Fable 2 video presentation

[MrWonderstuff]

Gamespot are hosting a video Peter Molyneux's presentation of Fable 2, concentrating mainly on your sidekick canine. However, he also provides a glimpse of the world itself at the end.

Gamespot link (http://uk.gamespot.com/pages/video_player/popup.php?sid=6167105&pid=927246)

He does go on a bit on the introduction but its well worth the bearing with.

[MasterEvilAce]

Oh my god, that guy is mind-numbingly BORING. He talks like there's all this emotion and thought behind what he's saying, but he just doesn't present it that way. I watched about 6 minutes of the beginning.. then skipped ahead, and it was the same thing :( Couldn't stand it.

[taza]

He does go on a bit on the introduction but its well worth the bearing with.
I had to watch this twice because the first time I passed out during the intro. "Mind-numbingly boring" doesn't even begin to describe this guy. He sounds like a complete ass, he's condescending, and quite franly I'm beginning to hate him. I really really hate him.

[Itchyeyes]

Yeah, I skipped the first half. You kind of have to keep in mind that this is GDC. This stuff really isn't meant for gamers to be watching. Developers are the intended audience. That said, it gets better once he starts showing the game. The last 5 min or so are probably the most interesting.

[Mr.Green]

I beg to differ. It was very interesting. You have to understand that it's an interview on game development, not a CG-filled game trailer.

The guy at Gamespot who put that annoying music, for lack of a better term, in the background should be drowned in vinegar, though. Nothing less.

[MrWonderstuff]

The guy at Gamespot who put that annoying music, for lack of a better term, in the background should be drowned in vinegar, though. Nothing less.

Yea it was really annoying. How did he not realise that it was crap?

[snugglebearofdeath]

You guys are all CRAZY! Apparently you haven't heard of Molyneux's newest genius idea/revolutionary game innovation:

You actually get to watch paint dry in REAL F#@*ING TIME!!!

Can someone please get some kibbles or something and lead Molyneux back from the place he has wandered off to that has apparently devoured every ounce of his talent?

[Vandenh]

So snugglebearofdeath, how many great games have you made?

Thought so... STFU please.

[Mr.Green]

Don't be too hard on snugglebearofdeath, Vandenh. At least the guy's honest. Look at his sig... ;)

[Klade]

I wasn't expecting a real time trailer with CG graphics. I was expecting an interview that showed off some early development features of a game. An interview like I have seen hundreds of times before from other developers. What I got was one of the most random and rambling sets of dialog ever released to the internet. I mean he played ketch with the dog and walked down a road to fight some bad guys. That took him 20 minutes? I could sum up everything he said in 3 minutes and not missed any substantive part of the game.

[snugglebearofdeath]

So snugglebearofdeath, how many great games have you made?

Thought so... STFU please.

Just play them, Vandenh. But I'm glad to see you took Molyneux's d*ck out of your mouth long enough to defend his good name.

Good games should be lauded as such. Same goes for boring gameplay demo's.

[snugglebearofdeath]

*er, I mean "innovations".

[Chalex]

I wonder if the sucking sound he makes at the end of every god damn sentence is supposed to be a hint of how this game is going to turn out, and honestly, could he be any more apathetic about his own fucking game?

[motor]

The guy's a charlatan, pure and simple. The dog thing is as old as RPG's. I'm sure his research involve playing Fate, a game made by one guy using the wild tangent engine, seeing how completely supperior it was to his $15 million dollar POS and copying everything from it he can. The really sad thing is how rich microsoft made him when they bought his company.

[MrWonderstuff]

Come on Snuggle didnt the dog sorta make you going 'awww'? Admit it, the doggy made you feel all warm and cosy inside.

[Itchyeyes]

The guy at Gamespot who put that annoying music, for lack of a better term, in the background should be drowned in vinegar, though. Nothing less.
Agreed. They did the same thing with the Bioware interview while simply interspersing it with Mass Effect footage from last year's GDC to make it seem longer. Really annoying.

[snugglebearofdeath]

I wonder if the sucking sound he makes at the end of every god damn sentence is supposed to be a hint of how this game is going to turn out, and honestly, could he be any more apathetic about his own fucking game?

Careful Chalex. Apparently you have to have made "great games" in order to have a negative opinion of this game at this point. Regardless of how boring Molyneaux is set on describing it.

Come on Snuggle didnt the dog sorta make you going 'awww'? Admit it, the doggy made you feel all warm and cosy inside.

Did he shoot the dog to put it out it's misery of being in this game?

[Mdot23]

I thought it was pretty cool. No need to hate on the guy, he's passionate about what he does. I liked the dog element. Sure, it was slow paced and boring at spots, but it was a good view of what they're trying to accomplish with that element of the game.

[Lekon]

As a Speech instructor: Good god Peter. Show the game, let the game speak for itself. The more you analyze, the more people like the above posters tune out.

That being said, I'm sure for some game developers, the long talks about other games being bad ideas to take concepts from was probably semi-well received. And whoever put that metroid 8-bit looping music needs to be shot. Ugh.

However. The dog is a neat idea, as is the home ownership, and the "Piles o gold I can run my fingers through." If thats in, Neat! However, Peter's Track Record on Features named, then features actually brought in is not the best.

Optimism? Sure. Guarded like Fort Knox? Indeed.

But, Its still one I'm now looking forward to. It and Hellgate.

[MrWonderstuff]

Did he shoot the dog to put it out it's misery of being in this game?

Sort of, but he's a crap shot and missed.

[Mr.Green]

Show the game, let the game speak for itself. The more you analyze, the more people like the above posters tune out.
Yeah. Lowest common denominator ftw.

[MrWonderstuff]

Apparently you have to have made "great games" in order to have a negative opinion of this game at this point.

I reckon if you have played the game then you are right to have an opinion either way. If you havent then um...whats your point again? ZZZZZzzz.

[Lekon]

Yeah. Lowest common denominator ftw.


Very much so. Start with the lowest to get them smiling like goofs, and keep them sitting still so you can start talking to the adults.

That being said, well, he was going for a Developer Conference chat, so that maaaaaay have gone over well with them. Plus, I doubt they had that *@#( music.

[KingGorilla]

As a Speech instructor: Good god Peter. Show the game, let the game speak for itself. The more you analyze, the more people like the above posters tune out.

That being said, I'm sure for some game developers, the long talks about other games being bad ideas to take concepts from was probably semi-well received. And whoever put that metroid 8-bit looping music needs to be shot. Ugh.

However. The dog is a neat idea, as is the home ownership, and the "Piles o gold I can run my fingers through." If thats in, Neat! However, Peter's Track Record on Features named, then features actually brought in is not the best.

Optimism? Sure. Guarded like Fort Knox? Indeed.

But, Its still one I'm now looking forward to. It and Hellgate.
Ummm...it was not a game demo, it was an Artificial Intelligence demo. And of all people in the induystry, Molyneux is probaly the foremost expert on AI. And I have to say, once again if Peter can pull it off, the idea of making a more accurate AI for a dog is indeed a different approach. For the LAST TIME, GDC is NOT E3, it is for developers and industry people to talk shop.

[Xerxes]

The guy at Gamespot who put that annoying music, for lack of a better term, in the background should be drowned in vinegar, though. Nothing less.
Blades and lemon juice. That shit was annoying. I was not liking how he can't hold his head up in that video. But I'd actually would love to listen from more of Peter. I also read Gamasutra's article with Warren Spector. I was more interested in what they had to say than Miyamoto.

[Grifter]

Hello, welcome to game faqs where our posters have the attention span of crack addicted four year olds and the IQ of lobotomized monkeys.


What the hell is happening to this place?

Just to help some of the children understand, this guy has created quite a few of the most innovative, fun and original games in the history of our industry. Without people like Peter this industry would never have gotten as far as it has. I think a little respect is in order.


The guy at Gamespot who put that annoying music, for lack of a better term, in the background should be drowned in vinegar, though. Nothing less.

At first I thought it was place holder music in the game because I didn't think it was possible to intentional add something so atrocious to a video after the fact. It actually pissed me off and made it much more difficult to enjoy the video. I recommend checking out IGNs stream. Little bit better presentation (peters not as nervous) and no shitty music.

[snugglebearofdeath]

Yeah. Lowest common denominator ftw.

Now, now Mr.Green. I'm just playing.

Seriously, I was very excited about this game - innitially. But the more that's revealed about the game the more I'm reminded that, for me personally, Molyneux is spending too much time on his ideas, like always, that never really seem to make it into the game (the way he originally intended is what he usually seems to say). Molyneaux has always made solid games but his self touted innovations never seem to bring much 'fun' to the game itself.

Again, that's just my opinion.

[Xerxes]

Hello, welcome to game faqs where our posters have the attention span of crack addicted four year olds and the IQ of lobotomized monkeys.


What the hell is happening to this place?

I blame fits and the free prizes. :rolleyes:

[Chalex]

Just to help some of the children understand, this guy has created quite a few of the most innovative, fun and original games in the history of our industry.
The first Fable was none of those things, and lasted about 6 hours to boot.

[Johan]

The first Fable was none of those things, and lasted about 6 hours to boot.

Not if you waited for Lost Chapters...then it was about 7! :D

[snugglebearofdeath]

Not if you waited for Lost Chapters...then it was about 7! :D

You both are forgetting Fable's big innovation and selling point - your character aged/changed over time. Didn't that make the 7 hours of gameplay seem much longer if not more enjoyable?

Other rpg's (Nights of the Old Republic jumps to mind) have done the 'character changes based on choices' thing with what I found to be more fun and engaging results.

[Boris]

Man, what happened to this guy Molyneaux? He used to make awesome games like Populous and Syndicate (games that are more fun than most of the shooter and RPG trash that sells these days). Now he's talking about "unconditional love" for a digital labrador as if it's groundbreaking gameplay.

Just pull your head out of your arse and make a sequel to Populous for fucks sake, Molyneaux!

[snugglebearofdeath]

Man, what happened to this guy Molyneaux? He used to make awesome games like Populous and Syndicate (games that are more fun than most of the shooter trash that sells these days). Now he's talking about "unconditional love" for a digital labrador as if it's groundbreaking gameplay.

Just take your head out of your arse and make a sequel to Populous for fucks sake, Molyneaux!

Exactly! Those games were (still are) incredible. That was my whole point from the beginning. He seems to have gone off on some strange (to me) tangent in recent years of creating something he feels brings something extra to the table in terms of gameplay and immersion that does zilch for me in terms of gameplay and overall enjoyment of the game. MHO.

