ThunderPeel2001

Some free advice to Peter Molyneux...

Recommended Posts

Why?

I watched the videos of him demoing the dog, and it looks fantastic to me. Looks like it'll work out beautifully, but even if it doesn't, at least someone is going off and trying something different.

SiN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I'm curious what your gripe is with what Molyneux said here, Thunderpeel? Sure, it's typically wacky and reaching for the sky, but you can't fault the guy for trying, right? We'll have to see how it eventually works in the game, but I like what he's saying here so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, of course I've seen the videos. I mean; we'll have to see how it eventually all comes together. Black & White also had exciting videos, but proved to be less than enjoyable. That's what I mean. But the videos are already very promising. I hope it turns out to be as awesome as it seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Molyneux is great. At the very least he'll tell us what not to try. Besides, he seems to have learned something (do not aggravate the player). This seems pretty damn cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for ages now i wanted to rant and rant and rant about emotion in games, and this seems like the perfect time to start. sadly I'm pretty tired, I think I'll just go to bed instead.

p.s i loved fable, so i hope this one is as good - wow moments or not - pft, they don't interest me as much as FUN gaming moments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason for contention in the original post is that Peter has a problem (which he himself has admitted to frankly) whereby prior to any release he'll give these rapturous talks which capture your imagination in one fell swoop (ad nauseam). Unfortunately the games following this whirlwind of hype always fail to deliver on the key points.

None of his games are bad (at all) but the way he talks about them prior to release is very unflattering once they are in your hands. He comes across as an affable geek to me and it's easy to fall under his spell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I admire Molyneux's constant desire and efforts to take games to new heights. While his chat has led to disappointments in the past, only a smoked cock would say he's done nothing for the industry and hasn't cranked out some superb games.

I see nothing wrong with the article you linked to Thunderpeel. He's trying to bring emotion into games in a way that other mediums such as films can't really do, yet games might just have a chance of doing one day. His ideas may be way ahead of their time, but they're sound.

Just remember that everything he dreams of probably won't actually make it into his next game and you'll be fine :tup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the dog is a really cool idea. I never did end up playing Fable, but this is making me pumped about the sequel. I've never had a problem with the guy. Hell, in a way I even liked Black and White. It didn't deliver on everything, but it still managed to be a pretty damn solid game. I had fun with it and have fond memories, so the hindsight of "hmm.. that was actually something of a letdown compared to what I'd read" doesn't manage to hurt my opinion of it too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how is this dog different from every other scripted NPC? (well, except that the dog's statemachine is a bit more complete than NPCs usually have).

I've always get the idea that Molyneux is too much focusing on working out certain parts in high detail and neglecting a lot of the other stuff.

For example in Fable, you main character will develop scars on his body over time. Well, interesting idea, but you usually never see the skin because the character is wearing clothes or armor. Besides, you armor isn't affected by the same logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its statemachine is more complete. That's all you need really. It's a smart NPC that will make playing the game more interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whenever Molyneux is involved, you need to have an automatic failsafe system that says: don't expect literally everything or anything to make it into the game in the way you were lead to believe. And you'll be fine. The guy has disappointed me severely in the past, but cynism and an adversity to his delighted rants are not the answer -that's a dead end. Just take it with a grain of salt, know where you stand, and go along for the ride.

for ages now i wanted to rant and rant and rant about emotion in games, and this seems like the perfect time to start. sadly I'm pretty tired, I think I'll just go to bed instead.

Rise and shine! Opportunities for talking about emotion in games are here! Just don't forget to put on your wanking hat ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they can create a bond similar to that between you and your horse (who I’m still convinced is called adolf) in Shadow of the Colossus (which was under emphasised but ever so strong) then this would be a wicked feature in the game. But I fear Moly will be so please with his dog that he couldn't leave the relationship understated and would make it too in your face, I know he talks about not aggravating the player, but I don't trust he has the emotional wisedom not to.

Given his control freak nature and the way he often misses the mark when he tries to introduce emotions in games I wouldn't be surprised if he had Asperger syndrome and his game design was the way he tries to take control of the chaotic world of emotion that he just doesn't understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Molyneux, but his games really do expose that unwarranted focus on a handful of neat touches, seemingly at the expense of a more rewarding whole. Maybe the dog is worth the effort this time, as if it has enough depth, it probably will make the game quite immersive. A few things he says (like the pub door-scratching scene) do sound like wishful thinking or hot air though. And maybe even if they do make it, they will be prime examples of too much fuss over the minutiae of the gameplay.

That sounds incredibly cynical. But my main reservation about it all is along the lines of what Ginger wrote - he's doggedly trying to distil 'emotion' into a formula like "dog sidekick + family + world reacting = emotion". I don't know if those games he praised in the Gamespot video had 'wow moments' in their design document like that either.

I haven't paid much attention to this game but I like that it seems to have moved more into the age of muskets and carriages and highways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its statemachine is more complete. That's all you need really. It's a smart NPC that will make playing the game more interesting.

