Five minimum is more like it.DVS BSTrD said:So does that mean at least 3 more games? Five tops.
You know, there ARE people out there who can make good games without promising ridiculous and completely implausible things. It's not an either/or scenario.UberNoodle said:I avoid being hard on the guy. He's a dreamer. He obviously has great passion for games and game creation. If it wasn't for people like him, all we'd have to play would be the yearly updates to existing military shooters, an endless stream of zombie games and promising game series buried under an average 6 sequels per 'generation'. Thank the gods we DO have people like him.
I don't agree. He promises the stars, certainly, but it serves the purpose of pushing the conceptual bar for the entire industry. Whether people agree with him, like or dislike him, he serves as an agitator in the industry. And for all the complaints about him, his catalogue of games is not one to be scoffed at. As for the 'cynicism he engenders', our community doesn't need him for us to justify being cynical. There's not a single bit of news in gaming which won't engender all manner of bitching and whining. What it comes down to is that people just don't buy his games if they don't want to. For those who do, while I agree that commentary on his missed chances is valid, ultimately his games are usually very good, so it's up to the gamer to accept reality, let go of the bruised egos, and rexamine the games for what they are and enjoy what they DO offer.Zachary Amaranth said:You know, there ARE people out there who can make good games without promising ridiculous and completely implausible things. It's not an either/or scenario.UberNoodle said:I avoid being hard on the guy. He's a dreamer. He obviously has great passion for games and game creation. If it wasn't for people like him, all we'd have to play would be the yearly updates to existing military shooters, an endless stream of zombie games and promising game series buried under an average 6 sequels per 'generation'. Thank the gods we DO have people like him.
We can live without the Peter Molyneuxs. We might even do better without the cynicism he engenders.
I would hazard a guess that he probably knows just a little bit more about how to make a video game than you do.rollerfox88 said:So, he doesnt know what the game will be about story-wise, how it will play or even what kind of game it will be, but he has a name picked already and thinks it will be the best game he has ever made?
Maybe he should stop making games then, as he is doing it wrong.
Except for the part where they don't really push at all. In fact, they're the ones usually trampled by the rampaging intrusion of reality. You're applauding someone for trying to beat up the ocean: an ultimately futile gesture that accomplishes nothing. Molyneux has done a wonderful job at masturbation over the years, but that's the overall end result.UberNoodle said:I don't agree. He promises the stars, certainly, but it serves the purpose of pushing the conceptual bar for the entire industry.
This explains (and confirms) so much! I've always thought Mr. Molyneux focused too much on unique and novel features but lost sight of how they would integrate into the gaming experience.DiamanteGeeza said:I've worked with Pete over the years, and it's not necessarily the studio's fault, but rather a combination of things.
Here's what happens: he comes up with a grand and intriguing idea that is (quite often) vast in scope. This is broken down into individual gameplay elements that people start prototyping. Quite often, these elements are pretty novel and haven't always been done before, or done in the way he envisions it, so this means it's going to take a LOT of iteration to see whether it'll pan out or not.
All good so far, but then his obsessive personality kicks in, and he'll have a stick up his ass about one particular part of one particular gameplay element and will then constantly revise and change what it is, and that has the knock-on effect of the original idea never having had time to actually be iterated on to a point where it becomes clear whether the fundamental idea is good or bad. Pete just keeps changing it and changing it, and obviously the prototype team can't get the code written at the same speed as his brain works, so concepts never get fully prototyped.
And then, stage 3 of Hurricane Pete, is he'll show up one morning after having had another epiphany during the night, and will scrap that entire gameplay element in favor of a new one he's dreamed up.
This then goes on until the publisher forces him to actually release a game, which ends up being full of interesting ideas that never got the development time they needed to be any good: a bunch of half-baked failed promises.
But it isn't from lack of talent or effort from either Pete or the dev team. His style of working is now counter-productive for much of the time.