[Mason]

Peter isn't wrong about much of anything, but his ideas just aren't as innovative as he seems to believe. As mentioned, Ico and SotC (and HL2:Ep1?) already showed how to form an emotional bond with an AI partner. Most importantly, those games made the relationships so meaningful by the absence of intricate mechanics.

Ico didn't let you bring Yorda food to make her like you more, and you couldn't switch to directly controlling her actions in order to navigate more intricate dual-progression puzzles. While these things would traditionally be thought of as adding much-needed gameplay depth, in truth they would've ruined the player's sense of connection to this strange, ethereal companion.

Western RPGs tend to err on the side of adding more and more game mechanics to mediate every single interaction, including most social interaction (alignment, social skills, fame, influence based on dialog choices, &c.). This just doesn't work very well in practice; recall Fable's emote-your-way-into-love, or Oblivion's social mini-game? For all their complexity, they sure weren't very meaningful.

Molyneux seems to want the right thing, and hopefully he can pull it off.

[snugglebearofdeath]

Peter isn't wrong about much of anything, but his ideas just aren't as innovative as he seems to believe. As mentioned, Ico and SotC (and HL2:Ep1?) already showed how to form an emotional bond with an AI partner. Most importantly, those games made the relationships so meaningful by the absence of intricate mechanics.

Ico didn't let you bring Yorda food to make her like you more, and you couldn't switch to directly controlling her actions in order to navigate more intricate dual-progression puzzles. While these things would traditionally be thought of as adding much-needed gameplay depth, in truth they would've ruined the player's sense of connection to this strange, ethereal companion.

Western RPGs tend to err on the side of adding more and more game mechanics to mediate every single interaction, including most social interaction (alignment, social skills, fame, influence based on dialog choices, &c.). This just doesn't work very well in practice; recall Fable's emote-your-way-into-love, or Oblivion's social mini-game? For all their complexity, they sure weren't very meaningful.

Molyneux seems to want the right thing, and hopefully he can pull it off.

Very well said.

[Itchyeyes]

Man, what happened to this guy Molyneaux? He used to make awesome games like Populous and Syndicate (games that are more fun than most of the shooter and RPG trash that sells these days). Now he's talking about "unconditional love" for a digital labrador as if it's groundbreaking gameplay.

Just pull your head out of your arse and make a sequel to Populous for fucks sake, Molyneaux!
He's already made two sequels to Populous. He probably just doesn't want to spend his entire career working on the same damn series.

I actually have a lot of respect for Molyneaux. You kind of have to know how to listen to him and take his words with a grain of salt. When he uses a phrase like "you will be able to do this" or "the game is going to let you do this", he's not really talking about how the game will necessarily turn out.

People get upset when the game doesn't turn out like he said because the thought it was some sort of a promise; but what he's really talking about is his original vision for the game and how he would like to see it work. It's a rare thing indeed when a game turns out exactly as the developer envisioned it from the beginning. As gamers, we just don't realize all of the ideas that have been stripped away by the time we see most games because there aren't a lot of developers out there who are willing to let the public in on a project that early on in its development (probably because they don't want the kind of backlash Molyneaux gets).

[Xerxes]

Exactly! Those games were (still are) incredible. That was my whole point from the beginning. He seems to have gone off on some strange (to me) tangent in recent years of creating something he feels brings something extra to the table in terms of gameplay and immersion that does zilch for me in terms of gameplay and overall enjoyment of the game. MHO.
See, what he forgets is people like you by trying to class the joint up. The people who will try to kick the dog and take shots at it. Am I mistaken about you planned abuse if such a game was to come across your doorsteps.

An attempt to get emotion in games is also an attempt at trying to make video games a more justified interactive story-telling medium. Books, movies, TV, music, plays, all gain some sort of emotional response. Other games have it in moments, why can't he try to make it a consistent thing through out the game?

Thing is you can't make every player feel anything cause in a some cases they could care less. This in some cases gets you games where you are too limited, FF games come to mind. Then their are games like Crackdown. You can do whatever the hell you want; they didn't even waste time attempting a story. Just some slapped on narration. Good job agent.

[MaiXu]

This man needs to shut the fuck up and show his goddamn game. He's promising to show me love and making me feel things in games I've never felt before, but once again, it's all talk, and I'm not seeing much to really believe it.

He's so enamored with his own "features," like getting to play as a woman and allowing people to have kids in the game ... considering how pointless and stupid the social aspect of the first Fable were, I can't help but think all this promising is another load of shit. I'll believe this family dynamic stuff being worth a damn as much as "kids running around with your haircut" in the first Fable. If it happened, I didn't notice, or care.

"We've spent a huge amount of time on the blending, the animation ..." Says volumes. A lot of time on animation and looks, and less time on the actual game. Brilliant.

He keeps telling me "there's real gameplay there," but I don't buy it. Put your money where you mouth is, and stop overhyping your shit once again.

[Rafer]

"We've spent a huge amount of time on the blending, the animation ..." Says volumes. A lot of time on animation and looks, and less time on the actual game. Brilliant.

I wish more games would make that compromise. Playing Zelda:TP I kept thinking it would of been better if it was shorter and they spent more time getting the horse animations right. Epona felt like a lifeless robot compared to SotC's Agro. Same with Oblivion, amazing game but riding a horse felt like I was on a damn hovercraft.

[Itchyeyes]

This man needs to shut the fuck up and show his goddamn game. He's promising to show me love and making me feel things in games I've never felt before, but once again, it's all talk, and I'm not seeing much to really believe it.

He's so enamored with his own "features," like getting to play as a woman and allowing people to have kids in the game ... considering how pointless and stupid the social aspect of the first Fable were, I can't help but think all this promising is another load of shit. I'll believe this family dynamic stuff being worth a damn as much as "kids running around with your haircut" in the first Fable. If it happened, I didn't notice, or care.

"We've spent a huge amount of time on the blending, the animation ..." Says volumes. A lot of time on animation and looks, and less time on the actual game. Brilliant.

He keeps telling me "there's real gameplay there," but I don't buy it. Put your money where you mouth is, and stop overhyping your shit once again.
Wow, such animosity. No body forced you to watch the video, did they? And he's not promising you anything. He's talking about a gameplay concept for a game that's still very early in development. This is GDC, that's what they do there. This isn't E3. It's not a venue where they show off flashy new trailers to get all the fanboys excited.

[BigJonno]

I don't think I've ever seen Molyneaux so sober. He's obviously learned from the poster child of over-hyping that was Fable and he looks like he's really struggling to restrain himself.

Lionhead's problem seems to be content. They can put together a truly beautiful, entertaining game that is user friendly and lots of fun to play. They have staggering attention to detail and put in all kinds of groovy, innovative little features. They just fail to make the body of the game meaty enough (Fable) or they miss some godawful level design (Black & White.)

[Xerxes]

Ok that's it, no more press at GDC.

[snugglebearofdeath]

See, what he forgets is people like you by trying to class the joint up. The people who will try to kick the dog and take shots at it. Am I mistaken about you planned abuse if such a game was to come across your doorsteps.

An attempt to get emotion in games is also an attempt at trying to make video games a more justified interactive story-telling medium. Books, movies, TV, music, plays, all gain some sort of emotional response. Other games have it in moments, why can't he try to make it a consistent thing through out the game?

Thing is you can't make every player feel anything cause in a some cases they could care less. This in some cases gets you games where you are too limited, FF games come to mind. Then their are games like Crackdown. You can do whatever the hell you want; they didn't even waste time attempting a story. Just some slapped on narration. Good job agent.

LOL - you couldn't be more mistaken. What have I said that would even lead you to believe that I would enjoy mistreating a 'virtual dog'?

I am saying that his more recent games, and recent gameplay innovations, do not interest, involve or entertain me. In fact I find his recent innovations very bland and boring.

How many hours do you honestly think you will spend with Fable 2 saying to yourself: "Man, this interaction I'm having with this dog is what makes this game!" More likely, you'll enjoy the novelty (which Molyneux has spent years on mind you) for 15 minutes before pushing it to the back of your mind in order to focus on other aspects of the game.

[MaiXu]

Wow, such animosity. No body forced you to watch the video, did they? And he's not promising you anything. He's talking about a gameplay concept for a game that's still very early in development. This is GDC, that's what they do there. This isn't E3. It's not a venue where they show off flashy new trailers to get all the fanboys excited.

Please. He's talking to reporters with video cameras, he's mic'ed up for fuck's sake. He knows anyone who follows gaming is going to hear these promises. I'm not expecting a "flashy trailer" as so many suggest, but I do expect actual demonstrations of his babble, which he did not provide. He showed me, between endless streams of promises, AI that looked no more advanced than the dog's AI in The Bard's Tale. He fetched a ball, he humbled on cue, he attacked an enemy, he limped back. Beyond the really cute "greeting" animation (which is just that, an animation), I didn't see anything to be excited about.

While I admit my first post was rather venemous, it's only because Molyneaux always talks about great ideas and then never shows them. He had thirty goddamn minutes to show me something to make me believe what he's saying, and he didn't show me anything! And consdiering how overpromised and underdelievered the first Fable was, I just feel like he's digging himself and his project another hole to climb out of.

And re: a focus on animation over gameplay, I gotta say that Zelda has both in spades. Sure, Epona isn't the most realistic horse, but some of the characters in the game feel like something out of a Disney movie. Compare Link's animations to the protagonist of SotC, and I feel they're about equal. Some minor characters in the game have more personality in their look and their animations than protagonists in other games have, period. And the humanity Nintendo's animators instilled in even the most minor characters brings a charm (for me) that few games have matched.

But I'm only just now looking for parts of some scattered mirror, so I (hopefully) still have far to go in this game.

[Xerxes]

LOL - you couldn't be more mistaken. What have I said that would even lead you to believe that I would enjoy mistreating a 'virtual dog'?

I am saying that his more recent games, and recent gameplay innovations, do not interest, involve or entertain me. In fact I find his recent innovations very bland and boring.

How many hours do you honestly think you will spend with Fable 2 saying to yourself: "Man, this interaction I'm having with this dog is what makes this game!" More likely, you'll enjoy the novelty (which Molyneux has spent years on mind you) for 15 minutes before pushing it to the back of your mind in order to focus on other aspects of the game.

Compared to your pet in WoW, that doesn't limp or cry out when being beat on it's an improvement. I think Animal AI is a nice thing to work on. I think NPCs could be a bit smarter. Funny how he forgot people praised and feared you in the first game though.

I myself want more powers and ways to mix them up. My favorite parts in Fable where about hulking out, using shadow swords to fight for me and lightening folks up. <shrug>

[motor]

Very much so. Start with the lowest to get them smiling like goofs, and keep them sitting still so you can start talking to the adults.

That being said, well, he was going for a Developer Conference chat, so that maaaaaay have gone over well with them. Plus, I doubt they had that *@#( music.

