Interview Peter Molyneux - Complexity is only simplicity multiplied

[DraQ]

Retroactive abortion. The solution for all world's ills.

 

[Heartwarden]

If they still allow work experience at Lionhead, it's as simple as a trip down and cyanide in his coffee.

 

[DraQ]

If they still allow work experience at Lionhead, it's as simple as a trip down and cyanide in his coffee.

A true patriot! I admire you!

 

[Xor]

I have lost all hope for the future of the industry.

 

[Achilles]

Same shit I read from Sid Meier recently. Said the same crap about how gamers need things streamlined and simple otherwise it's not 'FUN' and no-one wants to play complicated games and other such drivel....

I think that's a bit unfair for Meier. I don't know if he actually said those things, but his company is still making Civilization and doesn't seem to have sold out completely just yet. Maybe the next Civ will be dumbed down for the masses, but we ought to give him the benefit of a doubt.

 

[Hamster]

There is no other man in the industry that i hate more than Molyneux.

 

[poocolator]

It's saddest to see the guys who've been around the longest sink the lowest.


Qwinn

 

[Garm]

It's saddest to see the guys who've been around the longest sink the lowest.


Qwinn

Meh. He hasn't made a good game in ages. He's been on the bottom for awhile now...can't really sink lower at this point.

 

[poocolator]

Oh, wow. I never knew Meier was such an idiot. About every of those points makes me cringe.

 

[Angthoron]

Oh dear. That's so truly horrible a pile of quotes. Explains a lot, too.

He's right about the first 15 minutes in a way, though. Consider first 15 minutes of Torment vs Dragon Age. My character just woke up on a mortuary slab and has a floating skull and interactive zombies nearby! Holy crap. I was 14 or 15 at the time I saw that, it hooked me hard right there. It still does. Dragon Age? Yawn, please. So yes, he's right on that one.

I also sort of agree about moral clarity point he makes. I rather have it, as he's put it, in my head, if I want to see an enemy begging for mercy - or his people cheering me on as I liberate them from their leaders' oppression. The game can't guess my mood and desires and motivations, and so KotOR ends up corny and ME moral "ambiguity" silly. Fallout handled this well - you could be helluva evil, but there's nobody crying in your wake, or begging you to stop - after all, many like to be efficient in their games, or badass, but hardly ever does anyone want to feel like a hardcore sadist as the game pushes it into the player's face.


Ergo, Meier is still less full of crap than Mulenex.

 

[Achilles]

stupid things Meier said

Well, I stand corrected. Aside from that thing about the first 15 mintues, everything else is indeed stupid drivel. So what is going on here, is he taking all the glory while some faceless drone does all the work?

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Fallout handled this well - you could be helluva evil, but there's nobody crying in your wake, or begging you to stop - after all, many like to be efficient in their games, or badass, but hardly ever does anyone want to feel like a hardcore sadist as the game pushes it into the player's face.

If the game lets you be "efficient" (read: asshole to npcs) and badass, and nobody acts like they're feeling the consequences, then it's not really handled well.

 

[Ruprekt]

Here's Sid on the evils of making games complex, hard and realistic:

"Early on, Meier learned that Americans are egomaniacs. If you want to create a civilization that rules the world, you’re by definition an egomaniac. That has a lot of implications, such as how you have to always tilt the odds in favor of the American winning, regardless of the true mathematical odds for things such as battles. If you don’t do this, Americans will perceive your game as too difficult and will drop it.

“Game play is a psychological experience,” Meier said. “It’s all in your head. I thought the more realistic you made a game, the more historically accurate, [the more] the player would appreciate it. In reality, I was wrong. You have to take into account what actually happens in an American’s head. I never get letters from Americans who say, I won too much in your game.”"

Giving options to Americans is bad:

"Meier said that the first 15 minutes of a game are key. Americans have a need for instant gratification. If you don’t hook them at the start, they will drop it quickly. Game designers should never waste an Americans time by sending them down the wrong road or giving them too many options that distract them from the main object of a game."