Well, if it's nothing more than a statemachine it mostlikely won't have any emotion. All paths are predetermained, so it's nothing more than the love/hate scale similar to, for example, the light/dark-side stuff in the starwars games. If you want the characters to develop emotional scars you'll have to do more than a statemachine. The dog looks more like a normal NPC (with very nice animations) that listens to simple commands.

But the bigger question would still be if it's wasted effort. It's all fun at stuff, but I rather have 3 NPC that combined have the same work effort than 1 NPC with this effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, I'm curious what your gripe is with what Molyneux said here, Thunderpeel?

I love [sir] Peter Molyneux, he's a genius, but, after what happened to the last Fable!

If I have mentioned any feature in the past which, for whatever reason, didn't make it as I described into Fable, I apologise. Every feature I have ever talked about WAS in development, but not all made it.

I have come to realise that I should not talk about features too early so I am considering not talking about games as early as I do. This will mean that the Lionhead games will not be known about as early as they are, but I think this is the more industry standard.

Our job as the Lionhead family of studios is to be as ambitious as we possibly can. But although we jump up and down in glee about the fabulous concepts and features we're working on, I will not mention them to the outside world until we've implemented and tested them, and they are a reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only really even became aware of his whole hyping thing a few years ago around Fable's release. Before that I still had a great respect for him and indeed loved playing the likes of Theme Park a decade earlier, which was one of my all-time favourites and was indeed superb. I also loved Black & White.

He's not just hit legend status by talking bollocks over a few recent years Yufster; he developed the majority of his fans by actually releasing (and programming, in earlier years) great games.

So uh, to summarise, most people like Peter Molyneux because he's done a lot of fucking good stuff throughout his career regardless of the disappointments his recent hyping has caused. And his hyping of recent years has only really hit the mainstream media because he became so well respected before that; if it were just some random cock who's never made any great games at Crytek nobody'd care. :fart:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So uh, to summarise, most people like Peter Molyneux because he's done a lot of fucking good stuff throughout his career regardless of the disappointments his recent hyping has caused.

And yet John Romero doesn't get the same kind of love ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, what a pile of poo Daikatana was :oldman:

I also loved Black & White.

That was a truly brilliant game in my opinion. I remember I rushed out and bought it on my birthday. Though on reflection I would always hate having listened to the hype leading up to it's release, I'd always fall in love with the game whilst playing it. Evidence his incessant hyping does more damage than good.

I guess hatred towards Peter is from a jealousy standpoint. I'm not suggesting 'you' (or myself for that matter) are truly jealous, I don't know how better else to word it (!), but he's not saying or doing anything particularly ground breaking and this rightly irks people when he is put up on the pedestal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I'd say I loved Sir Him per se, but I certainly loves me the Lionhead in general. Every game they release, I play it and nothing but it until I beat it. Well, I try anyway. I sucked at Black & White when it came out so it took a while before I was able to beat it. B&W2 I beat in a week, and I played the crap out of The Movies. And I've beaten Fable about 4 times. Twice on the Box and twice on the PC.

I dunno. I love 'em all. But then again, I don't read previews or interviews as a general rule, so I'm not set up to be ticked that he didn't include awesome sounding idea X or really neat feature Y. I just take them as provided and love 'em to death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry to have a fascist little rant but I hate that people all worship Molyneux when really he is just an arrogant twatty bastard who likes to talk... And he's also boring... and not a genius... I don't get what all the fuss is about...

Ummm... Syndicate? Theme Park? Oh and he invented the god-sim with Populous. He also doesn't come across as arrogant during interviews, so I'm not sure where you get that opinion from (unless I've been reading the wrong interviews). He's actually one of the few people who seems interested in pushing the medium of video games forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree, every video I've seen of him being interviewed/grilled has shown him as a calm and passionate person -- certainly not arrogant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Molyneux is fine, whatever (I have played and enjoyed some of the games he's worked on), I don't like him but he's fine... I just agree with the original post which is that he needs to shut the hell up.

I think he gets way more recognition and fame and knighthoods than he deserves. You want games to be more emotional? Games have had emotion and stuff for years... I've cried during certain parts of certain games, I've become attached to characters... look at the example Ginger already gave... Adolf ¬¬ ...

...but now Peter Molyneux is saying it, everybody is sitting up and taking notice and saying "Oh wow yeah great idea! Why didn't WE think of that? Gosh darn that man is a total GENIUS!"

And that grates on my nerves. I wish he'd either shut up, or people would stop hanging onto his every word like it's gospel...

Which I suppose is sort of like jealousy... why can't I be famous for talking about conceptual bullshit and whatnot? I can talk more bullshit than Peter Molyneux any day of the week. ;(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've cried during certain parts of certain games, I've become attached to characters...

lol women :rolleyes:

I think Molyneux is alright, it's good that he's passionate and excited about the games he wants to make. If he wasn't, they'd probably be shit.

Also it's good to have characters like him in the industry, I'd rather laugh at the rantings of a complete nutter than listen to some boring twat that has no charisma at all.

Until I read this thread I thought everyone liked Pete. :shifty:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now