Most developers have a very low opinion of Molyneux. He uses the GDC to advertise his next game instead of talking about process or what people can learn. Technically, Fable was awful. The art direction rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. And he ascribes behavior to his AI systems taht are ridiculous. Some of the things he said about what was going on with the creature AI in Black and White still makes my blood boil ("See how the creature is throwing that guy over the wall, he's actually trying to build stairs so he can climb over it."). Ugh.

[CaptStu]

This thread hurts my eyes. Yes, the video was long and somewhat slow. Yes, the crappy music made my ears bleed. But, yes. It was also very interesting to see a man have pride in what he does and yearn for all things better. I played maybe 15 minutes of the first Fable. I couldn't get into it, but his new-found excitement gets me excited about the game's next iteration. I don't know what it is about this site lately, but ugh ... Too much crap talk.

[Xerxes]

Most developers have a very low opinion of Molyneux.
When did that happen?

[Samael]

Sounds like he's going to kill the dog at the end and wants the player to be vested before then.

The stuff about making the dog absolutely never annoy you is important if it works. I don't know of anyone that hasn't finished Ico without deliberately walking away to leave the moron of a girl to her fate. For me it broke the response he describes he felt at the end of the story.

Having completely AI controlled sidekicks seems important for story telling, most of the people that got attached to star wars: republic commando seemed to for that reason and that was very minimal.

[snugglebearofdeath]

Compared to your pet in WoW, that doesn't limp or cry out when being beat on it's an improvement. I think Animal AI is a nice thing to work on. I think NPCs could be a bit smarter. Funny how he forgot people praised and feared you in the first game though.

I myself want more powers and ways to mix them up. My favorite parts in Fable where about hulking out, using shadow swords to fight for me and lightening folks up. <shrug>


Then you and I see pretty much eye to eye.

For all these other people who think the time and money being invested in these silly-assed, trivial, mind numbing novelties Molyneux is attempting to pass off as some kind of revolutionary innovation needs to line up so I can punch them in the neck.

That's right people! I'm handing out neck punches for your inability to see that Peter Molyneux needs a G*d D*mn intervention for this silly shit! We'll all just give him a big o' hug and tell him how much we love and value his talents. Come back to us Peter, come back.

The man is spending YEARS on this stuff people! YEARS! He is better and more talented than this (or maybe he is thrilled by the mundane)!

*edit: Don't get me wrong. I think creating emotion and an attachment to characters to be extremely important and makes a game much better if implemented correctly. Molyneux strives for this but God bless him he sucks at it.

[motor]

Ummm...it was not a game demo, it was an Artificial Intelligence demo. And of all people in the induystry, Molyneux is probaly the foremost expert on AI. And I have to say, once again if Peter can pull it off, the idea of making a more accurate AI for a dog is indeed a different approach. For the LAST TIME, GDC is NOT E3, it is for developers and industry people to talk shop.

Are you in the industry? Because just about everyone I know of who works on AI thinks he is one of the biggest jokes in the industry. As I said before, the lies he was telling people about what was happening with the creature AI in Black and White are unforgivable. He would let people watch the game and the take advantage of people's desire to anthropomorphize actions and then claim that the AI was drastically more advanced then it actually was. It was a low point in PR whoring.

[Boris]

Yeah, I agree. His recent contributions have been so trite and boring. I feel sorry for the poor guy that had to sit through Molyneax's waffling design meetings and implement that dog love game mechanic.

Besides, dog love in games has been done before - Nintendogs, Rule of Rose etc...



LOL - you couldn't be more mistaken. What have I said that would even lead you to believe that I would enjoy mistreating a 'virtual dog'?

I am saying that his more recent games, and recent gameplay innovations, do not interest, involve or entertain me. In fact I find his recent innovations very bland and boring.

How many hours do you honestly think you will spend with Fable 2 saying to yourself: "Man, this interaction I'm having with this dog is what makes this game!" More likely, you'll enjoy the novelty (which Molyneux has spent years on mind you) for 15 minutes before pushing it to the back of your mind in order to focus on other aspects of the game.

[motor]

When did that happen?

After Black and White.

[MrWonderstuff]

Fable was a wonderful game, full of charm and humour. You lot are cynical old gits. :-P

[BigJonno]

Technically, Fable was awful. The art direction rubbed a lot of people the wrong way.

People without a frickin' soul! Fable is one of the most beautiful games of all time and the art direction was superb. Just looking at the buildings in that video invoke the same sense of dark fairytale whimsy that pervaded the original.

Having now watched the whole video, I just can't believe how cynical you miserable lot are. Sure, we've all learned to take Molyneaux with a pinch of salt, but how any RPG fan could fail to get excited about the concepts he talks about is beyond me. The whole idea of a world that you can thoroughly immerse yourself in and make your mark on and that actually reacts to you has got to be one of the Holy Grails of RPG design. I'm just glad that someone is actually passionately pursuing this goal rather than churning out another Diablo-esque clickfest.

[Mr.Green]

Are you in the industry? Because just about everyone I know of who works on AI thinks he is one of the biggest jokes in the inustry.
Yeah, and I'm the queen of England. Nobody buys your shit so stop trying to give your opinions weight by posing as some kind of insider because all you do is make people roll their eyes up to the back of their heads. Have a nice day, buddy.

[opusdeath]

Sure the guy has a certain manner which puts people off but I think the actual game is sounding interesting. I actually enjoyed the Gamespot videos.

[wezlypipz]

Bunch of angry people here. I don't care who designs the games as long as they're good. Bottom-line is that Fable was a great game, but it was too short. If Fable 2 is more of the same, but better graphics and longer, than I'm all in.

This interview is boring and I only watched it to get an idea of the game, looks like I thought it would, and that's fine by me.

[motor]

Yeah, and I'm the queen of England. Nobody buys your shit so stop trying to give your opinions weight by posing as some kind of insider because all you do is make people roll their eyes up to the back of their heads. Have a nice day, buddy.

I'm not trying to add weight to my opinion because I'm a game developer. The post I was responding to was saying, "People in the game industry respect this guy." I was responding by saying, "I work in the industry, I know lots of people in the industry, and we don't". I wasn't saying, "I work in the industry so my opinion counts for more" I was correcting a factual error. It is not true that people who develop games think that Molyneux is some kind of AI genius (the whole thing is kind of ridiculous because he hasn't written code in years).

BTW, although I'm not comfortable letting people know who I am, if you are very interested and would promise not to make the information public, I'd be happy to send you an e-mail from work.

[megaman]

I also read Gamasutra's article with Warren Spector. I was more interested in what they had to say than Miyamoto.

On that note wasn't he supposed to reveal a bit more of the game he's working on at gdc? Any news on that front?

[Itchyeyes]

People without a frickin' soul! Fable is one of the most beautiful games of all time and the art direction was superb. Just looking at the buildings in that video invoke the same sense of dark fairytale whimsy that pervaded the original.
Yeah, for all of its shortcomings, Fable was a gorgeous game. I get really annoyed by people who look down on any game that doesn't strive to have the most lifelike graphics possible. Games like Fable, Okami, Wind Waker, and Viva Pinata get almost no appreciation for the artistry that goes into crafting those worlds.

[Mr. Lake]

After watching that video all the way through... twice... I'm sold. The rest of you who are seriously afflicted by A.D.H.D. should take some Ritalin and watch again. I honestly think that for a lot of people this idea will work. The question is how much effort and how much time has already been (or is going to be) spent on making these features work in most situations, and account for most player's habits - in addition to managing the world ecconomy, scaling AI, metering NPC interaction, and coming up with enough new or compelling gimmicks to keep the player engaged. If Lionhead can stay focused and not settle for "good enough" on any of their feature items, it may very well be ONE OF the best RPGs to date. Of course, that's MHO. I regard FFVII, Secret of Mana, and Fable: Lost Chapters to be some of the best RPGs I've ever played - mostly because I can't stand turn-based combat or obscenely convoluted skill management. That, and I'm not a patient person. It sounds interesting, so I'm in.

[tombofsoldier]

Oh my god, that guy is mind-numbingly BORING. He talks like there's all this emotion and thought behind what he's saying, but he just doesn't present it that way. I watched about 6 minutes of the beginning.. then skipped ahead, and it was the same thing :( Couldn't stand it.

I know what you're saying. I still enjoyed the presentation, but Molyneux just seemed sort of nervous and distracted. I thinks that's because he got berated by his PR guys about Fable. If you watch his presentations from earlier years he's really excited and entertaining.

[Xerxes]

Then you and I see pretty much eye to eye.

Oh gawd no... :confused:

After Black and White.
Are you in the industry? Are these just your feelings or is this some sort of inside joke? I mean I never read anything about Molyneux being a joke. :o

[motor]

Oh gawd no... :confused:


Are you in the industry? Are these just your feelings or is this some sort of inside joke? I mean I never read anything about Molyneux being a joke. :o

Yes, going on 8 years now. And of course, I'm talking about industry gossip. No one is going to write an article in game developer about why Molyneux is a joke! Probably the single biggest point is when he gave a presentation that was actually a commercial for Black and White 2 at GDC a few years ago. Everyone who did AI was grumbling about the stuff he was claiming in the presentation and the stuff he claimed was going on in the first Black and White. That's the most wide-spread hate of him I've seen. But we have an industry night here in Seattle once a month and people talk. Plus my office has a lot of people and the game industry is very fluid so people are moving jobs all the time. I think I can say the feeling is pretty prevalent. Not that we obsess over him or anything. But his claims about Black and White rubbed many people the wrong way and people will mention it when Black and White comes up in conversation (primarily people who work on game AI).

[Xerxes]

On that note wasn't he supposed to reveal a bit more of the game he's working on at gdc? Any news on that front?
In the article I read here (http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20070305/sheffield_01.shtml), he still seemed tight lipped.

Gamasutra got my hopes all up with this part, "Houston-based studio Junction Point" but everything I see still has Austin all over the place.

[tombofsoldier]

P.S. Someone ban Snugglebearofdeath please. I think this is the first time anyone on the internet has acted stupid enough to piss me off. I can understand why people didn't like Fable, or why people are skeptical about Fable 2. But can someone shut this idiot up?

[Xerxes]

P.S. Someone ban Snugglebearofdeath please. I think this is the first time anyone on the internet has acted stupid enough to piss me off. I can understand why people didn't like Fable, or why people are skeptical about Fable 2. But can someone shut this idiot up?

Maybe a good logical debate. There was no debate team or class at any school I went to. I solve all my problems with obscene amounts of profanity or ignore people. So I'm out. :rolleyes:

[motor]

P.S. Someone ban Snugglebearofdeath please. I think this is the first time anyone on the internet has acted stupid enough to piss me off. I can understand why people didn't like Fable, or why people are skeptical about Fable 2. But can someone shut this idiot up?

