Slashdot Mirror


Molyneux on the Vanity of Gamers

Fable 2 is turning out to be a fantasy game unlike any other, with a new feature announced almost every time Molyneux opens his mouth. At a games industry event in Brighton, he sat down for a chat with Gamasutra to discuss using vanity as an incentive. "Fable 2 will take a similar dramatic approach to the concept. Drained of health points and laid out on the ground, players will have the choice of losing experience points - the game's key method of building up a selection of fearsome fighting moves - and immediately jumping up to regain the action, or letting the enemy close in and work them over with stabs, kicks and punches ... Worse than that, when you eventually get up again to fight another day, the marks of your beating will remain for all to see." These scars will be important, somehow, in Fable 2 online mode, a topic they still aren't discussing in detail.

25 of 91 comments (clear)

  1. Vanity in one game by Applekid · · Score: 4, Funny

    I thought this was about the vanity in gamers that call themselves elite. You know, the ones that use SKU as a word instead of model, those that call it Squeenix instead of Square-Enix, that refer to shooters as shmups, those that say Rogue-Like when they've never personally played Rouge, those that refer to Shigeru Miyamoto as Shiggy, and other stupidity to make themselves feel better than everyone else.

    --
    More Twoson than Cupertino
    1. Re:Vanity in one game by furball · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That post was full of humility eh?

    2. Re:Vanity in one game by Broken+scope · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The only ones that really bug me are the "hardcore" gamers.... who play either madden, counterstrike, Wow, star craft... or any game exclusively. Then there are the ones who spend more time bitching about what game is better or how all the new games suck, then they actually spend enjoying the games they hold so highly. Actually I just hate all the asshats who claim to be hardcore gamers then act like it makes them an authority any game.

      When ever someone say "I'm a hardcore gamer", I have the urge to kick them in the teeth.

      --
      You mad
    3. Re:Vanity in one game by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 4, Funny

      Then there are the ones who spend more time bitching about what game is better or how all the new games suck, then they actually spend enjoying the games they hold so highly.

      You'll enjoy this recent SomethingAwful article where they look at postings from a forum where everybody is convinced that Fallout and Fallout 2 are the best games ever, to the extent that they actually threaten to kill Bethesda developers for "ruining" the franchise. (Bethesda's version is not even released yet!)

      http://www.somethingawful.com/d/weekend-web/fallou t-scarleteen-armenianclub.php

    4. Re:Vanity in one game by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know why you'd have to have played Rogue to legitimately use the word Rogue-like. Angband, Nethack, Moria, etc are all "Rogue-like", and it's a very useful way of referring to the genre of similar games with a very recognizable style even if you haven't played the original. What's a non-vain way of saying it? Should I stop saying "sci-fi" because I haven't read whatever the first science fiction book supposedly was?

      And I have played Rogue, at least enough to know that I would rather play any other Rogue-like game, because surprise it's the most primitive. I only played it because it was the only Rogue-like that I found for my Palm at the time; once I found kMoria I played that instead. I think it would be stupid to require people to play it before they can otherwise claim to appreciate the genre, since ultimately it's not a very good game compared to the other options.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    5. Re:Vanity in one game by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Your analogy is flawed. Anyone who continues to invest time into games, no matter how many games they invest time into, no matter how much time they invest, is a gamer. Obviously, someone who plays a game once, and then never touches it again, isn't a gamer, however, someone who just plays Halo is. I'm sorry you don't like Halo, or whatever it is that causes you to use that horribly flawed analogy, but those people ARE gamers.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    6. Re:Vanity in one game by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      This isn't even about moving on from Fallout, really. These people are attached to Fallout 1/2. Fine. They want Fallout 3 to be exactly the same. Fine, if unrealistic. However, they're treating anyone who likes Fallout 3 (thus far) as if they must be a shill (among other things, like unnecessary personal attacks, but this is the one that irked me the most). Is it incomprehensible to these people that someone might actually DISAGREE with them? "Oh, you claim to like the first two games, and the third too... you're on Bethesda's payroll, buddy." That's sad, that their reasoning is so limited. Ironically enough, it's the same thing some (not most) Slashdotters have to say when someone says something good about Microsoft... but at least here, those trolls are in the minority. Most people here are willing to accept that someone might have a differing opinion from them, even if they can't possibly understand why.

      Anyways, the failure of those rabid fanboys isn't that they haven't moved on from Fallout, per se, it's that they're too caught up in their own obsession to see anything else. Most Starcraft fans, for example, want Starcraft 2 to be as close to Starcraft as possible. However, they aren't going to decry any little itsy bitsy change from Starcraft, nor are they going to treat anyone who actually does like Starcraft 2 with such abject hostility.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
  2. Molyneaux's Fables by Puff+of+Logic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Molyneux is a guy I have very mixed feelings about. He headed up Bullfrog when they made Dungeon Keeper, one of the first games I've ever played from the evil perspective, and a game that earns him huge cool points in my mind. The trouble is, the guy keeps talking about making games that I really want to play but then isn't able to deliver. Black and White is an excellent example: huge potential, but the delivery lacked...something. I can't decide whether I like the guy for being such a visionary, or dislike him for constantly taunting me with game experiences I can't have!

