Peter Molyneux gets homoerotic *snigger*

[SpiderMonkey]

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=20390

"The innovation that you, me and friends are playing a game together and we're experiencing male-bonding as we all cry over the same thing. That is my ultimate plan. One of the emotions I hope, if I do my job right, is the emotion of being loved. Not of you loving something, but something loving you,"

It's too damn easy to giggle at, so I shall do no more of that.

I found what he had to say pretty interesting. Does anyone have any links to more complete write-ups/transcripts? When he says "The big feature is the emotions that I want to you to feel. And for me, that is where the revolution comes", he is of course talking about catching up with what many developers have been doing for at least two years now.

But hmm, a game that makes you feel loved. Interesting concept that I think I need to put more thought into to properly understand. Anyone care to share how they interpret the concept?

[baconian]

What? He's not gay? I always thought he was gay.

[StarEye]

he is of course talking about catching up with what many developers have been doing for at least two years now.

Two years? Hell, I got all emotional when Elaine was kidnapped with Guybrush standing on the dock in the Secret of Monkey Island!

Games have had emotional impact for as long as I remember.

[brkl]

It's perhaps more healthy to feel like a character loves you than to fall in love with a character.

[SpiderMonkey]

Two years? Hell, I got all emotional when Elaine was kidnapped with Guybrush standing on the dock in the Secret of Monkey Island!

Games have had emotional impact for as long as I remember.

Of course. I guess I should have clarified my comments down to (my perception of) the context of his comments. He was saying that action games need to abandon the emotion of "check me out I'm all powerful and I'm kicking your ass" in favour of more nuanced ones. I don't think that's even remotely as "new and revolutionary" as he seems to think it is.

[Wrestlevania]

I don't think {insert game idea} is even remotely as "new and revolutionary" as he seems to think it is.

Isn't that PM to a 'T' though?

[drummand]

All so harsh. Sure, Moly frequently talks bigger than anyone can deliver, but I at least appreciate the sentiment. And I appreciate it being articulated by someone who's apparently respected in the field.

Not saying it's an entirely new idea. Or even a little bit new, for that matter. And yeah, "love" is pretty doggone hyperbolic (and abstract enough that you can winnow it down to something more attainable). But I'm all for anybod who's willing to spotlight their attempt to create an attachment between the player (not just the player's character) and the game's AI characters.

So that GI blip was a chockablock of hyperbole. I at least thought it interesting; made me wonder what's really going on in the guy's head, where he'd go had he unlimited resources and no worries about sales. He's enthusiastic; is that really so wrong? I'm kinda bummed he got so beaten over Fable's lack of delivery; the ideas there were interesting, even if they couldn't be implemented (for whatever reason). And I miss that part of the scene; the conceptual game that exists in my head, based on the ravings of overly-vocal designers.

Maybe my fault is mine. I do so dig ideas and respect attempts (even if their execution is imperfect). And I enjoy the game conceptualized sometimes as much (and sometimes even more) than the game played.

Thus, I returns to teh lurk

[SiN]

Maybe my fault is mine. I do so dig ideas and respect attempts (even if their execution is imperfect). And I enjoy the game conceptualized sometimes as much (and sometimes even more) than the game played.

And that's right on the money.

Whenever someone bashes Molyneux, I feel the need to swoop in and defend him. This time drummand beat me to it.

The thing about the guy is that he speaks as a designer. It's so damn interesting to hear what's going on in his head ... sure the talk does not always equal the game, but that's just because he's talking about the vision and not necessarily the game.

Also, stuff like this comes up pretty often ...

Isn't that PM to a 'T' though?

... and I guess Molyneux is right as he recently said "You're only as good as your last game". And that's a shame. Because whenever I read a comment like that, I just think of Populous, Theme Park, Syndicate, Dungeon Keeper, Black & White, and wonder, "where the hell is [insert_posters_name] coming from?"