I'm not tring to say this in any kind of insulting way, but what is he saying that is so bad? He thinks that this huge innovation (a dog) is something that people will play with for 15 minutes before they start noticing that they have to manage it and it just starts getting in the way. Whether you agree or not it strikes me as not nearly the worse thing I've read here even today.

[Xerxes]

I'm not tring to say this in any kind of insulting way, but what is he saying that is so bad? He thinks that this huge innovation (a dog) is something that people will play with for 15 minutes before they start noticing that they have to manage it and it just starts getting in the way. Whether you agree or not it strikes me as not nearly the worse thing I've read here even today.

Motor, did you not see that the dog is basically ignorable. It's more useful than something in the way. He will kill and eat his own food. So there is no pleasing it. No micromanagement.

[Hugenex]

Too lazy to read all the coments... Bards Tale for consoles that came out a couple of years ago had a side kick dog that traveled around with the hero. So Peter you are biting ideas.

[motor]

Motor, did you not see that the dog is basically ignorable. It's more useful than something in the way. He will kill and eat his own food. So there is no pleasing it. No micromanagement.

You're right I was going off on a tangent (although I am really nervous that some dog management will creep in). I was also speaking out of turn for Snugglebearofdeath. His point (and I hope to be more accurate this time) was: They are spending all this time on soemthing that most people will look at for 15 minutes and then not care about. I just don't see how that is such a terrible thing to say.

I think I'm getting dangerously close to picking a fight and that's not my intention, I was just wonder what Snugglebearofdeath said that made you so mad.

[motor]

Too lazy to read all the coments... Bards Tale for consoles that came out a couple of years ago had a side kick dog that traveled around with the hero. So Peter you are biting ideas.

So did moria (action text rpg) and Fate (wildtangent action rpg - which is very good btw).

[Lekon]

Too lazy to read all the coments... Bards Tale for consoles that came out a couple of years ago had a side kick dog that traveled around with the hero. So Peter you are biting ideas.

Not only did Bards Tale have a doggie, but the doggie died about 1/4th through the game in a horrible way... then came back from the dead and followed you around still, as a semi transparent puppy. Creepy.

[Hugenex]

Yeah that sure was creepy and fuck did i feel sad about the dog.

[Fyd]

boring video and i think hes gay

[KingGorilla]

LOL - you couldn't be more mistaken. What have I said that would even lead you to believe that I would enjoy mistreating a 'virtual dog'?

I am saying that his more recent games, and recent gameplay innovations, do not interest, involve or entertain me. In fact I find his recent innovations very bland and boring.

How many hours do you honestly think you will spend with Fable 2 saying to yourself: "Man, this interaction I'm having with this dog is what makes this game!" More likely, you'll enjoy the novelty (which Molyneux has spent years on mind you) for 15 minutes before pushing it to the back of your mind in order to focus on other aspects of the game.
Did you watch it or read any information or hear a podcast on the dog mechanic? He said you could choose NOT to use the dog if you wished.

[Mr. Lake]

I know what you're saying. I still enjoyed the presentation, but Molyneux just seemed sort of nervous and distracted.
I think it's a little more obvious from the video that he's really sick... cold or flu. He looks exhausted. Someone get that man a cup of chicken soup!!!

[EvoG]

With all due respect to motor (giving you the benefit of the doubt...you dont need to send me an email), I too have been in the industry now for, shit, 10 years, and to be perfectly honest, I have NEVER heard of anyone deriding Molyneux, let alone there being some sort of concensus that he's a "joke" in the industry. I'm certain there ARE people that have issue with him, but thats case by case at best. Now I'd never propose that I'm on the 'pulse of developers' simply because I'm one of them, but most of my friends now are spread all over the industry, and while we dont sit around talking about Peter Molyneux, if and when it does come up, there's nothing but respect for someone who dreams big, genuinely loves games and has made substantial strides in game development in his rather long career.

Perhaps there is a younger generation that fills the mills at various larger studios, so their perspective may only go as far back AS Black and White and Fable, but thats certainly not representative of veteran developers who grew up playing Peters games.


...and btw...has ANYONE made it to the end of the video? I seem to be the only one who noticed that he shows parts of the actual realtime gameworld, and Bowerstone looks absolutely incredible. On top of that, finally he's offering substantial incentives to purchasing property, other than 'earning rent' or whatnot, stating that each thing you buy will come with at least one quest attached. Now thats awesome.

[Xerxes]

I think I'm getting dangerously close to picking a fight and that's not my intention, I was just wonder what Snugglebearofdeath said that made you so mad.

No worries. I am just defending one of my game developing heroes. I probably have some of the worst if people don't like Molyneux. I know they don't like Itagaki. Doubt many would knock Yu Suzuki though. :rolleyes:

[HotCod]

The idea of being able to buy everything, having quests and so on linked to each building and how you can become 'king' of a place by buying the whole town (or some such) is a really very good one and is one i've wanted to see in games for a long time. If it is actaly like that in the game then i'm sold on that alone. The dog might also prove intresting, and the whole idea of a faimly if done well could prove to be also be cool... they both could also be awful and annoing but we'll just have to wait untill we find out. The ideas them selfs i think are intresting and are going places i think rpgs really need to start to move in to more and more...

[Xerxes]

...and btw...has ANYONE made it to the end of the video? I seem to be the only one who noticed that he shows parts of the actual realtime gameworld, and Bowerstone looks absolutely incredible. On top of that, finally he's offering substantial incentives to purchasing property, other than 'earning rent' or whatnot, stating that each thing you buy will come with at least one quest attached. Now thats awesome.

What would have really made this the cat meow in my book is voice commands. Hell I put that damn headset on for no reason some times. It's damn near second nature. Like in GR games I really don't think it needs to be limited to just online play. I'm not hating the dog.

The quest with every building is kind of tripping me out though. WoW has bastardize my idea of quest as late but I don't want to go kill 10 chickens to appease the ghost in my house or anything silly. Or each quest is like go to city hall to do something with the deed. <shrug>

[motor]

With all due respect to motor (giving you the benefit of the doubt...you dont need to send me an email), I too have been in the industry now for, shit, 10 years, and to be perfectly honest, I have NEVER heard of anyone deriding Molyneux, let alone there being some sort of concensus that he's a "joke" in the industry. I'm certain there ARE people that have issue with him, but thats case by case at best. Now I'd never propose that I'm on the 'pulse of developers' simply because I'm one of them, but most of my friends now are spread all over the industry, and while we dont sit around talking about Peter Molyneux, if and when it does come up, there's nothing but respect for someone who dreams big, genuinely loves games and has made substantial strides in game development in his rather long career.

Perhaps there is a younger generation that fills the mills at various larger studios, so their perspective may only go as far back AS Black and White and Fable, but thats certainly not representative of veteran developers who grew up playing Peters games.


...and btw...has ANYONE made it to the end of the video? I seem to be the only one who noticed that he shows parts of the actual realtime gameworld, and Bowerstone looks absolutely incredible. On top of that, finally he's offering substantial incentives to purchasing property, other than 'earning rent' or whatnot, stating that each thing you buy will come with at least one quest attached. Now thats awesome.

I totally agree the Populous, magic carpet and Syndicate are great great great games. But listen to how apologetic the man is now, he knows has really stepped over the line with the stuff he has said to the press. The false promises of feature not in his games, the claims of whats going on under the hood. I think you can make a really stong argument that his last four games (that's what ten years!) have been at best disappointments (either critically or commercially or both) [Black and White 1 and 2, Fable and The Movies].

As for the game looking great. I think your looking at it through xbox eyes. It looks fantastic for a xbox title, for a year 3 360 title? I'd give it a solid 7. Especially considering he is first party now and he is only making it for one platform and he has more money then god to develop it.

[Mr. Lake]

...I too have been in the industry now for, shit, 10 years...

First rule of being in the industry is YOU DON'T TALK ABOUT BEING IN THE INDUSTRY.

[motor]

First rule of being in the industry is YOU DON'T TALK ABOUT BEING IN THE INDUSTRY.

That's actually one of the things I've always liked about EA, I get the feeling there are a lot of industry people here. I frankly like to hear from people in the industry with some anonymity that the newsgroups provide.

[workerbee]

Peter Molyneux mentioned opening the doors to Hell, and I can easily imagine a room full of snugglebears on the other side. It's no wonder its hard to engage a community of end-users

[EvoG]

I totally agree the Populous, magic carpet and Syndicate are great great great games. But listen to how apologetic the man is now, he knows has really stepped over the line with the stuff he has said to the press. The false promises of feature not in his games, the claims of whats going on under the hood. I think you can make a really stong argument that his last four games (that's what ten years!) have been at best disappointments (either critically or commercially or both) [Black and White 1 and 2, Fable and The Movies].

Hmm, I agree that I too was disappointed with Fable, but only because of "Project Ego". That aside though, Fable in and of itself is a great game...there's nothing at all wrong with it. If you want to just talk numbers, it did great both critcally AND commercially, so really, Fable isn't a good measure of his 'failure'. Regardless of his promises, which he apologized for (name any other developers that do that), I understood where those promises came from. Does he sound like the guy that wanted to "lie" and "deceive", or does he sound like the guy who sincerely wanted all those things he talked about, but couldn't have them?

As for Black and White, I liked them both a lot. Those are some techincally amazing and complex games, and they DID do what they intended, it was just a bit rough around the edges. I loved training my avatar, watching his behavior evolve, but then again tech demos are fun for me. :D

The Movies? It was just boring, but I dont consider that a failure, since as a game, its perfectly good. Lots of people make movies with it and for that Sims crowd, I bet its a blast.

As for the game looking great. I think your looking at it through xbox eyes. It looks fantastic for a xbox title, for a year 3 360 title? I'd give it a solid 7. Especially considering he is first party now and he is only making it for one platform and he has more money then god to develop it.

But didn't you see the last few minutes when he showed Bowerstone? If thats where they're at now, a year out, I'm not the least be concerned about the final quality. I appears they're going open-world as well, which makes that even more beautiful. Mind you, I'm not referring to the dog-demo at all, since you just take that for what it is, not a graphics demo. Then again, I'm more of a style over glitz any day...as much as those recently released tech demos for the CryEngine made me cry, not everything needs to be Gears or GRAW 2 to look beautiful...and honestly, you think Xbox can push Bowerstone as shown?

[Xerxes]

Peter Molyneux mentioned opening the doors to Hell, and I can easily imagine a room full of snugglebears on the other side. It's no wonder its hard to engage a community of end-users

It pretty much sounds like them wanting shit that's just asinine.