    --
    P.P.S. I'm doing Science and I'm still alive.
    1. Re:Molyneaux's Fables by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Here's the problem with Molyneux: While his games have great concepts and ideas, the execution is usually lacking.

      Dungeon Keeper had a great concept, but as a game it was kind of eh. Dungeon Keeper 2, on the other hand, is a much better game in every way. Ditto with Black and White and Black and White 2. For some reason, Molyneux's sequels come out to be better games than the originals... either this is because he needs some feedback from the gaming community to decide what to change, or that he pays less personal attention to the game to give more power to his 'underlings' to add features. (i.e. skipping the tutorial in Black and White 2, but even that was a patch.)

      Interestingly, both Dungeon Keeper and Black and White had the exact same bug. In both games, once you set your minion to worship, they were supposed to leave when they get hungry or tired, go get some food, then come back to the job. Instead, they would worship until they starved to death and died. Both Dungeon Keeper 2 and Black and White 2 fixed this bug.

      I will give him this though: Although he makes crazy promises, like a lot of bigwig game producers, he's a lot better at following-up with them than most. I think Black and White contained nearly every feature it was touted to contain. (Although I know Fable was missing more than a few.) Also, his games come out at least remotely close to "on time."

      P.S. What was with that level in Black and White where they stole your creature away? The creature was the selling point of the game, and frankly the most fun part of it by far. Then you go to an island, and bam it's gone. That sucked.

    2. Re:Molyneaux's Fables by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Molyneux is a visionary. And he's great at that. As a game creator, he lacks a few things. Mostly what is lacking in most visionaries: He doesn't see the "long run".

      You can say about his games what you want, but they are never some kind of clone of what's been done a billion times before. They usually are either something completely new or at least twist things around in a way that make them look like something completely new. Not a bad thing if you ask me.

      The problem with him is that his vision usually stops where the game starts. His concepts are awesome. His ideas are brilliant. His execution often lacking. The first moments of playing you're simply in awe. It's something really new. It's something really cool. It's something really stunning. Then, after a few hours, you learn that it's something really repetitive. What a lot of his game have is an incredible level of micro management that gets tedious after a while. B&W being a prime example of it, but DK suffers from the same problem.

      Also, often it's not really easy to do well in his games in the "long run". DK was quite hard to beat if you had to wage a prolonged war, your money was usually running quite low quickly. B&W required a lot of micromanagement if you didn't want your worshipers to die or "forget" that they should probably stock up on food. They were also slow enough that it made quite some sense to "help" them. Which leads back to repetitive, boring micro management.

      I love his vision, though. If he could manage to coop with someone who knows how to make games fun and entertaining for a long period of time, we'd see the best game of all ages.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:Molyneaux's Fables by DrEldarion · · Score: 3, Funny

      Molyneaux + Wright would make the best game ever, but it wouldn't come out until 2018.

    4. Re:Molyneaux's Fables by GrumpySimon · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, at least he hasn't threatened to make us his bitches, yet.

    5. Re:Molyneaux's Fables by LKM · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think the reason why his first attempts usually suck is that his ideas are too big for the development time of a single game, and he doesn't have the financial resources to say "it's done when it's done."

  3. Unlike any other? by Aladrin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Unlike any other? I dunno, sounding a LOT like Fable 1 so far. Free-roaming so vast that one of the devs got lost, for example... Yeah, sure it was.

    You'd think PM would have learned his lesson on Fable 1 about opening his mouth, and I think I remember him SAYING he learned his lesson (Why did I believe him?) but here he goes again.

    --
    "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    1. Re:Unlike any other? by Hatta · · Score: 2, Informative

      Unlike any other? I dunno, sounding a LOT like Fable 1 so far.

      Is that a bad thing? Fable is the best adventure/RPG hybrid I've played since Quest for Glory 4. My only complaint is that it was too short. Seemed like it was just warming up and then it ended. My girlfriend actually got a bit sniffly when we found out there was no more Fable.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  4. Schmiss, anyone? by MSTCrow5429 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think this will cater to machismo, not seen as a drawback.

    --
    Slashdot: Playing Favorites Since 1997
  5. ATTN: Abbreviations/Pet Names == Vanity by FatSean · · Score: 4, Funny

    Thanks for clearing this up. I hate the vain IMers who use 'LOL' instead of typing out the ha ha has or using the phrase 'I'm laughing out loud' too!

    Perhaps we can combine forces and release an informative newsletter!

