. In
Myth, unit facing, formation, and placement matter more than they had in other strategy
titles. Because the developers did not have to worry about how players would use
resources, more time could be spent on the physics system and other technologies that
would enhance the combat experience. For example, this attention to detail meant that
archers needed to worry about finding a clear shot through the trees, how the weather
would effect the trajectory of their arrows, and how their vertical placement on the
landscape would impact the distance they could shoot.
Players’ inability to build additional units also affects the care with which they use
the units at the start of a level. InWarCraftone can make a very substantial blunder
early on in a level and still be able to win by wise resource usage and unit creation. In
Myth, such an error is often fatal, with the levels becoming less and less forgiving as the
game progresses. Players’ only recourse when their plan of attack fails is to reload the
level. This makes for a very different kind of gameplay than is found inWarCraft.In
Myth, players must think through their actions fully instead of just trying whatever first
pops into their heads. The units are much more precious and, as a result, players start
caring for their welfare. Since more can be made easily, the units inWarCraftmay seem
like just so much cannon fodder. Conversely, inMytha particular unit may be crucial to
finishing a level, and there is no way to bring him back once he is killed.
Storytelling .................................
Despite its exemplary game design, a large component ofMythis its storytelling, which
is conducted using a number of well-integrated devices. First are the cut-scenes, which
appear sporadically throughout the game, outlining major plot points and setting up cer-
tain levels. These are often used more as “teasers” than to really advance the story
significantly. Second are the mission briefings, which precede each level. These contain
a large amount of detail about the progression of the war between the Light and the
Dark (the game’s two opposing forces). They also give meaning to the upcoming level,
making the mission objective more than just some arbitrary task picked by the level
designer.
Third, and most interesting, are the in-game storytelling devices that are used. Of
course, the levels are set in locations that match the needs of the story line, whether it
is a frostbitten, barren mountain area or a smoldering lava pit. The battles and missions
contained in the level match up with the story as explained by the mission briefings.
But players can also see and hear exchanges between different characters within the
game. For instance, a townsperson may advise the players’ units of the location of a trai-
tor. Players’ troops may provide advice such as, “We’d better get back to the bridge!”
Though players never lose control of their units, the game is able to trigger these bits of
dialog at different key points in the levels. In one mission, as the players’ troops
approach an insurmountable mass of Myrmidons, the Avatara that players have been
guarding steps forward and says, “Let me handle this.” He begins a conversation with
Chapter 16: Game Analysis:Myth: The Fallen Lords 301