[EvoG]

First rule of being in the industry is YOU DON'T TALK ABOUT BEING IN THE INDUSTRY.

Bah, I'm trying to break out of this anonymity shell to be honest. Then again, I tend to talk a bit of shit when I dont like something I see, and I dont need to be burning bridges senselessy over an opinion. Unfortunately people in this industry have REALLY thin skin considering we're all creatives, and artists are bitches. :D

[Zeal]

Wow, it sounded to me like he had no idea what he wanted to do with Fable 2.

He also essentially admitted that Fable sucked. Considering I had no expectations, I actually liked the game quite a bit, though.

[EvoG]

What would have really made this the cat meow in my book is voice commands. Hell I put that damn headset on for no reason some times. It's damn near second nature. Like in GR games I really don't think it needs to be limited to just online play. I'm not hating the dog.

Oh no doubt...that would be amazing...but doesn't Dogs do this but to only some success? I tell ya, my guys in R6 BARELY did what I asked so... :)


The quest with every building is kind of tripping me out though. WoW has bastardize my idea of quest as late but I don't want to go kill 10 chickens to appease the ghost in my house or anything silly. Or each quest is like go to city hall to do something with the deed. <shrug>

Sure, but dont be surprised if they are derivatives of such. As much as I would want it, I dont expect each and every property to have an extensive and interesting story...then again who knows...I'd rather think they will be. :D

[Zeal]

OK, I just realized that this guy sounds like he is entirely on drugs. What the fuck is he talking bout????

No, seriously, he's slurring his speech, slinging his arms around, and his eyes are rolled back into his head.

[Itchyeyes]

As for the game looking great. I think your looking at it through xbox eyes. It looks fantastic for a xbox title, for a year 3 360 title? I'd give it a solid 7. Especially considering he is first party now and he is only making it for one platform and he has more money then god to develop it.
Don't you think it's a little early to be judging the games looks? This game probably still has 1.5 to 2 years of development left. The dog looked pretty good, even by Xbox 360 standards. Bowerstone looked excellent, there was tons of detail in the buildings and the streets. The character model and the demo area looked average for 360 visuals, not great but average. Again though it has a long way to go, so I'm not going to get down on the game just because it didn't look fantastic in that demo.

[Zeal]

It's impossible to discuss the graphics at this point. That didn't even look like an alpha.

[motor]

Hmm, I agree that I too was disappointed with Fable, but only because of "Project Ego". That aside though, Fable in and of itself is a great game...there's nothing at all wrong with it. If you want to just talk numbers, it did great both critcally AND commercially, so really, Fable isn't a good measure of his 'failure'. Regardless of his promises, which he apologized for (name any other developers that do that), I understood where those promises came from. Does he sound like the guy that wanted to "lie" and "deceive", or does he sound like the guy who sincerely wanted all those things he talked about, but couldn't have them?

As for Black and White, I liked them both a lot. Those are some techincally amazing and complex games, and they DID do what they intended, it was just a bit rough around the edges. I loved training my avatar, watching his behavior evolve, but then again tech demos are fun for me. :D

The Movies? It was just boring, but I dont consider that a failure, since as a game, its perfectly good. Lots of people make movies with it and for that Sims crowd, I bet its a blast.



But didn't you see the last few minutes when he showed Bowerstone? If thats where they're at now, a year out, I'm not the least be concerned about the final quality. I appears they're going open-world as well, which makes that even more beautiful. Mind you, I'm not referring to the dog-demo at all, since you just take that for what it is, not a graphics demo. Then again, I'm more of a style over glitz any day...as much as those recently released tech demos for the CryEngine made me cry, not everything needs to be Gears or GRAW 2 to look beautiful...and honestly, you think Xbox can push Bowerstone as shown?

Well, getting into our opinions on particular games is tough because there isn't much to really debate.

The Movies was obviously a failure, it is not widely used for Machima (the sims is still used much more) and it did not sell very well.

Black and white 2 has a gamerankings rating of 76 and it did not sell well. Considering the amount of money spent developing it, I think it can be called a failure.

The first black and white got a gamerankings of 89, which is very good, so I think I'm going against the grain with my belief tht a large number of those reviewers did not actually play the game for more then a few hours. I think the game is completely boring after the first two hours. My main beef with the game and with Molyneux is the stuff he told the press about what was going on with the creature AI. Like I said, it made my blood boil, and the other ai people I've talked to did not like what he was saying either. I guess the most charitable thing to say about it he go wrapped up in the moment and made a lot of ridiculous claims about the AI system.

As for Fable, I also listened to a lot of the project ego stuff so it was a disappointment to me. When someone cringes because you have a "I'm bad" flag set on your character, that does not mean you are simulating the feelings wants and desires of a whole world (tm). I also think, and this is very inside baseball, that the only reason that Fable did as well as it did was because of it's launch in relation to Halo 2 and the cross marketing that Microsoft did.

As for Fable 2, and the graphics, I don't think they are bad (7 is not bad), but frankly it's not that hard to push a lot of static geometry anymore. If the demo had two hundred people walking around I would have been a hell of a lot more impressed. And yes, I think an xbox can easily push that much static geometry around.

Look, I should probably back off some, I really dislike Molyneux for the AI claims he made about Black and White. And that has probably filtered what I've heard from other developers. But the people I have talked to (especially at GDC after the Black and White 2 presentation) about it seem to be in agreement. And I think everyone can agree (especially Molyneux) that he really shot his mouth off about Fable and it damaged his reputation.

[EvoG]

Fine, I guess my perspective is that when you've been in this industry long enough, odds are you'll have walked in other mens shoes, and I wouldn't put myself above someone else, let alone someone who's accomplished a HELL of a lot more than I have.

That and I judge a developer by their career, not just their last game, like a lot of people like to bullshit on about. There's just no disputing he's talented and he's sincere, period. When the alternative is a company like EA, or a PR mouth-off session by some dick suits with insincere smiles, I'll take someone who makes a few mistakes because he tried something new over the iterations of last years games with a new coat of paint...and no that does not include Fable 2.

[silv]

I watched the whole thing and liked it. It's quite obviously directed at game developers, and it was pretty off-the-cuff. He quite clearly isn't a very charismatic speaker, but he is a game developer not a politician.

I also didn't sense any real boasting about Fable 2. He seemed excited, and when you put so much of yourself into something it is only natural to be excited and proud. If you put 2 years into something and are NOT totally sold, what are you doing with your life?

Anyway, I enjoyed it, and my heart cringed watching the poor dog struggle back to the guy. Maybe it's because I've seen my own dog sick with Lyme's disease and it made my heart break. I'm a sucker for dogs.

[Disgustipated]

Well, getting into our opinions on particular games is tough because there isn't much to really debate.

The Movies was obviously a failure, it is not widely used for Machima (the sims is still used much more) and it did not sell very well.

Black and white 2 has a gamerankings rating of 76 and it did not sell well. Considering the amount of money spent developing it, I think it can be called a failure.

The first black and white got a gamerankings of 89, which is very good, so I think I'm going against the grain with my belief tht a large number of those reviewers did not actually play the game for more then a few hours. I think the game is completely boring after the first two hours. My main beef with the game and with Molyneux is the stuff he told the press about what was going on with the creature AI. Like I said, it made my blood boil, and the other ai people I've talked to did not like what he was saying either. I guess the most charitable thing to say about it he go wrapped up in the moment and made a lot of ridiculous claims about the AI system.

As for Fable, I also listened to a lot of the project ego stuff so it was a disappointment to me. When someone cringes because you have a "I'm bad" flag set on your character, that does not mean you are simulating the feelings wants and desires of a whole world (tm). I also think, and this is very inside baseball, that the only reason that Fable did as well as it did was because of it's launch in relation to Halo 2 and the cross marketing that Microsoft did.

As for Fable 2, and the graphics, I don't think they are bad (7 is not bad), but frankly it's not that hard to push a lot of static geometry anymore. If the demo had two hundred people walking around I would have been a hell of a lot more impressed. And yes, I think an xbox can easily push that much static geometry around.

Look, I should probably back off some, I really dislike Molyneux for the AI claims he made about Black and White. And that has probably filtered what I've heard from other developers. But the people I have talked to (especially at GDC after the Black and White 2 presentation) about it seem to be in agreement. And I think everyone can agree (especially Molyneux) that he really shot his mouth off about Fable and it damaged his reputation.

Black & White 2 was a HUGE improvement over BW1, and the graphics are still fucking awesome. It's a great game, I hated BW1 a week after I bought it, but BW2 is still cool...

Fable: The Lost Chapters was awesome, great game. Just too short and not deep enough.

All of that being said, I think Fable 2 has a good chance to be pretty damn good.

[MacD]

I just have to chime in on Molyneux and AI. First off, nowadays Molyneux is a producer/ideas man. As pointed out, he hasn't coded (afaik) for a while now, and I do agree that when he coded himself, his games were better. Still, you can't call his games bad by any stretch of the imagination. They have solid art and coding, few if any showstopping bugs, are fun to play (if you know what you're getting yourself into...go into Fable believing all the hype and you will be disapointed...but that's with any game) and most importantly they make money.

But the AI work in B&W is not a joke. What his coders did there was awesome. It was a practicle example of machine learning in a virtual environment. Not just machine learning, but practical skillsets within that environment. What was done in that game had not been done in any game up until then, not to that level and certainly not to that scope.
If modern gamedevs dont like him, I think there's a couple of reasons:
-they're too young and have no idea what he and his team did. Some people build on previous work without any knowledge of where it comes from.
-they're jealous star-wannebe's who wished they'd done that, and are now nitpicking on some of the more outlandish stuff which Lionhead wanted in there but didn't make it
-they have no idea what really is going on under the hood.

Fact is, the "AI people" (btw, no-one calls him/herself that. AI is a long unused term, at least in acedemic circles, as it is in gamedev circles, from what I read...although they do try and achieve agents which resemble AI) I talk to (well, ok, the one :)) as well as those at uni (a few more) are still quite impressed with the realtime agent implemented in B&W. It's still being trotted out in classes to show the successes and pittfalls of such fuzzy statemachines. They just wish they had sourcecode :)

-edit-
Just gotta add that to me, Molyneux functions kinda like a think tank for the games industry. A lot of his ideas are stole^H^H^Hreused in other games, and I bet MS is using him that way too. Sure, some of the ideas may suck, some aren't implementable (yet), but some are classic.

[Mr. Lake]

The thing is, a lot of people are looking at the body of work one person has done and making assumptions that this new work will be similiar to expectations and revelations of previous work. It's just unfair and wrong and that sort of judgement should be reserved until it ships. Of course, the opinions of most people in forums concerning games who have never worked on one lack a certain credence and shouldn't garner the attention they do... but it still hurts our feelings.