SiN

[miffy495]

I like Molyneux as an idea man, I just am consistantly dissappointed with his execution. I would absolutely love for him to follow through one of these days, but can't help thinking that he'd be an entirely brilliant consultant to a games company if he would just focus on that aspect.

[Wrestlevania]

Yes, my point would also be that – for whatever reason – the deliverables rarely match up to his still-great ideas nowadays. Maybe it’s the focus on style more than content when it comes to publishing a sellable product, but you’re not coming through very clearly, Mr. Molyneux.

And if I could get it to run, I’d still be playing Syndicate at every given opportunity.

[StarEye]

He makes decent games. Most of the time it's way above average. Fable was a great game, but people expected too much. It's a shame that people buy so much into hype that they just can't see a good game even if it hit them in the face with a shovel with the words "this is a good game" written on it. I think it's obvious that he's just enthusiastic. I look forward to all of his games, and the last games in no way shows that he's on a bad roll. I expect the next game to be good too. And if it IS earthshattering, that's great, but I'm satisfied with even an "ordinarily" good game.

[SpiderMonkey]

... and I guess Molyneux is right as he recently said "You're only as good as your last game". And that's a shame. Because whenever I read a comment like that, I just think of Populous, Theme Park, Syndicate, Dungeon Keeper, Black & White, and wonder, "where the hell is [insert_posters_name] coming from?"

There's something ironically pertinent about you using a "recent" Molyneux quote that is in fact a rehash of what others have been saying for years. That sentiment, for example, was on the front cover of Develop a couple of years ago.

I don't think it's really that simple though. I don't look at Fable and see a failure. I look at B&W2 and The Movies and see failures. And it's not failures to make a good game, or failures to sell enough copies. It's a complete failure to keep pace with the rest of the games industry. B&W2 was just a rehash of B&W1 and The Movies was a cynical throwback to Bullfrog's old strengths, a simple Theme Movie Studio.

In that sense, Molyneux joins that pantheon of developers who have struggled to stay relevant in this now-ending generation of games. Rare, id, Ritual, and others whose names escape me now. Studios/people who seemed to take their eye of the ball and have struggled to move their game design sense beyond about the year 2000. Where other developers died and fresh ideas grew up in their places, there also exist this group of developers who died but never truly died and now just stumble on like zombies, trading off their 90s reputation and ideas and their 00s failure to keep up with their past.

(Some of) his comments are just a part of that. It's embarrassing, like the kid in school who shoots his hand up suddenly in the middle of class to make a point about the discussion that moved on somewhere else 10 mins ago, and that he thinks is really sharp and novel but was on everyone else's minds at the time.

----

I seem to have responded to a vigorous defence of Molyneux with an equally vigorous dressing down, which I feel kinda guilty for. I consider Fable to be a success, not a failure, when assessed in the terms above. I don't begrudge failure to execute on promises, and it was certainly a commercial success. (But I do have trouble ascribing it to Molyneux, since afaik the game's concept was born of Lionhead satellite Big Blue Box and the Carter brothers.) And yeah, like both Drummand and SiN said, he's a fantastic dreamer so it's always interesting to look inside his head (hence this thread's original intent).

[DanJW]

The Movies was a cynical throwback to Bullfrog's old strengths, a simple Theme Movie Studio.

Have you played it? The Theme Movie Studio part is actually very well polished and in my mind falls into that catagory of games that take genre staples but hones them and improves them until almost perfect. Where i think The Movies failed is in the machinema engine part. In making it accessible they made it too restrictive; camera angles are chosen by tick box, and cannot be moved freely. This and other similar annoyances makes everyone's movie look the same and cripples their creative visions. A shame, since I had high hopes for the game breaking machinema into a much wider audience.

[StarEye]

To be honest, I'd love a new Theme Hospital. He didn't do that did he?

[Marek]

He had no involvement in Theme Hospital, was a producer (not a designer) on Syndicate, and a producer on Magic Carpet (no idea who designed it).

[Wrestlevania]

Magic Carpet (no idea who designed it)

Peter Molyneux did.