Molyneux promoted to creative director of MS games

[obonicus]

Now his interviews are fine, I heard there's always someone in the back to prevent him from making "Molynades". (ie talking about things that might not be in the final product.)

I don't think they're doing their jobs, not with quotes like "Science Fiction writers, film makers, they haven't imagined what we are able to do today." and "This is true technology that Science Fiction hasn't even written about. And this works... today... now."

I mean, it takes a rare kind of talent to take what is really impressive technology and hype even that to a level it can't possibly reach. I can only imagine that if Microsoft discovers Cold Fusion, he'll be promising time travel with it.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I don't understand the hate Molyneux gets on these forums. Same about Carmack-bashing. I guess it's because they come from a PC background...

Ihave awesome respect for Molyneux's early works, predating the PC with the Amiga. He was a visionary, creating whole new game ideas.

However, his more recent endeavours (from B&W) have had huge promise that he's been vocal about, adn not delivered. In stark contrast to the early games that were jsut games he made and sold and people biught because they were good, the later works are bought on promise that, not only doesn't meet standard, but is often completely and utterly broken. B&W is a classic example. The creature training and AI was utter poo. The creature was untrainable, bugged, the motion detection registered slaps on your creature when you were petting it, and it became a nuisance. The guesture interface was cumbersome and inaccurate, and keyboard shortcuts were far better.

That's one example. Subsequent games have all had high promise yet missed the mark. I respect the man's creative drive, but I think he's run away with himself and whatever made Bullfrog a powerhouse of creativity has gone, leaving behind an ideal without the energy to drive
it.

If he didn't make wild, open promises (often not promises but wishes and dreams inadvertantly voiced) and just made the games, there'd be less mistrust. Still, you can't give a guy carte blanche for all creations based on some early success. Would you say StarWars episodes 1, 2, and 3 were fabulous films because 4,5 and 6 were? Things move on. Peter can't sit on his legacy as proof of his value to the industry. He needs to make the right games and execute them to the highest standard. If the past ten years have seen titles that have underdelivered, that's the reputation that'll follow him. I'm sure everyone who knows Molyneux's history is wanting a return to the glory days, to industry-changing titles that are fun, polished, fun, original and fun. Perhaps a problem here is a worry that he's courting new gamers, trying to find new experiences, and not giving gamers the experiences that they want? Dunno. I'm just thinking of Fable 2's single button combat. I haven't played the game so have no personal opinion, but I don't recall the internet being awash with enthusiasm for the system. Was it really a better choice to make this accessible system instead of go with a gamer-friendly combo system that needed gamer-skillzorz and which gamers would value more? Of course, with millions of units sold Fable 2 was hardly a flop

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

Fact is that Bullfrog is what made Molyneux's reputation. Although he took the credit and was the face of the company, Bullfrog was more than just Molyneux. Many talented people contributed and thought up the ideas that he took the corporate credit for.

When he sold up to EA and Bullfrog was finally completely subsumed, that talent dissipated, and it goes a long way to explain why his later games didn't really hit the mark. If anything, I'd say Molyneux is a "big picture, high concept" kind of guy, without always stopping to think if an idea is always going to work, or sometimes not being able to get the code working properly in a way that is fun and matches the lofty goals that the high concept demands.

Let me quote Tycho from Penny Arcade:

Peter Molyneux has no credit with me - he must always pay in advance, cash only. I am completely impervious to him, so when he says that he's invented some kind of digital boy this firm assertion is refracted into harmless light. Illusions of the kind he proposes are tremendously fragile - it's hard enough to maintain them in raw text, without the idiosyncrasies of the nested recognition systems in play with Milo. Please understand: I love the future, and I long to live there. I want very much to simulate a cognizant digital imp. But this man has broken my heart so many times that it can no longer contain love.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

I don't quite agree with that.

Bullfrog completely and totally failed the minute Molyneux left. Some of the blame goes to EA, but good devs still manage to put out good games for a time after being bought by EA so I don't buy that.

Molyneux has ALWAYS promised more than he could deliver. Even at Bullfrog he promised more than he could deliver there. I'm not sure if it's just wishful thinking or not, but Bullfrog also had quite a few games that didn't make it or were in developement indefinitely.

Am I the only one that remembers the Superhero game that he promised and Bullfrog featured for a while? It had some revolutionary features that still haven't appeared in any superhero game made to date. Picking up a skyscraper and using it as a weapon?

Anyway, agree or disagree, Molyneux was the driving force behind Bullfrog. And without him it failed, and failed almost instantaneously.

