Molyneux's Unfocused Innovation

[Yahtzee Croshaw]

Molyneux's Unfocused Innovation

Yahtzee likes Mr. Molyneux, but doesn't think his head's in a good place right now.

Read Full Article

 

[Calibanbutcher]

Well, maybe his head is but his developers suck.
And what's with those imps and romantic dinners?
Is there something you aren't telling us?

 

[Prof. Monkeypox]

I like Peter, he really seems like a nice guy, and proud of what he does.
It's just a shame Fable is so... un-enthusing.

I'm glad he tries to mix the formula up, I'm just not sure he thinks everything through from a purely gameplay perspective (which is rather important).

 

[Mr.Pandah]

Or ya know...he could look back at Black & White and remember he made another amazing game back in the day as well.

He has a decently sized arsenal to lean back on for ideas, so whats the deal with all of this Fable love? After Fable 2, I don't care for the series anymore due to it just being so...disappointing. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't great. Same goes for Black & White 2 when it came out.

He needs to just go back to having fun with his ideas and stop trying to appeal to such broad audiences (which is why he can't pinpoint whom exactly his games are aimed at anymore).

 

[Scow2]

Black & White had a sequel... which also tried to be too much.

But, I find the Fable Games to be quite fun. They allow me to enjoy anything I want, except the Main Quest (Which, I think is utterly horrible in every one of the fable games). In my mind, the Broad Appeal is awesome.

I did hate the introduction of more emphasis on the sex in Fables 2&3. In the first game, it was only there if you went looking for it. Later games, no matter how you play, you're at least going to stumble across a condom.

Had there been no condoms, the games would have been a lot better.

 

[Mullahgrrl]

I seriously need to replay dungeon keeper, that game ruled!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjbXb2xPdgE

Homm!

 

[Electrogecko]

Great article Yahtzee. I've never played any Fable game and I'm having a hard time thinking of a game I've played that suffers from trying to juggle dozens of different aspects, but I agree with your point about how features that are inspired by a technical or purely fantastical drive generally tend to fall short when realized. The maturity level of the gaming community tends to disappoint me. When somebody says a game is good because it lets you have sex with any random person or pilot a rocket launcher equipped scooter, I can be pretty sure that I wouldn't get along famously with them. It's not so easy to sum up what makes a great game so quickly. You don't like Shadow of the Collosus simply because it lets you stab behemoths in the face. You like it for the entirety of the experience- for the open world, the anxiety of finding your next target while you explore, the sense of insignificance and fear upon finding it, the adrenaline and strategy of the battle, and the sense of accomplishment upon sending it crashing to the ground.

 

[Drummodino]

I share your pain Yahtzee about games devolving into Halo clones and the like. I thoroughly enjoyed games like COD MW2 (the first of the series I owned) but the fps genre is full of games that are just too similiar that they become unbelievably dull, because you have seen it all before. Many of my friends repeatedly buy these games and they condemn me for resisting the trend, when I try to justify my not wasting $120 on a game that I feel like I've already played thousands of times.

However I do believe there are some games which contain enough innovation that they can buck this trend, yet they just don't seem to get the recognition and audience of the huge titles. For instance, Vanquish (which I am very annoyed you haven't reviewed) was a title I only found out about because I saw the demo in the PSN store about a month after its release. I played through this and the new rocket sliding transformed a potentially bland, gears clone into an awesome, high paced adrenaline rush. It was a third person shooter that actually rewarded you for not constantly staying in cover, taking pot shots when your enemy reloaded. Just Cause 2 also was a fantastic experience because they weren't afraid to adhere to silly things like physics and realism. Yet the modern gamer, like you said doesn't seem to give anything without incredible graphics and realistic physics a chance, because they just can't appreciate innovation. Instead they keep buying the same bland games and bragging about their 720 quickscoping and 1.5 K/D ratios. This just pisses me off to no end and makes me worry about the future of this art form that is just not living up to its potential.

EDIT: Sorry for the rant, I just get really riled up about this stuff.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

Unless I'm getting him confused with someone else, Randy Pitchford (of Gearbox) is a decently famous name, and he's pretty much of this generation of games. Ditto for CliffyB.

 

[zehydra]

Off topic, but I really want Yahtzee to review a very old game known as Magic Carpet 2, which was a product of Molyneux's bullfrog before it got eaten up by EA.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

"Having is not so pleasing a thing as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
-Spock (Star Trek)

I think that about sums it up.

