Molyneux's Unfocused Innovation
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
As much of an at best casual interest I've taken in the Fable games, I have to admit that I too have always respected Molyneux, because he has the balls to stick his balls on the rails for all to see, but isn't afraid to leap off and apologise to everyone for not delivering. He'll admit being too ambitious or misguided, but at least he was damn well passionate about it in the first place. I'm hoping he manages what he wants to achieve some day, and I just think Fable 4 isn't going to be that realisation.
Speaking of Dungeon Keeper, I really need to figure out how to get DK2 working on my computer. It doesn't seem to like Vista 64 and an 8 core processor.
If people keep buying cookie-cutter shooters, people will keep making them. It is as simple as that. Innovation occurs when it is the only option left; very few people will take the risky option when the can make 3x the amount of money with the product they released last year
Good article. It pretty much summed up my own thuoghts on Molyneux. He's a great idea man, but not so good at executing these ideas. Have all these ideas are great, but instead of takeing a few good ones and making sure they work well he's takeing them all and letting them go a just working.
The glitter trail was terrible! Talk about being led by the nose! The lack of inventory in Fable 3 is dumb. Apparently there were a lot of complaints about the inventory from fable 2. Thats not an issue with haveing an inventory but with having a poorly designed one. Console games have terrible list inventorys, list after list after list and they suck, yes, but that's as much a limitation of the system you are working with as the developers innovation.
Molyneux makes good ideas, not good games.
The glitter trail was terrible! Talk about being led by the nose! The lack of inventory in Fable 3 is dumb. Apparently there were a lot of complaints about the inventory from fable 2. Thats not an issue with haveing an inventory but with having a poorly designed one. Console games have terrible list inventorys, list after list after list and they suck, yes, but that's as much a limitation of the system you are working with as the developers innovation.
Molyneux makes good ideas, not good games.
Dungeons is coming out soon...
This'll be a proper RTS/Management Dungeon Keeper-like, if the promo videos are anything to go by. Effectively DKIII! None of this Overlord E-RPG nonsense.
This'll be a proper RTS/Management Dungeon Keeper-like, if the promo videos are anything to go by. Effectively DKIII! None of this Overlord E-RPG nonsense.
Pitching the Fable games to a creative directer in twenty-five words or less? It'd probably start out something like this...
"So, basically, I'm trying to create the greatest role playing game of all time... Basically."
"So, basically, I'm trying to create the greatest role playing game of all time... Basically."
This is the sentiment of all the gamers lucky enough to play games during the "golden age" (roughly 1988-2003). It's why those gamers are so bitchy about the loss of expansion packs, dedicated servers, more original IP, the soul of Lucas Arts, and small free-bee items between expansions while bristling at the idea of paying for DLC. The kids willingly shell out the cash for it today.Yahtzee Croshaw said:
I think what people are most pissed about was the combat going from the various, scaled and interesting boss battles from Fable TLC to "not another fucking goon and/or golem" in Fable 2 which had less deep fluff instead of fun variation in core gameplay. The end lacked power and/or reward because the rest of the game: is a constant breeze, was padded with fluff, lacked bosses that only YOU could conquer (for whatever reason) and the story's tone of only you have the power/haste was contradicted by the previous flaws.thisberichard said:
If Fable 2's intended tone of serious epic shit needs to be done actually had the serious epic shit needed to be done like in Fable TLC for just everything until the end: getting to the regular guy would have felt like an accomplishment, the tone of only you can do it would have been felt, there would not be a epic boss fight lost feeling, the story would have been relevant and what you see as "fresh and different" would have been appreciated for working.
-
Personally it also didn't help that in my first play-through in Fable 2 I was unfortunate enough to do the fun old absolute evil route. When I finished the game it was done by accidentally shooting the main villain once, I thought my experimenting with the interactivity was fine because I should be able to do what he was doing for shits, giggles and evil, instead of just back stabbing him after I watch all my friends die. BUT NOOOOOOO, apparently I was now pals with everyone ever and everything I did before was cool because I accidentally killed the bad guy thus according to the universe I could not kill the idiotic 3 myself and am a real great guy.
Apparently the epitome of all that is good can be the ultimate evil restricted by the universe's arbitrary laws. THAT is what ruined the entire game as well as the ending for me.
I'm not sure what PM does (now) counts as innovation. At least not examples like maps. A good UI doesn't break immersion, but he's not the first nor the last person to try and strip the UI down or remove it. Centralised hubs, similarly, are not new. The biggest difference here is that F3's seems to suck more than the average.
I mean, I like a streamlined UI. Some parts of the HUD are really useless or only need to be there sometimes. And some people try and remove the whole damn thing and annoy me in the process. It's not really innovative or creative and hasn't been for years.
Molyneux talks a big game, promises the moon, and falls short. It's like he talks innovation, then gives us "The map room" (Whatever that hub is called). He frequently doesn't seem to "get" where his ideas fall short, like the whole "clothes change" thing.
I mean, I like a streamlined UI. Some parts of the HUD are really useless or only need to be there sometimes. And some people try and remove the whole damn thing and annoy me in the process. It's not really innovative or creative and hasn't been for years.
Molyneux talks a big game, promises the moon, and falls short. It's like he talks innovation, then gives us "The map room" (Whatever that hub is called). He frequently doesn't seem to "get" where his ideas fall short, like the whole "clothes change" thing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NRS_social_gradeWolfram01 said:
He's talking about social classes... I think.
Nintendo may consistently reuse their properties, but their sequels always feel fresh and creative.Spot1990 said:
Out of Mario's 4 3d console titles, only 2 were remotely similar if you repaint all the characters. Everybody knows Ocarina of Time. Majora's used a 3 day clock coupled with collectible magical masks. Windwaker had a unique aesthetic and the game took place on a vast ocean which you had to sail across with the help of a magical instrument and a talking sailboat. Twilight Princess had Link turning into a wolf and clearing the realm of a shadowy mist. Just recently we've seen a controversial 2d-3d,FPS hybrid narrative-driven Metroid game, Kirby without his inhale ability and turned into yarn, and DK....well....there's coop....and blowing.
I won't even mention the first console use of a touch screen, camera, or motion controls. Not to mention the balance board or the fricken vitality sensor.