Moral choices are bad:

"He said that games should have moral clarity. If you’re playing an empire game, the player should have no qualms about crushing a rival. If you make the rival into a mean ruler, then there’s no moral dilemma. But if the rival is pleading and the action is morally confused, the American won’t be as satisfied. The style and content of a game should be consistent. You don’t mix exploding heads with cartoons. And you shouldn’t assume that players will be magnanimous; in one test of the Civilization Network online game, Meier said that American's should be able to give each other gold. The problem was that no one was ever properly motivated to give away money, and so they didn’t do it."

Fixed

 

[Angthoron]

Fallout handled this well - you could be helluva evil, but there's nobody crying in your wake, or begging you to stop - after all, many like to be efficient in their games, or badass, but hardly ever does anyone want to feel like a hardcore sadist as the game pushes it into the player's face.

If the game lets you be "efficient" (read: asshole to npcs) and badass, and nobody acts like they're feeling the consequences, then it's not really handled well.

What consequences? Did slavers in Africa suffer consequences for shipping locals to America? Maybe if they caught malaria. Otherwise they got rich and built nice homes in the homeland.

What consequences? Going through a town you'll never see again and where no-one knows you and doesn't have a clue where you went?

What consequences? Looting a bunch of freshly-butchered caravaners that ran into a group of bandits and legging it right after?

I felt the consequences: I lined my pockets at their expense. Just like I intended. My character was a practical unscrupulous Machiavellian jerk. Not like some writer decided me to LARP.

Fallout does this just fine. If Mass Protocol would be of the same size as Fallout, "every action" wouldn't have a consequence either. In a chain of events interconnected, yes. In the world where you can wander around the wastes for years, no.

 

[Ruprekt]

"In the world where you can wander around the wastes for years"

A world like that makes no sense, anyway.

That's why Fallout has an ending and the ending montage... those are your consequences.


In reality psychopaths and narcissists are high maintainance. They don't prosper as lone badasses 'wandering the earth' (thought they might like to picture themselves that way).

 

[1eyedking]

Re: Today's Web Opera Cast Of Characters

4too

No, he's not Keldorn. You've got to work yourself into a particular state of mind to write dadaist stuff - Keldorn was self-absorbed, but not in that sense; plus he lacked the intelligence.

His registration date reads "May 2004". This one's straight out of the DAC or NMA asylum.





Out of the frying pan into the fire, I'd say.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

What consequences? Did slavers in Africa suffer consequences for shipping locals to America? Maybe if they caught malaria. Otherwise they got rich and built nice homes in the homeland.

Weird wording on my part. By "consequences", I meant something happen. Having people begging you not to kill them, for example. If the game lets you be a cruel fuck and nobody cries after you leave or beg you not to kill them, then it's not working.

I felt the consequences: I lined my pockets at their expense. Just like I intended. My character was a practical unscrupulous Machiavellian jerk. Not like some writer decided me to LARP.

You said the other npcs didn't make you feel like your character is a practical unscrupulous Machiavellian jerk, supposedly because people wouldn't feel comfortable with it or something. So, it failed in that aspect.

 

[Angthoron]

What consequences? Did slavers in Africa suffer consequences for shipping locals to America? Maybe if they caught malaria. Otherwise they got rich and built nice homes in the homeland.

Weird wording on my part. By "consequences", I meant something happen. Having people begging you not to kill them, for example. If the game lets you be a cruel fuck and nobody cries after you leave or beg you not to kill them, then it's not working.

I felt the consequences: I lined my pockets at their expense. Just like I intended. My character was a practical unscrupulous Machiavellian jerk. Not like some writer decided me to LARP.

You said the other npcs didn't make you feel like your character is a practical unscrupulous Machiavellian jerk, supposedly because people wouldn't feel comfortable with it or something. So, it failed in that aspect.

