: this is proof that Maul are not descended from, related
: to, or ancestors to, the Ogre, but they ARE the Oghre.
: Check the Maul monsters tag. On the top is says Ogre.
: Spelled differently sure, but we can all assume.....
...any more than the Brigand object/projgroup tag names are proof that they're actually Warriors.
These both give us pre-release info; at some time during Myth2's development, the Mauls were envisioned as Oghres (probably) and the Brigands were envisioned as the Myth2 Warrior replacement. But later in development both these ideas were scrapped. The splitting of Mauls and Oghres was done very deliberately--you'll notice that most of the other Maul tags begin with "og". This means that they were all originally named "Oghre [something]", but that someone painstakingly went through and renamed them all to "Maul [something]."
In the final version, we know that Mauls are not Oghres--unless they're an incredibly mutated variant--simply because we have lots of pictures of Oghres in the Tales of the Fallen Lords comic, and they don't look anything like Mauls. Also, we're told that the Oghres were completely exterminated...and even if the Maul ancestors went into hiding back in the Wolf Age, the Trow would have noticed them once they were freed by Balor. Mauls aren't exactly low-profile. :-)
But obviously MJ either overlooked the comic or, more probably, consciously rejected it as an info source. In fact, I'd say that the bulk of Myth III's conflicts with the Bungie backstory are focused on Tales, rather than the previous games. Which should certainly make it more palatable to most players.
--SiliconDream