That said, he's no different now than he was then. No less bombastic, no less imaginative, no less talented. However, unlike his early days with Bullfrog, his every single word is reported on by the press. He's in the spotlight now. He's got a soapbox he can hop on whenever he wants and the press will gleefully write it up.

When he was at Bullfrog, especially at the start, he was an unknown. Noone payed much attention to him. And even then PC gaming was so small that the spotlight was also small once he started to get recognized.

Anyway, point is, he makes the exact same exaggerated claims now as he did when he first made populous on the Amiga.

And he's still revolutionary (IMO) if only for trying to push the envelope of what is expected from a PC/console game. For trying to push gaming out into new areas. Perhaps he hasn't been as successful as he could be. Developement cycles are longer and developement is more difficult than when he started. Budgets have to met, etc...

Anyway, like him or not. He's still pushing to move gaming beyond what it is at any given moment. And I'll always respect him for that, even if I wish he'd actually properly finish a game for once.

Or bring back a true successor to Populous, Dungeon Keeper, Magic Carpet, etc...

Regards,
SB

 

[TheChefO]

Personally, I'd like to see a new syndicate wars

 

[Squilliam]

Personally, I'd like to see a new syndicate wars

The original Syndicate was better!

 

[Chisholm]

Personally, I'd like to see a new syndicate wars

Unfortunately, I can't see that happening, not any time soon, given that EA owns the IP.

On the whole Molyneux issue, I'd say that the main problems I see with him is his propensity towards running his mouth every now and then. The level of expectations every game of his gets is ridiculously high, but that doesn't mean that his games don't deliver.

 

[Lefungus]

Peter can't sit on his legacy as proof of his value to the industry.

I agree with that, yet I do like recent Lionhead productions. I realize it's not as good as the bullfrog days, but how much is due to nostalgia and fuzzy memories ?
And I didn't follow Fable hype, so I had no unrealistic expectations

Personally, I'd like to see a new syndicate wars

You remember E3 where Molyneux predicted a big event ? During the first seconds of some trailer, I thought to myself 'OMG, it's Syndicate. I'm seeing cyber-enhanced agents roaming in the city. It's gonna be sandbox too'. Unfortunately, it was Crackdown 2 trailer

Btw, would they get sued if they released a Syndicate game without using the name, but keeping the theme and gameplay ? Is the IP covering that ?

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

Surefire hits remade today from the Bullfrog back catalogue: Populous, Syndicate, Magic Carpet, Dungeon Keeper. Instant money in the bank.

I have no idea why EA haven't done it already and are just leaving that valuable IP languishing in limbo. Most likely the people running the company would have no idea what I'm talking about when I list those games, as I doubt they even play games. It's just "product", "units" and "marketing".

 

[obonicus]

I have no idea why EA haven't done it already and are just leaving that valuable IP languishing in limbo. Most likely the people running the company would have no idea what I'm talking about when I list those games, as I doubt they even play games. It's just "product", "units" and "marketing".

Also because, except maybe for Magic Carpet, those are games built around PC controls. Maybe Dungeon Keeper for Wii would work -- possibly if Overlord for the Wii is a success EA will take notice.

 

[TheChefO]

Is the IP covering that ?

I doubt it would hold up in court if EA wanted to bring it there.

Cyborg agents in a futuristic city ...

As you said, could be crackdown, could be syndicate wars.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

I have no idea why EA haven't done it already and are just leaving that valuable IP languishing in limbo. Most likely the people running the company would have no idea what I'm talking about when I list those games, as I doubt they even play games. It's just "product", "units" and "marketing".

Just because there's been no announcements, it doesn't automaticaly mean that EA is stupid...

Also note their opinion that part of their recent failures has been itroducing too many new IPs at once. They may be holding back intentionally.

 

[scooby_dooby]

I'm just thinking of Fable 2's single button combat. I haven't played the game so have no personal opinion, but I don't recall the internet being awash with enthusiasm for the system. Was it really a better choice to make this accessible system instead of go with a gamer-friendly combo system that needed gamer-skillzorz and which gamers would value more?

The single button combat in fabe was implemented extremely well, even from a gamer standpoint.

Single button is really misleading, as the goal of the combat was to use all the abilities in conjunction, so a typical battle would always use all 3 buttons in varying degrees, combo'ed together.

I thought it was one of the best, if not the best, control scheme I've ever used for an ARPG. The way you could seemlessly blend magic to melee to gunplay and back around again was brilliant.