Well, from my point of view, it's quite the opposite - it gives me the feeling that life is cheap and people understand it very well. I don't want every NPC beg for their lives when the kill count in the game is in the hundreds, and neither do you, I believe. What it does is facilitate the style and let me do this.

I feel extremely irritated over the "emotional" moments when in, say, KotOR, you, a Sith, come to take away all money from a man and he looks at you like a puppy you are about to kick. The player isn't a Sith, his character is. His character can't give a damn about this character's rich inner world. He's just here to screw him over. There's no need to give the player emotional blackmail for it. I appreciate games that don't do it.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

I resent that baby arm misappropriated my signature for this news item.

 

[4too]

Emo Marketing

Emo Marketing




The first page of this thread hooked my attention, and in spite of the quotes, I read the whole Gamasutra Peter-M presentation.

I don't 'buy' the sugar coated rationalizations,
and when these hypothetical 'they' stir up emotions and are surprised when they stir up sh-t,
I wonder which alternate reality 'they' are ship wreaked on.

Let's get a look at that Life-style's EULA! Missed a dependent clause? Up the creek without a paddle?

New Buzzword "Digital Relationship" found!

ACHIEVEMENT UNLOCKED

I consider this an excellent laughing encapsulation of the resultant 'choice and consequences' gamed by the marketers of Nex Gen products.

Not only do 'they' manipulate the target demographics' emotional hooks
with illusions as bundled in Peter-M's "'arc of enjoyment ",
but 'THEY" want to codify time and place dependent rationalizations.

Maybe 'they' were just lucky.

Guess 'success' is not enough. Aspirations for unconditional love? No thank you.

"Arc of enjoyment" , an emotional rainbow ride,
might also qualify for a humorous challenge,
if it were not so deviously exploited in popular music.

Computer gaming industry reaches for the stars of movie marketing and achieves the brass ring of Tin Pan Alley one hit wonders.




4too

 

[DraQ]

Same shit I read from Sid Meier recently. Said the same crap about how gamers need things streamlined and simple otherwise it's not 'FUN' and no-one wants to play complicated games and other such drivel....

I think that's a bit unfair for Meier. I don't know if he actually said those things, but his company is still making Civilization and doesn't seem to have sold out completely just yet. Maybe the next Civ will be dumbed down for the masses, but we ought to give him the benefit of a doubt.

Here's Sid on the evils of making games complex, hard and realistic:

"Early on, Meier learned that players are egomaniacs. If you want to create a civilization that rules the world, you’re by definition an egomaniac. That has a lot of implications, such as how you have to always tilt the odds in favor of the player winning, regardless of the true mathematical odds for things such as battles. If you don’t do this, players will perceive your game as too difficult and will drop it.

“Game play is a psychological experience,” Meier said. “It’s all in your head. I thought the more realistic you made a game, the more historically accurate, [the more] the player would appreciate it. In reality, I was wrong. You have to take into account what actually happens in a player’s head. I never get letters from players who say, I won too much in your game.”"

Here's more, a real favourite of mine being a flight simmer:

"One example he gives of the “realism problem” is flight simulators. At first, they were simple and fun. But as they became more realistic, the controls became more complex. Fewer and fewer people could master them. And ultimately, the games became so inaccessible that the genre died out."

Wrong, wrong, wrong but never mind Sid....

Giving options to gamers is bad:

"Meier said that the first 15 minutes of a game are key. Players have a need for instant gratification. If you don’t hook them at the start, they will drop it quickly. Game designers should never waste a player’s time by sending them down the wrong road or giving them too many options that distract them from the main object of a game."

Moral choices are bad:

"He said that games should have moral clarity. If you’re playing an empire game, the player should have no qualms about crushing a rival. If you make the rival into a mean ruler, then there’s no moral dilemma. But if the rival is pleading and the action is morally confused, the player won’t be as satisfied. The style and content of a game should be consistent. You don’t mix exploding heads with cartoons. And you shouldn’t assume that players will be magnanimous; in one test of the Civilization Network online game, Meier said that players should be able to give each other gold. The problem was that no one was ever properly motivated to give away money, and so they didn’t do it."