I'm just remembering when Gray Matter (R.I.P.) was chosen to do the mission pack for COD and everyone bitched and moaned about how we were going to ruin the game and add zombies to it just because the previous title RTCW had zombies in it (which BTW, you can blame Id for that nonsense). Of course, COD:UO came out and nearly everyone loved it... especially the multiplayer. No one thought the studio could pull it off because of expectations based on previous titles. So, I'm totally going to give Molyneux the benefit of doubt and see what sort of rabbit he can pull out of his hat.

[Jack B]

I didn't play the original Fable, but I like the directrion of Fable 2. Although, Molyneaux comes across more like an academic from PBS than a hip DJ for MTV, the substance of what he was saying is more important to me than the style. I've watched both PBS and MTV. I can deal with it.

Anyway, back to the content. I agree with Molyneaux. Tons of games have stories. Even Gears of War had a story... Getting you to really care about a character and/or even (should I even go there) cry while playing a game is a big step up from just playing a game with a story. He's an idealist and even if he doesn't pull it off, someone will. I like what he's trying to do.

We've had threads on EvAv about whether you've ever cried during a game. Very few have. I never have, but I've been moved by many movies. I'd like to see the same connected emotional feeling in a game.

I've seen lots of pets in games. The last one was the bird in Prey. I've never seen one yet, that looked as good and acted as well as that crazy dog. We'll see how it holds up in the game, but I was very intrigued.

As for the rest of it. I've seen RPG's since the days of Bard's Tale and they all have stories. Often, quite stupid ones. I want to see if Molyneaux can make me care about this dog and/or my kids in the game. If I could care a little bit about my Pinata's, then maybe he can pull it off. I'm willing to give him a chance.

Sorry to interupt the bashing of his boring, quirky intellectual PBS style delivery. Continue your bashing, but I'm hoping Fable 2 pulls this off. We'll see.

[Lunar Blue]

I for one enjoyed the presentation apart from the horrible music. Not that there was a lot to show but i just can't help but admire his enthusiasm. You can tell how much the man enjoys showing you this stuff. If he really succeeds into making this all into game, it will be a great one. I actually felt bad when he ran away from the dog, so maybe we get to experience stuff in games we haven't before. Instead of drinking the haterade, I'm really looking forward to this.

A lot of people seem to just outright hate Molyneux but i have always liked him. What you have to realize is this guy is not a corporate mouthpiece who is knowingly bullshitting you, but a visionary and a dreamer. He knows that he overpromises and you can tell that he is holding back nowadays because he realizes that a lot of people get pissed of when a lot of the stuff doesn't make it in the game. But who gives a shit, his games are always fresh in at least some aspects and you know what, they are pretty good too. No offence to you motor, but that's something different from 95% of game developers. Most of the games (today at least) are uninnovative and downright shit. I don't hesitate to say that all of his games have pushed the boundaries of our beloved industry. Do games like Popolous, Syndicate, Theme motherfucking Park and Dungeon Keeper ring the bell? This guy has been a huge influence to this business and that alone gives him the priviledge to bullshit me from dawn to dusk. I really want to see that stupid motherfucker who thinks Peter Molyneux is a joke and then slap him upside the head and encourage them to take their own life in the most brutal way possible.

If you fell for all the promises he made with Fable and B&W, too bad for you. I didn't and i was content with what he delivered. Peace ;)

[BigJonno]

I want to know where this thing about B&W's AI being bullshit comes from. I followed the game very closely and, although I have some issues with the game, I remember it doing exactly what it said it would do. I even used it to answer a computer science exam question. My problem with the game was the level design, the fact that it took away your creature just as you were getting into the swing of things. It killed the game for me.

[motor]

Fine, I guess my perspective is that when you've been in this industry long enough, odds are you'll have walked in other mens shoes, and I wouldn't put myself above someone else, let alone someone who's accomplished a HELL of a lot more than I have.

That and I judge a developer by their career, not just their last game, like a lot of people like to bullshit on about. There's just no disputing he's talented and he's sincere, period. When the alternative is a company like EA, or a PR mouth-off session by some dick suits with insincere smiles, I'll take someone who makes a few mistakes because he tried something new over the iterations of last years games with a new coat of paint...and no that does not include Fable 2.

You're missing my whole point. I think that he has really failed in his last four games, not just his last one.

As for the EA approach, I agree the year plus one is kind of boring. But I think that the mark of a really successful designer is to not go too crazy. Take a game that exists, pretty much copy it and polish the hell out of it, and add one new big innovation. Don't try to do so many new things that you do none of them well. This seems like a trap he has fallen into time and time again over the last decade.

Edit: Just to continue on this, I think Gears of War is a great example. They took the standard shooter, polished the hell out of it and added the cover system. I think from a design standpoint that is exactly right. One big innovation, and worked it into the whole game in a non-gimmicky way. I see something like Gears having a much bigger impact on future games in the shooter genre then something like Fable has in the rpg genre. And I think that's exactly the way it should be.

[motor]

I just have to chime in on Molyneux and AI. First off, nowadays Molyneux is a producer/ideas man. As pointed out, he hasn't coded (afaik) for a while now, and I do agree that when he coded himself, his games were better. Still, you can't call his games bad by any stretch of the imagination. They have solid art and coding, few if any showstopping bugs, are fun to play (if you know what you're getting yourself into...go into Fable believing all the hype and you will be disapointed...but that's with any game) and most importantly they make money.

But the AI work in B&W is not a joke. What his coders did there was awesome. It was a practicle example of machine learning in a virtual environment. Not just machine learning, but practical skillsets within that environment. What was done in that game had not been done in any game up until then, not to that level and certainly not to that scope.
If modern gamedevs dont like him, I think there's a couple of reasons:
-they're too young and have no idea what he and his team did. Some people build on previous work without any knowledge of where it comes from.
-they're jealous star-wannebe's who wished they'd done that, and are now nitpicking on some of the more outlandish stuff which Lionhead wanted in there but didn't make it
-they have no idea what really is going on under the hood.

Fact is, the "AI people" (btw, no-one calls him/herself that. AI is a long unused term, at least in acedemic circles, as it is in gamedev circles, from what I read...although they do try and achieve agents which resemble AI) I talk to (well, ok, the one :)) as well as those at uni (a few more) are still quite impressed with the realtime agent implemented in B&W. It's still being trotted out in classes to show the successes and pittfalls of such fuzzy statemachines. They just wish they had sourcecode :)

-edit-
Just gotta add that to me, Molyneux functions kinda like a think tank for the games industry. A lot of his ideas are stole^H^H^Hreused in other games, and I bet MS is using him that way too. Sure, some of the ideas may suck, some aren't implementable (yet), but some are classic.

Hmm...Weird, just everyone I know who does AI in games says, "I do AI in games." I'll have to send an email to the 100 game developers that wrote articles for "AI game programming wisdom" (volumes 1 - 3) and tell them their book is incorrectly titled...

I guess this gets to the problem of having a long e-mail thread. I never said that his AI system was terrible (the lead AI programmer wrote a very good article about the design in game developer magazine that was very widely read), what I was saying is that Molyneux would demo the AI system to journalist and people, being people, would see the creature behavior and ascribe much deeper motivations to it then actually existed. Molyneux would then feed that anthropomorphization. Here's a great example, in GTA you will occasionally see people of the opposite sex walking together. Some people seeing that will say, "Hey, there's a couple going down the street." No, it's just random, generate enough random people walking in certain directions and every once and a while you'll get two people of opposite sex walking in the same direction next to each other. The game does not have a dating simulator. But it is very common for people to want to put meaning into situations they see, it's part of the social predicition on each other that we've been doing for thousands of years.

Even in this video there's a very Molynuex moment when he's talking about the house buy and he starts going off about how they have modeled the whole economy. Really? Or do they have two lines of code that make houses randomly vary in price slowly over time. It's fine to trick people, I mean hell, that's half of what game ai is all about, but I don't think it's fine to say you're doing something that you aren't. And yes, I don't know what he has actually done with the economy fable 2, maybe he has wasted the manpower of putting a developer on writing an economic simuation for half a man year. I'm trying to illustrate a point.

[EvoG]

You're missing my whole point.

I'm trying to illustrate a point.

I'm thrilled you value your opinion so highly. :)

Believe it or not, your point is not terribly difficult to grasp. What you're encountering is 'disagreement', and thats all.

As for your thoughts on iterative design based on derivation is not new, and I dont find it valuable. You are correct...that is the safest route for a developer to choose, and it does work from time to time, but its not the end all be all to game development, and is actually NOT the mark of a successful designer, just a good designer that knows to work formula. A successful designer is one that thinks outside the box, is not afraid to take chances and from time to time does get it right.

In other words there are tons of great basketball players in the NBA, but only one Jordan(no I dont equate Molyneux to Jordan), and he said that he failed over and over again in life, and thats why he succeeded. There's a reason why we have tons of game designers in the industry, but only very few we all recognize, and respect, by name.

And just to note, I dont mean to sound antagonistic in this post, but I got the impression you weren't interested really in what we had to say, only that you wanted to make your point again and again, and that isn't valuable either when your point was clear many posts back...you think Molyneux is a terrible failure. I respect that, I just disagree with your measure of this.

[theguido]

I'm going to avoid listening to Molyneux regarding his games so that maybe, just maybe I have a chance to like them again.

It's possible I would have liked Fable if PM hadn't been spewing his nonsense for many, many months beforehand.

If I had gone in expecting a short RPG on rails with very cosmetic choices available to you, then maybe I would have enjoyed it more. But, as it was I truly, deeply disliked it, and the only chance I'll have of enjoying Fable 2 is if I just don't listen to him.

[motor]

I'm thrilled you value your opinion so highly. :)

Believe it or not, your point is not terribly difficult to grasp. What you're encountering is 'disagreement', and thats all.

As for your thoughts on iterative design based on derivation is not new, and I dont find it valuable. You are correct...that is the safest route for a developer to choose, and it does work from time to time, but its not the end all be all to game development, and is actually NOT the mark of a successful designer, just a good designer that knows to work formula. A successful designer is one that thinks outside the box, is not afraid to take chances and from time to time does get it right.

In other words there are tons of great basketball players in the NBA, but only one Jordan(no I dont equate Molyneux to Jordan), and he said that he failed over and over again in life, and thats why he succeeded. There's a reason why we have tons of game designers in the industry, but only very few we all recognize, and respect, by name.