On the topic at hand, I think Molyneux is obviously a dreamer, and usually exagerates the impact of almost everything, but at the same time, he churns out really great, very unique games.

Fable 2 just had an atmosphere and feel that was very different than ny other RPG I've played. I still remember when I switched from Fable to Fallout, I really missed the world of Albion for a while, everything was so sterile and devoid of personality in the Fallout world, it made for a very striking comparison.

 

[zed]

George Broussard is now free. MS should get him on board
they'ld make a killa dual PR front

Molyneux dealing with whats gonna be in the product
Broussard dealing with when the product is gonna ship

 

[obonicus]

As a dissenting opinion, single-button combat worked, but was, as expected, shallow and simple. That plus magic allowed for some flashy attacks, but it also contributed to Fable being jack of all trades, master of none.

 

[scooby_dooby]

As a dissenting opinion, single-button combat worked, but was, as expected, shallow and simple. That plus magic allowed for some flashy attacks, but it also contributed to Fable being jack of all trades, master of none.

I wouldn't call it shallow in comparison to anything but a straight action game, ala DMC, NG etc.

But when I play games I always try and make the best of em, so while I could've concentrated on melee, or spammed magic, I always go for the cool factor, and when you master combining all attacks together it's really fun.

Honestly, it's one of the few games I always anticipated combat, I was always happy to get into another fight cause it meant I got to experiment some more, and see just how quickly I could completely decimate these guys

 

[RobertR1]

The single button combat in fabe was implemented extremely well, even from a gamer standpoint.

Single button is really misleading, as the goal of the combat was to use all the abilities in conjunction, so a typical battle would always use all 3 buttons in varying degrees, combo'ed together.

I thought it was one of the best, if not the best, control scheme I've ever used for an ARPG. The way you could seemlessly blend magic to melee to gunplay and back around again was brilliant.

On the topic at hand, I think Molyneux is obviously a dreamer, and usually exagerates the impact of almost everything, but at the same time, he churns out really great, very unique games.

Fable 2 just had an atmosphere and feel that was very different than ny other RPG I've played. I still remember when I switched from Fable to Fallout, I really missed the world of Albion for a while, everything was so sterile and devoid of personality in the Fallout world, it made for a very striking comparison.

Well said.

The charm, wit and atmosphere in Fable 2 was very inviting and immersive. After Fable 2 I tried to get into Fallout 3 but just couldn't. The world was dull, the characters were lacking charm and my character seemed generally out of place in the world. And this is coming from someone who played a ton of Oblivion.

The single button combat worked extremely well. You could do nice combinations and make combat fluid vs stop, pick your options, execute, rinse and repeat that seem to plague most such games.

As for Peter, he is absolutely a dreamer and a visionary. Unfortunately for him, he seems to let his imagination slip into words. I'm sure he's probably more dejected than anyone else when the tech available isn't able to present his vision as he imagined. I doubt he sits there with the menatlity "let's under deliver and laugh." Perhaps Fran can elaborate more.

His new fit with MS seems good. They dont' need a bean counter or another business exec in such a role. They need a person with a strong desire to see his visions fruition. Do I expect Peter to let slip his imagination and then roasted for not having it fullfilled? Likely. It's the case for most visionaries. However, at the end of the day, I don't see anyone in MS' stable for fit for such a role.

 

[obonicus]

I wouldn't call it shallow in comparison to anything but a straight action game, ala DMC, NG etc.

Or GoW. But there isn't much to compare it against in its own genre. Zelda?

But when I play games I always try and make the best of em, so while I could've concentrated on melee, or spammed magic, I always go for the cool factor, and when you master combining all attacks together it's really fun.

Honestly, it's one of the few games I always anticipated combat, I was always happy to get into another fight cause it meant I got to experiment some more, and see just how quickly I could completely decimate these guys

Alright, but by that metric almost any game can be good, if you're willing to focus on the positive and the cool and overlook the negatives.

 

[mrcorbo]

Alright, but by that metric almost any game can be good, if you're willing to focus on the positive and the cool and overlook the negatives.

If this is possible and you enjoy the game, why would you not want to do this?

 

[TheChefO]

However, at the end of the day, I don't see anyone in MS' stable for fit for such a role.

Agreed.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see Peter get promoted again ... potentially as the lead of MS games worldwide.

He not only has vision, he has passion. This combined with full MS resources could be a very potent combination. With where games are headed these days, I see two visionaries that are thinking out of the box: Mayamoto, and Molyneux