    --
    Blar.
  6. Know who this is going to bother? by RandoX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The guys that pick the "hot chick" character in every game.

    1. Re:Know who this is going to bother? by hansamurai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If I'm going to stare at the rear end of a character for 40+ hours, it might as well be a woman.

    2. Re:Know who this is going to bother? by Drachemorder · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's all well and good, but I prefer for my avatar in a game to be a representation of what I would like to project myself as rather than what I'd like to sleep with. It's just a personal preference about play styles, though. Some people like to create a character that's completely different from who they really are. Others like to project themselves into the game and act according to their real-life principles. Still others just want to look at a hot female butt. I have no problem with any of these. It's your game, play it however you want to.

  7. Re:Eh. by Broken+scope · · Score: 2, Funny

    I used plate/mail and I was still all kinds of fucked up. Though my old guy just looked freaking badass in the white magicians outfit. He freaking pulsed power.... to bad the towns people were really scared of him because i screwed up the prison escape 6 freaking times...

    --
    You mad
  8. Why not? by Moraelin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why not? There _will_ be people whose goal will be exactly to look as disturbing and menacing as possible. And there _will_ be people who'll wear "I'm the smart guy who took the xp advantage over dumb aesthetics" like a medal of honour.

    You can see both sides of the medal in WoW too, that is, both PM's point and the counter-point.

    On one hand, if you take a census of the population (repeatedly at different times, to have a good statistic), on any server, you'll find that, with exactly one notable exception, the more a race looks human and pretty, the more players play it. Before Burning Crusade, that meant there were more Humans or Night Elves than the whole Horde combined, no matter what advantages the Horde races got. Even as everyone was bitching about shamen and warlock-killing un-fearable Undead, most people didn't actually want to go and play one.

    That's one major reason why the Horde got Blood Elves in the Burning Crusade expansion. Blizzard just caved in and realized that the only thing that would even start to even the odds was to give the Horde a pretty and human-looking race. In fact, one prettier than the Night Elves on the Alliance side.

    So that would sorta illustrate PM's point that, indeed, a lot of people will take looking pretty over being an effective killing machine.

    The counter-point, though, is that notable exception I've mentioned: the undead. (Technically called the "Forsaken".) The WoW undead aren't the pretty sanitized VTM vampires, but something more hideous than anything you could get in Fable or in most other games. They look literally like someone who's been rotting in a grave for two weeks and then got dug out. You know, with missing flesh, tattered clothes, bones poking out, etc.

    The funny thing is, the undead were the most played Horde race. Ok, so the Will Of The Forsaken ability was a major selling point too, but even then it illustrates that some people do take power over looking pretty. But the funny thing is, even after WOTF got nerfed, the undead _still_ are disturbingly popular. Some people actually _like_ looking like that. Go figure.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  9. Re:will it let you complete the game? by Broken+scope · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because the scaring in the last game did affect gameplay.

    You could be the glorious hero, full of light and wisdom, but you were so damned fugley by the end game that the towns people would run away from you.

    Not to mention the fact that some people DO care what their character looks like, even more once you go online, a name isn't always enough to make you unique.

    Go look at wow, how many lvl 70s look almost the same and are the same right down to the enchants, the talents, and the equipment? Its not pretty and it gets really annoying really fast.

    People want unique characters, this is part of that to an extent.

    --
    You mad
  10. To the pain by Chr0me · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Every babe that weeps at your approach, every woman who cries out, 'Dear God! What is that thing,' will echo in your perfect ears."

    Based on what Molyneux has said before regarding scars, your interactions with NPCs and (possibly) other players online will be affected. So your ability to complete the game won't be changed, but the manner in which you complete it would.

    Thant is, if you believe everything Molyneux is saying. Personally, I have a box of Morton's Kosher on hand.

  11. More of the same from Molyneux by vonPoonBurGer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As far as I'm concerned, this guy has burned all of his credibility. Years from now, I suspect someone somewhere will write a retrospective of his career arc, and we'll find out how one of his former colleagues at Bullfrog was responsible for keeping his wilder impulses in check, keeping his visions grounded in reality, and keeping his mouth shut when the gaming press was around. Whoever or whatever it was that kept him from doing the same thing back at Bullfrog, it's clear that that influence is sorely needed now at Lionhead. His inability to reproduce at Lionhead the level of success and critical acclaim he received at Bullfrog makes me think that a) at the very least he wasn't solely responsible for those fantastic game designs and b) he's not the visionary designer he's sometimes made out to be. I've completely stopped paying attention to his hyperbole, as his track record at Lionhead has shown that he's not able to cash the checks his mouth keeps writing. Will Wright is a top game designer. Shigeru Miyamoto is a top game designer. Molyneux is a superb pitch-man, but maybe not so much a top-tier game designer. Perhaps he should give advertising or PR a try.