Gamers need to know who is bad and who is good:

"If you are presenting a villain in a pirate game, give the villain the look of a pirate that the player has seen in movies, such as a character with a black curly mustache. The player will immediately know it’s a villain."

Finally:

"One of the biggest skills that game developers can foster is listening to what players are really saying. This means you don’t have to take their suggestions literally, but interpret them so that you know what they really want."


In other words Sid sucks the sweaty anuses of dead maggots. Find this and more drivel at: http://venturebeat.com/2010/03/12/game- ... al-gamers/

I hate.

 

[kris]

Molyneux is only stupidity multiplied.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

You don’t mix exploding heads with cartoons.

Molyneux disagrees, you can headshot people in fable 2, turning their heads into a pink mist, and then dance and fart all over their corpses.

Molyneux 1; Sid 0

 

[1eyedking]

Re: Emo Marketing

Emo Marketing




The first page of this thread hooked my attention, and in spite of the quotes, I read the whole Gamasutra Peter-M presentation.

I don't 'buy' the sugar coated rationalizations,
and when these hypothetical 'they' stir up emotions and are surprised when they stir up sh-t,
I wonder which alternate reality 'they' are ship wreaked on.

Let's get a look at that Life-style's EULA! Missed a dependent clause? Up the creek without a paddle?

New Buzzword "Digital Relationship" found!

ACHIEVEMENT UNLOCKED

I consider this an excellent laughing encapsulation of the resultant 'choice and consequences' gamed by the marketers of Nex Gen products.

Not only do 'they' manipulate the target demographics' emotional hooks
with illusions as bundled in Peter-M's "'arc of enjoyment ",
but 'THEY" want to codify time and place dependent rationalizations.

Maybe 'they' were just lucky.

Guess 'success' is not enough. Aspirations for unconditional love? No thank you.

"Arc of enjoyment" , an emotional rainbow ride,
might also qualify for a humorous challenge,
if it were not so deviously exploited in popular music.

Computer gaming industry reaches for the stars of movie marketing and achieves the brass ring of Tin Pan Alley one hit wonders.




4too

Mark of enjoyment




Some people say humanity is a-progressing, that we left the Information Age long ago and postmodernism's suffix is tired; I'd agree with them, and tell them we're moving into the Emotional Age.

A never-ending rocket ride, full to the brim with excitement, to the point excitement is no longer the brim of the hull: ecstasy is what it's all about. Digital relationships, NEXT-Gen grannies buying their grandsons some over-the-counter drugs, and IP debauchery, it's what's all about.

Riding the sea crest, we stumble upon the distant lullaby of English sirens; "Tie yourselfs to the mast, ye sailors of the ocean webs!", cries our Ahab, "for yer ears may hearken a song not being sung, nay, but being played the larger role in our imaginations! Today's deceit lies not in other's words - but in our lying selves." The brave Captain soon jumped the plank and smashed his head against the rocks. Is there any hope at all for those who still want to listen?

"You've got to sell at least a million copies!", they said Moby Dick cried.

Is that why our Captains kill themselves?

Whatever the case, they're in far better worlds now, we can hear their laughter and joy from afar; or is that what other voices from beyond sing? Could it possibly be that they're...?




No.





1eyedking

 

[4too]

Novel Cherry Picking

Novel Cherry Picking

...Today's deceit lies not in other's words - but in our lying selves. ...

So ... as I point with one finger, ... three are pointing back at me!

Holy leaping Cetaceans, hooked by my interior motives, and hoisted by my own petard!

:shock: 'teh horror-ah, teh horror-ah!!1! :shock:

Not taking (post)modern marketing (too)seriously, ... serious business.



4too