And just to note, I dont mean to sound antagonistic in this post, but I got the impression you weren't interested really in what we had to say, only that you wanted to make your point again and again, and that isn't valuable either when your point was clear many posts back...you think Molyneux is a terrible failure. I respect that, I just disagree with your measure of this.

Grumble. I guess I need to quote things line for line.

You said:

I judge a developer by their career, not just their last game

I said in response:

You're missing my whole point. I think that he has really failed in his last four games, not just his last one.

My point is (and when did point become some kind of arrogant term?) I'm not judging him by his last game, I'm judging him by his last decade of output.

And the second time I used the term point was in a completely different context! I was using it to mean "illustrating an example". Because I was sure that someone was going to immediately post, "You haven't seen the source for Fable 2, how do you know it doesn't have a full economics simulator!?!?!"

And yes, your post does seem quite antagonistic. A line like, "As for your thoughts on iterative design based on derivation is not new, and I dont find it valuable." and then a bunch of platitudes that sound like they come from a first year digi-pen student about what makes a great designer is pretty much equivalent to FU. It doesn't really further the debate. I certainly don't think my thoughts on iterative design are new (although I'm not sure if I would call "clone/polish/add one big new feature" iterative, it depends on the big new feature) but I do know they keep my projects from being cancelled. And that "one big new feature" is pretty exciting to work on.

If you want to have a debate, I'm more then happy to oblige. The first thing I need are some definitions and clarifications. Let's continue the Gears of War example. Some designers think that the cover mechanic in Gears is just a tiny design thing and that Gears really is nothing new and doesn't deserve any props. Some designers think the cover mechanic and how it was worked into the level and game design really is something new and innovative (you can probably guess where I stand). What's your opinion?

If we projected Cliff B's designer career from Unreal tournament to Gears to the next 5 games (assuming that each game he makes is about as innovative as the difference between unreal tournament and Gears) he makes before he retires, would you consider him a good designer, or an iterative hack?

Just one more thing, what do you think about God of War? David Jaffe is now a household name. Is God of War a design triumph, or is it just a polished piece of iterative hackery?

Just to note, my weekends are pretty full so I probably won't be able to be super fast in replying.

[Xerxes]

OK, I just realized that this guy sounds like he is entirely on drugs. What the fuck is he talking bout????

No, seriously, he's slurring his speech, slinging his arms around, and his eyes are rolled back into his head.

I see you Zeal. You little attention scamp. :D

EvoG, great basketball analogy. I mean I would probably put Jordan on the exact same pedestals as Dr. J(not above). I was watching some old school shit and it was amazing. Molyneux's name is one to be remembered in the game industry for a good while.

Motor, two lines of code or a half man year of code; if they both accomplish the same goal it really doesn't matter. The player wouldn't notice either way.

[EvoG]

The word isn't what would be arrogant in this case, though I didn't say you were arrogant either...but you do want people 'hear' you.

...and then a bunch of platitudes that sound like they come from a first year digi-pen student about what makes a great designer is pretty much equivalent to FU.

Hmmm, ad hominem? Interesting how now my 'platitudes' have been reduced to simply the ramblings of a student. I see you have a lot of experience with forum discussion tactics...deride and conquer.

Some designers think that the cover mechanic in Gears is just a tiny design thing and that Gears really is nothing new and doesn't deserve any props. Some designers think the cover mechanic and how it was worked into the level and game design really is something new and innovative (you can probably guess where I stand). What's your opinion?

Love Gears. New and innovative? Not in the least. What makes Gears work so well is its execution of the designs and attention to detail. A game doesn't need to 'innovate' to be excellent. As for designers thinking the cover system is 'innovative', let alone new, need to play Kill.Switch, or perhaps even GRAW 1. Gears just made it sexy as hell.


If we projected Cliff B's designer career from Unreal tournament to Gears to the next 5 games (assuming that each game he makes is about as innovative as the difference between unreal tournament and Gears) he makes before he retires, would you consider him a good designer, or an iterative hack?

A good designer, but not in the upper echelon of brilliant designers. Mind you I'm not talking about someone who is talented...there are lots of talented people, just like there are lots of talented athletes, but there are very few superstars.

Then again, isn't it rather ironic if we bothered to 'project' Cliff's career, when in fact if we projected Molyneux's career starting with his third game (Powermonger) in 1990, we'd see four excellent games followed by 4 controversial games, three of which score 85 - 90% in rankings. So its rather meaningless, to judge Cliffy's future as a designer based on his past success if we can't judge Peter's future on his past successes?


Just one more thing, what do you think about God of War? David Jaffe is now a household name. Is God of War a design triumph, or is it just a polished piece of iterative hackery?

Love God of War. Same as with Gears, what makes it brilliant is its design execution and attention to detail. It brings nothing new to the genre, but it does the genre justice and then some.

I dont expect Cliff nor Jaffe to break their backs trying to do something really new, which isn't a bad thing at all, but thats exactly my angle of discussion with Molyneux. He doesn't want to do iterations, he wants to try new things. What I was hoping my Jordan comment would have accomplished was to impress upon you that Molyneux's "failures" don't easily equate to a "joke" in the industry. I'd take someone who has a better chance of giving me a new experience over someone who SHOULD be able to give me a great, but older experience. In other words, there is NO reason Jaffe nor Cliffy should have given us anything less that great experiences, simply because of the massive body of work they can reference. They are talented, but they are not extending themselves like Peter does.

I look at Will Wright, and I get excited about Spore. I look at Warren Spector, and I think about how I grew up with that name since Ultima 7, to Ultima Underworld to the original System Shock to Thief and Deus Ex. I think of Irrational Games and Ken Levine, who are brilliant creatives, with System Shock 2 being my most favorite game. I look at Richard Garriott and Lorne Lanning for storytelling brilliance...

I could perhaps go on, but I have my cavalcade of industry people that I really admire and respect. Some, if not all, have failed from time to time, yet that does not diminish their history of remarkable creativity. Molyneux is in this list, if not at the top, and this is not only because of his history of game making, but his genuine love of games.

Anyway, its just funny how someone, who's past decade of games(which includes Dungeon Keeper, 1997) again all garned 85 - 93% review rankings, could ever be considered a "joke" or failure. Perspective is a beautiful word.

[EvoG]

EvoG, great basketball analogy. I mean I would probably put Jordan on the exact same pedestals as Dr. J(not above). I was watching some old school shit and it was amazing. Molyneux's name is one to be remembered in the game industry for a good while.

Hmmm, Jordans all around game? Not above Dr. J? Come on now, you're playing with dangerous danger here! :D

But...if you want to go by statistics, Jordan has the easy win. (http://www.nba.com/history/players/jordan_bio.html) God I miss watching him play. :(


Motor, two lines of code or a half man year of code; if they both accomplish the same goal it really doesn't matter. The player wouldn't notice either way.

Exactly, and besides, Peter was referring to the world economy, not just 'property' economy. Its difficult to balance, but not difficult to create.

[Xerxes]

I look at Will Wright, and I get excited about Spore. I look at Warren Spector, and I think about how I grew up with that name since Ultima 7, to Ultima Underworld to the original System Shock to Thief and Deus Ex. I think of Irrational Games and Ken Levine, who are brilliant creatives, with System Shock 2 being my most favorite game. I look at Richard Garriott and Lorne Lanning for storytelling brilliance...

How many developers aspire to put there name in those ranks?

[EvoG]

How many developers aspire to put there name in those ranks?


You know, thats a great question. For many, its a job, not a passion.

[Xerxes]

Hmmm, Jordans all around game? Not above Dr. J? Come on now, you're playing with dangerous danger here! :D

But...if you want to go by statistics, Jordan has the easy win. (http://www.nba.com/history/players/jordan_bio.html) God I miss watching him play. :(

And he's from Chi-town ladies and gentlemen... ;)

[Xerxes]

You know, thats a great question. For many, its a job, not a passion.

To answer my own question, I do; So bad it hurts. But I'll have to keep on grinding because that's the way the game is played. :(

[EvoG]

And he's from Chi-town ladies and gentlemen... ;)

Haha...no doubt there's bias!

BUT! I implore you fine people...the stats dont lie! :D

[EvoG]

To answer my own question, I do; So bad it hurts. But I'll have to keep on grinding because that's the way the game is played. :(

Well to be honest, I do as well. Not for the sake of simply aspiring to such company, but for the exact reasons why they aspired. There's a point in your life where you feel so strongly about something that it never can escape you, and games have been that since my 2600. I feel very fortunate to be where I'm at and am excited about it every day.

As for the grind...I feel ya, but I'm on an up swing currently with a kick ass project, so its a good grind. :D

[Xerxes]

Well to be honest, I do as well. Not for the sake of simply aspiring to such company, but for the exact reasons why they aspired. There's a point in your life where you feel so strongly about something that it never can escape you, and games have been that since my 2600. I feel very fortunate to be where I'm at and am excited about it every day.

As for the grind...I feel ya, but I'm on an up swing currently with a kick ass project, so its a good grind. :D

For the love of the medium and interactive storytelling(even storytelling alone).

[BigJonno]

I think one of the biggest failures of this industry is that games like Fable don't have a bigger influence. What is the point of striving to innovate, to try something new, if no-one carries on your work? Even when ideas are taken from innovative games, they are often the wrong ones. Look at GTA, it was only last year, with Bully, that anyone decided to emulate the gameplay, rather than the setting.

[Montgomery_Python]

Weren't those games made by the same company?

[BigJonno]

Weren't those games made by the same company?

Different development teams, same publisher, but I think the connection makes it worse.

[Jack B]

I saw the videos on gametrailers today. They just showed the dog parts without all the slow paced intro stuff. The also only showed Peter once when pointing at the screen, so they really cut to chase so to speak.

Anyway, I was surprised to see the gametrailers scores of 8.4 to 9.1 (very high scores for gametrailers videos) for the 3 parts of the Fable 2 dog clips. Condensing 1/2 hour into 6 minutes seemed to work wonders for peoples opinions.

After reading all the negative stuff here, I was wondering if anyone cared. Apparently, the content was very well received, it was just the 1/2 hour worth of delivery, that caused many people to cough up a hairball.

[KingGorilla]

Something that is freaking me out. MS buys Bungie and suddenly they become the Halo House...Lionhead gets bought, and I am afraid it will become the Fable House. I know Peter and a lot of the programmers would quit and form a new company with him(they did it after Bullfrog after all) if it came to that. But the MGS strategy of bleeding out really solid IPs is a scary thought. I mean Bungie was pretty sick of Halo and Shooters about a week into Halo 2 development.

[motor]

Hmmm, ad hominem? Interesting how now my 'platitudes' have been reduced to simply the ramblings of a student. I see you have a lot of experience with forum discussion tactics...deride and conquer.


