Peter Molyneux Talks Next-Gen Combat and Wii 57
An anonymous reader writes "Speaking at the Games Convention Developer Conference in Leipzig, Peter Molyneux gave attendees a sense of what he believes the future of combat in games will be like, some of which he is trying to get his team to include in Fable 2. He also showed videos of some prototypes based on his concepts. Later in his presentation, he responded to a user's question about Nintendo's Wii, saying that he's not sold on motion-sensing controllers."
Conflict of Interest (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Conflict of Interest (Score:4, Insightful)
Off-key (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not gonna touch the obvious joke about pr0n here.
But if I've learned anything while playing videogames with friends over the decades, it's that people often look like idiots while playing, and it doesn't lessen their enjoyment.
And if I've learned anything about repetitive physical exercise, it's that the more often you do it, the less tiring it becomes... you know, cardiovascular and muscular conditioning?
Molyneaux works for MS. And while some of his past work has been great, I think he's a bit ff-key and I of course, as others have pointed out, have to question his motives.
I RTFA... (Score:5, Insightful)
Later,
Towards the end of Molyneux's talk, he made it clear that this panel was not a thinly veiled way of promoting the combat in one of his company's upcoming games, though these are naturally ideas he and his team are considering. "A lot of what I've talked about here will never make it into any game, but maybe some of it will," he said. We expect to see Fable 2 at Microsoft's X06 event next month, and we'll be on the lookout to see how much, if any, of the ideas in today's talk make it into that game.
It doesn't sound to me like he's saying anything about what is going into Fable 2. Rather, the author seems to be trying to mention Fable 2 as much as he can, despite the panel not having any information at all about the game. This was simply a talk from Molyneux about what would be cool to incorporate into a game, not what is feasible or what will go into any games he might be designing.
Re:Conflict of Interest (Score:3, Insightful)
Most likely, the environment at Microsoft is one of extreme pride toward the 360, and a general belief that the system is superior to all others. Being that Peter is now immersed in that environment, it's hard to believe that it would not affect his own thinking and judgement. Which means that he's likely to be very positive toward the 360 no matter what happens, and the Wii will have to work very hard to garner his affection.
Pretty gimmicky (Score:5, Insightful)
I base this on history: The canonical example in my mind is the megazoom in Black and White from an apple with a worm in it out to the full island view. Cute, but in-game, there was nothing else with the level of detail of that worm, other than that apple. The video, hyped as a promise of things to come, was actually the complete set of cool actions you could take. Molyneux seems to keep giving us that.
Honestly, combat is the one thing that modern action-based video games do tolerably well at; it's the other aspects of the game I'd like to see improved first. (Note that I really do mean "tolerably well"; it's not perfect, but the fact that it has been the primary focus of gaming for nigh unto these many years shows, and the near-complete lack of attention paid to anything else but graphics also shows.)
Re:Conflict of Interest (Score:2, Insightful)
I think the Wii will have plenty of fun games, but they're not going to be like the 'traditional' video games. It'll be a blast to swing a sword at enemies. Can you imagine a fencing game? That'd be AMAZING fun! Or how about a gamewhere you're the conductor for an orchestra? I can see that being quite enjoyable. A baseball game would actually be FUN, instead of "Who can time the button presses better".
But you know what? I can't fence for much more than an hour. Baseball's a little better, but I'm still not too interested in the game and would use it as a glorified batting cage, and I'd use the conducting game as much as I play Guitar hero... as often as I have friends who want to play it. The very thing which makes the controller EXCITING, is the thing which makes it unsuited for certain types of games, which can be just as fun as any game which will be on the Wii. Changing the type of control doesn't automatically make it more fun. It allows for different games to be made, and the invention of new genres.
And, no offence, but I don't see the Wiimote being used to great sucess on many first person shooters once the novelty wears off. After all, how many FPSes outside an arcade use light guns? And I don't just mean require, I mean even SUPPORT them? Sure there are a few, but it's not that appealing, to be honest.
Still, if I were to get one of the next gen systems, I'm honestly split between the 360 and the Wii. On the one hand, there are games out NOW that I want a 360 for (Stupid poverty, grumble grumble), like GRAW, Oblivion, and to some extent Prey, as well as upcoming games like Gears of War and Halo 3 (duh). And Geometry Wars, but that doesn't really count. On the other hand, there are games coming out for the Wii which look just as fun, like Twilight Princess. If I had the money to do it, I'd buy both.
The point is, Molyneux is saying that his statement "I think motion-sensitivity is very, very useful, but I think the obvious way of doing it -- unless you're dealing with a 15 to 20 minute experience at most of actually being hugely physical -- is not where the opportunity lies here." is entirely accurate. There are obvious opportunities fun games which offer short, repeatable, fun experiences. There are less obvious opportunities for eccentric games which offer longer periods of enjoyment. But for the traditional "sit down and veg" games like FPSs, the controls aren't that well suited. Why do you think the Wii offers a traditional controler with it as well? Hint, it's not just backwards compatability. But I bet game developers will basically ignore it, because it's a game for the Wii, and ignoring the Wiimote would be like writing a game for the original XBox which couldn't use the hard drive...
Its been a while... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Unique nature of controller may hurt the consol (Score:2, Insightful)
All talk, no action (Score:5, Insightful)
The fighing especially was a horror. Every single weapon handled exactly the same making no difference except for the stats.
So talk all about how fighting in games is going to be in the future but when your own game is a throwback to the 1980 were the only difference between types of blades is their stats then don't expect me too be too impressed.
Yes better fighting would be much appreciated but don't talk about it, do it. He already talked enough about what Fable was going to be like. Why are we still listening to him doing it all over again with Fable 2?
It ain't the first time. Remember Dungeon Keeper? Remember Black & White. Both games wich in their first incarnation were more hype then delivery. Both times admitted by the guy and both times the press drooled all over it and then the sequel only barely admitting that their drooling over the original was a bit too much. I for one am not going to be fooled anymore.
The gaming press just can't be relied upon to be objective when it comes to this guy. With 3 games so far that completly failed to live up to the hype why is this guy still hailed as some kind of gamer god?
Re:Hmm... (Score:2, Insightful)