 

[Electrogecko]

These days, everywhere, I look I find more and more evidence that the breed of games I like most - immersive, artistically-driven triple-A console titles - are dying. Unsustainable. Ruinously expensive to develop and insufficiently purchased by consumers who have gradually been bred to immediately reject anything that doesn't have the shiniest graphics, the realistic-est physics and the growliest insecure-est white male space marines.

And now you see why I support the Wii so much Mr. Croshaw. At least it tries and does things different with this industry and doesn't bend over backwards for the graphics whores and space marine shooter snobs. I'm not saying the other consoles don't occasionally have more original artistically driven stuff but it's few and far between now between stuff like Killzone, HALO, Call of Duty, ect. I don't buy a console just to play FPSs set in space or in a real life war. I need variety.

I was going to say something similar. Why is it that Yahtzee is so bent against the Wii and Nintendo if this is the way he feels about games? Does he think that triple-A means a visual level that the Wii can't handle? That motion controls have led to no innovations or expansions to the medium? He seems to be being hypocritical in the passage you quoted.

 

[shiajun]

I think Yahtzee put into words I've had for a while: the game developer celebrity. I understand the idea of straying from the auteur phase of things, but were are the people leading the charge? It's just faceless, nameless entities now. I feel it generates this breach between the gamer and the gaming industry since you can identify with no one in particular.

Developers from before 2003 I can name of the top of my head: Roberta Williams, Ron Gilbert, Tim Schaffer, Warren Spector, Jordan Mechner, Jane Jensen, Sid Meir, Peter Molyneux, Hideo Kojima, Ragnar Tornquist, maybe Toby Gard (ok, heavy adventure game slant there, but I used to play them a lot). Most of them are still around one way or another.

Names I can come up that have been recent and innovative: Kevin Levine, Fumito Ueda, Jenova Chen, and maaaaaaybe the guys at Tale of Tales. That's it. I can't recall anyone else that actually seems to have a school of design philosophy. Everyone else just appears to be going with the flow of whatever management wants. This lack of direction towards anything is my main suspect for meandering, repetitive and dull games from the primary studios as of late. The indie scene is where most of the auteurs are appearing and definite trends in design can be drawn. I guess that's why I've become much more of a fan of that movement.

 

[CitySquirrel]

I was going to say something similar. Why is it that Yahtzee is so bent against the Wii and Nintendo if this is the way he feels about games? Does he think that triple-A means a visual level that the Wii can't handle? That motion controls have led to no innovations or expansions to the medium? He seems to be being hypocritical in the passage you quoted.

From what I can tell based on his videos, his issue with he wii is that most game design is built around a gimmick. And when he criticizes something for looking bad on the wii it is usually because it is trying to be something that the wii is not. To put it another way, not focusing on the systems strengths. I hope I have this right.

 

[RatRace123]

That was... depressing. I agree, but still. When you take an overview look of the industry like that, it really does seem like we're going backwards.
We built the industry on innovative ideas and concepts and now we want all games to look, feel and play the same.

Maybe we're experiencing something of a new renaissance with the all the "throwback" FPSes coming out, the only reason I mention this is because FPSes seem to dominate the market, sad but true.

Meh, I'm done philosophizing, it's depressing and not all that related to the original topic.

 

[EightGaugeHippo]

I dont hate Peter Molyneux, just the sphere of lies he weaves around his games.

He says things will in a game but when you get round to it, its nothing like he explains it. One quote I remeber from just before Fable 2 was released was "If you save a farming village from attack and come back later it will have expanded."

It turns out that mechanic was in the game, one single quest to be exact. I was under the impression that the vllages in the game would come under attack at random and as time goes by, they actively expand depending on weather or not you help.

 

[Delusibeta]

Unless I'm getting him confused with someone else, Randy Pitchford (of Gearbox) is a decently famous name, and he's pretty much of this generation of games. Ditto for CliffyB.

Not really: Randy's been around since Duke Nukeum 3D (and wisely bailed out of 3D Realms after it's launch to found Gearbox. First game: Half Life 1 expansion). Cliffy B again is probably known for Unreal Tournament 1, also known as UT99. That said, Bullfrog, the company that first shot Molyneux into the limelight, did date from the late 1980s. Populous was released in 1989.