This is a little rich from someone's whose first lines in his last post were:

I'm thrilled you value your opinion so highly.

Believe it or not, your point is not terribly difficult to grasp. What you're encountering is 'disagreement', and thats all.

As for your thoughts on iterative design based on derivation is not new, and I dont find it valuable.


If that's not derision, I'm not sure what is.

I guess my analog to Molyneux would be George Lucas instead of Micheal Jordan. Someone who has spent so much time bragging about future work and failing to deliver (Lucas's comments about episode II being a love story strike some similar uncomfortable feelings as when Molyneux was talking about it both in Fable I and II) that I've just lost most of my respect for him. I don't think I've ever seen someone promise so much before the code hits the plastic. I find it a distasteful cry for attention. I'm all for talking to people after a game is done, especially other technical people at GDC, but what he does is different.

As for you're list of games, it's really interesting. They are all great. System shock II and Half-life are two of the only single-player games I've played multiple times not to see a different outcome (like Kotor, also excellent in my opinion) but just because I enjoyed the activity so much.

For me Gears is the edge case that I throw into the innovative pile. Kill.switch had so many control issues and GRAW I, although great, really didn't emphasize the cover in nearly the same way that Gears did (part of that was because the squad stuff was so much of the emphasis). It also hard because Gears was in development for so long, its hard to know what was copied and what was simultaneously generated designs. We definitely debated about it at work, but I'm always interested in what people think. Other parts of it were a mess (the bad framerate, the non-existent story) and sometimes I think designers are a little jealous at it's success, creditting it just to a pretty engine.

As for God of War, I'm with you, it's kind of the edge case I throw on the non-innovative pile. Smooth as butter, and I think unlike you, I'd be very happy having a carreer when I made 10 God of Wars. But I'm a programmer, so I'd be happy making some games purely for the techical challenge that I'm sure you'd vomit at. I love design as well, and my role right now I get have a big impact on it, so it would be hard to beat except getting to be the creative director of a game.

As for what you and I consider innovative versus iterative, I think on that front we might really disagree. Taking a game like System shock II, I see that as falling squarely in what I would call "iterative", take one game (quake), copy the hell out of it, and add one big thing (a lite RPG). This is putting the excellent story aspect aside, but as great as those are (good stories) to be part of, the best story in the world doesn't strike me as an innovation. You might disagree, there are a number of designers who would much rather be screenwriters and for them a great story is much more important then anything else.

In fact, on that list I'm not sure if there is anything that I don't see as taking a pre-existing idea, polishing the hell out of it and adding one big feature. The one exception to that in your list I think would be thief. The stealth gameplay in thief strikes me as a real change. In part because I credit it with almost a whole new genre (stealth action games). I'm afraid that your initial negative reaction toward me has made you misread what I saying as, "I think Madden 2004 to 2005 is the way to go."

As a counter balance to thief, I really used to like Deus Ex, but looking back on it now I really don't think it is that big of an accomplishment. Trying to do the classes and the multiple solutions thing was interesting, but if you look at how it was done they were all such little branches in the levels. The way that it came out so much more emergently in Oblivion seems much better.

Finally, I mentioned the review scores for his last for games and they were all very high. But we both know that those can be a very tricky thing. You take a game like Halo 2 for example, utterly fantastic review scores, and parts of it definitely deserved it (the xbox live multiplayer is fantastic), but parts of the single-player game were extremely weak, and I think in many ways inferior to the original, but the momentum of a huge title or a huge name can have such an impact on review scores that sometimes they are not a true indicator of quality. I think Fable is a quitesential example of that. Published by a different company without Molyneux's name and I think it would have gotten much much worse scores.

[motor]

You know, thats a great question. For many, its a job, not a passion.

Well, not to get into yet another fight with EvoG, but my experience has been completely opposite. Game development is a hard job given the time you need to put into it and the monetary benefits you get in return. No one goes into it as a job and when it becomes a job very few people stay in for very long after that. Now I've been very lucky to work at really good development companies (working on new IP, lots of time and money to develop), so this might be different where EvoG works. But if you work at a good place, you'll be shocked how everyone is very passionate about games. Everyone is talking about them, designing new ones in their spare time, talking about changes we could make to what we're working on. If you love games like I do, it's a very exciting and energizing environment to work in.

[motor]

I think one of the biggest failures of this industry is that games like Fable don't have a bigger influence. What is the point of striving to innovate, to try something new, if no-one carries on your work? Even when ideas are taken from innovative games, they are often the wrong ones. Look at GTA, it was only last year, with Bully, that anyone decided to emulate the gameplay, rather than the setting.

Really, I'm not trying to be a smartass, but what exactly would you say are those innovations in Fable? I just don't see the there there. To me it was exactly like a pervious poster said, a very linear short RPG with terrible load times that happened all the time (okay I added the last part).

[EvoG]

...I'm not sure what is.

Yes, I believe this indeed is the case.

I noticed you left out the smilie I had included with that little jab I took...why is that?

Otherwise the other two sentences were in fact not derisive; your point was well understood when you said I had "missed it", and I simply said that I disagree with you. The third sentence...well it wasn't anything...what you were saying wasn't valuable to the discussion...no ridiculing there either.

If you feel slighted I'll apologize, as I have no problem with you. We can call a do-over if you like, but you must appreciate how hard it is for programmers and artists to get along. :)




As for everything else you wrote, I can't really argue. Every game on the planet has had to take something from games that preceded it, I don't believe I implied those games on that list were completely unique, but they did expand greatly on the genre. I dont consider the cover system nor the active reload in Gears as an expansion on the genre in any way, but it is THE most polished genre game to date. This the important thing to note; Kill.switch indeed was a so-so experience with so-so execution...but they did do the cover system first. I said that Gears was great due to its incredible execution and again, attention to detail, but that doesn't mean they innovated over Kill.switch...they just did it WAY better.

As for System Shock 2, you have to admit you GREATLY oversimplified what the game is...Quake and just RPG-Lite? Come now...

...and, you're starting to put a few words in my mouth. No I wouldn't consider story alone to be innovative(that kinda doesn't even make sense), BUT, I do consider the way Half-Life delivered story as innovative.



I think its safer to say we disagree about Molyneux and leave it at that, though to have an opinion of course is one thing, and you're entitled to it no doubt, but to state something like "he's a joke in the industry" as fact is REALLY stretching things a bit, and thats why I was compelled to chime in.


Cheers

[EvoG]

Well, not to get into yet another fight with EvoG, but my experience has been completely opposite. Game development is a hard job given the time you need to put into it and the monetary benefits you get in return. No one goes into it as a job and when it becomes a job very few people stay in for very long after that. Now I've been very lucky to work at really good development companies (working on new IP, lots of time and money to develop), so this might be different where EvoG works. But if you work at a good place, you'll be shocked how everyone is very passionate about games. Everyone is talking about them, designing new ones in their spare time, talking about changes we could make to what we're working on. If you love games like I do, it's a very exciting and energizing environment to work in.

Your experience has been completely opposite of what exactly?

I simply stated that many in the industry DO look at it as a job. Has zero to do with me or where I've worked. But, I have encountered MANY developers that rarely even play games...and this is mind-boggling to me. Their excuse is that they're too busy with work. Well yea, and so am I, yet I manage to play practically every game worth playing that comes out...not as a duty, but desire.

I find it hard to believe you've never encountered anyone like this but okie dokie. :)

[snugglebearofdeath]

Sorry I went away for the weekend and missed everyone calling me an idiot (I'm sure this thread is pretty much dead by now anyway).

Thank you, Motor, for being one of the very few who understood my whole point. Maybe I didn't do a good enough job of explaining myself.

These are only my opinions.

I like Molyneux's games. I like his older games much more. I never said I didn't like Fable. I thought it was a good looking, solid (short) game that was overblown by Molyneux. By his own admission he is guilty of doing this. Molyneux talked and talked about how you will age/change throughout the game. He talked of how your actions will affect the way people react to you. While he talked about these features as being the be all end all other developers (Bioware - Nights of the Old Republic) implemented it in a better, more involving manner. And Bioware didn't try to sell this one aspect of their game as a new revolutionary feature - only one of many.

In recent years Molyneux spends too much time on his ideas that really do not enhance the game for me - balanced with how much time went in to them. I'm not saying they are bad. Only that from everything I gather - AND I AM NOT IN THE BUSINESS (now you can discount my opinion since some seem to think you can only have an opinion if you're in the biz) - he seems to dedicate too much time on these "visions" that do not pay off based on the amount of time/money invested. That's it.

Only my opinion. EvAv hasn't gone Provda on me has it?

[KingGorilla]

You spoke ill of Peter Molyneux...but you praised Bioware. I am conflicted...you may yet live through the day.

[BigJonno]

Really, I'm not trying to be a smartass, but what exactly would you say are those innovations in Fable? I just don't see the there there. To me it was exactly like a pervious poster said, a very linear short RPG with terrible load times that happened all the time (okay I added the last part).

Fable was innovative in that they tried new ways to give your actions consequences in a living world. Unfortunately it was either too subtle or disconnected from the rest of the game most of the time. If you just played the game straight through without stopping to play with the world you'd completely miss it. The other problem, which I mentioned before, is that the meat of the game wasn't there. It was short and it was linear, there's no arguing that.

What I like about the dog in Fable 2 is that it has a definite gameplay purpose. It replaces much of the HUD and helps you out in combat. Fantastic, now heap on the stuff about love and playing with your dog as much as you like. It's the same way with the features from Fable that they seem to be expanding on. In Fable you could get married. So what? Now you can get married and have a kid to shape in your image and also has all kinds of gameplay possibilities. In Fable you could own buildings, but all they did was generate rent. In Fable 2 they have quests attached.

This is exactly the right step to take. Actually integrate all the cool little features with the core gameplay. And make it longer. And less linear. :D

[snugglebearofdeath]

Did you watch it or read any information or hear a podcast on the dog mechanic? He said you could choose NOT to use the dog if you wished.

Lol - yeah, sorry about that stretch - just jumps to mind.

To answer your question above - yes. And that, KingGorilla, is my whole point.
How much time/money/blood/sweat/tears do you think Mr. Molyneux has put in to the dog mechanic? From the way he talks I would say quite a bit.

And yet we have the choice, from the very beginning, to simply do without it if we choose.
If it's so great, so awesome, so worth his proclamations and adorations - one of his new envisioned mechanics that he is so proud of - why do we have the choice to just bypass it altogether?

*hint - because it's a nifty little feature. Nothing more. Nothing less.

I know I can be an a$$hole (especially when poking at the monkeys in their cages) but you have to admit that you may not agree but can at least see my point, right?

[Utils]

That dog limping about broke my heart.