Damn, people HATE Molyneux here huh? He didn't insult Mm or LBP, get over it people. LBP was a risky project, which succeeded, but nobody knew it was going to ever sell a million or whatever.
Exactly, I feel the same way. People are giving Sony so much sh.t ignoring that they're the only platform holder that's willing to take creative risks while still satisfying the hardcore base.
So I'm going to just say that none of you should be bashing Molyneux. As someone who's met and spoken to him multiple times at multiple GDC's (I was present at this lecture), I can say not only is he extremely intelligent, but he's one of the nicest people I've met in the industry. Calling him a 'certifiable douchebag' and 'an overrated ass' is completely uncalled for.
Nobody's going to argue against him being a nice guy. He really doesn't seem like a mean person; however, his tendency to exaggerate, lie, and over-hype his games overshadows his personality in a lot of people's minds.
Should we really be so quick to beat the shit out of Molyneux here?
I love LBP. The music selection is amazing (Battles and Go! Team are two of my favourite bands), the idea itself is empowering, and every time I see a new custom level, I'm thoroughly impressed by the versatility of the creation tools that they have given to players around the world.
That being said, I haven't touched the thing in months. New costumes don't do it for me, custom levels (at least the last time I checked) were more about points-fests and shoddy recreations of other games and movies, and I loved the single player mode, but couldn't bring myself to 100% each of the levels.
Don't get me wrong; the game is a critical darling and a marvel of ingenuity. I think Molyneux was basically saying this: "It's cool, it's amazing, it's groundbreaking. Will it sell?"
LBP swept GDC, but last time I checked, its sales were simply average. Molyneux wasn't willing to take a risk on it, and Sony was.
Molyneux has always struck me as the kind of person who actually does care about the depth, the art, and the honest-to-god quality of a game ALONGSIDE sales. He's not a braindead businessman.
A little intresting fact: This isn't the first time a company betray one another. Did you know the Playstation would have been Nintendo's brand? the Playstation was a collaboration between Sony and Nintendo after the Sega CD for the Genesis came out. Sony and Nintendo the break up the project and Sony did the playstation by themselves If Sony and Nintendo didn't ditch each other out, then Nintendo would have had a powerful console beyond Xbox 360 and Wii. it would have been the Playstation 3. I could imagine this
-Nintendo would had owned famous characters like Ratchet & Clank, Jax & Daxter, Crash bandicoot (which is no longer owned by Sony), and Spyro the Dragon (also no longer owned by Sony), Gabe Logan from Syphon Filter, and Nathan Drake from Uncharted. Also Killzone and Resistance would have been Nintendo's Halo and Gears of War. -Nintendo would have had the first console to play DVD movie thanks to Sony. -Nintendo would made a Super Smash Bros in HD with Sony's Character if they didn't break up like Nariko (Heavenly Sword), Kratos (God of War), Gabe Logan (Syphon Filter), Nathan Drake. They would have made a FPS Super Shooter Bros with Nathan Drake, Gabe Logan, the Navy Seals Team from SOCOM, Nathan Hale, and characters from Killzone. -Also Nintendo would have had Fallout 3, Bioshock, GTA 4, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (which is on DS), Dead Space (one for the Wii came out), and other good game which Sony and Nintendo could have owned.
You're assuming that if the partnership lasted that all of Sony's and Nintendo's brands would have merged, including ones that were created well after the fact, like Bioshock, Fallout 3, GTA, CoD4, etc, which is a very, very bad assumption. Sony was wanted to push the envelope in terms of performance and technology (notice how they have gone to the next-gen media each console?), but Nintendo wanted to use tried-and-true, stable, but slightly old tech (aside from the Wii, but that was a result of GC). It wasn't meant to be from the start: the companies have very different visions and markets they try to play to.
If it DID happen, however, I say MS would not have entered the market. That would have been interesting (or uninteresting, as only 1 console maker could have been).
@Kobun: That was so blown out proportion and misunderstood, and due, for the most part, to an oversight in the design community moderation system. The vast majority of stuff was not deleted. Using the "Good Grief" tool put affected levels in unplayable limbo until they could be be reviewed by Media Molecule. This is why so many levels "magically reappeared." It wasn't MM backpedaling- it was the moderation process playing itself out. So much of the mess came from people who were misusing the "Good Grief" tool to literally grief other players.
Rampant, misinformed speculation and irresponsible knee-jerk reporting from usually decent outlets resulted in the big bru-ha-ha we witnessed last November. Media Molecules inadequate communication to users who were affected by the moderation process only compounded the problem.
@Bialia: Yeah, we all know they weren't deleted, but effectively removing those levels from the game is pretty much semantics as far as that goes when it came to accessing user content (the chief selling point of LBP). Thankfully, MM got that sorted out quickly enough.
@Kobun: Been reading your comments on this thread, you seem very defensive, maybe you should drink some water and chill out, maybe go take a break from the PC for a while, before you cry anymore fanboy tears.
@Strife Fox †: So name calling passes for common sense in the Strife Fox + household? Too worked up that someone posting on the Internet won't ride the meme train with you and therefore must be a "fanboy?" Sheesh. It's somewhat akin to allowing people to state unchecked that Bad Religion's entire output sucks due to the existence of Into the Unknown, lest someone be labeled a "fanboy" by a stranger on the Internet (shudder).
@Kobun: I disagree though- I think it is very different. Temporarily putting a hold on a level is a very different thing from wiping it from the face of the earth forever. It shows that MM held user creations in a slightly higher regard than the internet community was giving them credit for, even when shit was going down.
People were reporting that MM had deleted beloved community levels on a whim when they simply hadn't. Some asshole decides to flag, say, the Azure Palace for no reason, it gets yanked on a temporary basis and the internet basically implodes. This wasn't the hand of Media Molecule hand at work- this was users abusing the system.
Obviously there was a huge oversight when they worked out their moderation process, but they just weren't destroying people's creations immediately and slapping their userbase in the face for no reason with no gratitude for their hard work. I think the spin that news outlets put on the whole deal was just fucked up and misled.
It's not just semantics- intent is important here, especially when they were raked over the coals like they were.
@Bialia: I was thinking semantics as far as what the end user perceives -- getting deleted or getting blacklisted ultimately means about the same for a player unable to access a level. You're right that the media should have clarified it better though since it just led to panic and uninformed bashing. LBP was a big enough title and strong enough to weather that backlash, but I hate to think what such sensationalistic reporting would have done to a smaller game.
You obviously have a skewed view. The man is defending PM, and he's taking flack for it. PM is a great dev, and has done WONDEROUS things for gaming. Too many people forget how influential this man was, or are too young (12 year olds like yourself) to remember Bullfrog
MM should have done a better job with the media. LBP is great for what it is, but I just don't see it's linear side-scrolling game-play as anything revolutionary, or anything that will hold my attention for more than 10 minutes.
@WontonTiger: Yeah, the side scrolling gameplay wasn't revolutionary at all per se, and it wasn't even a side scroller in the usual sense. It was a physics game all the way, you know, and you could feel it- floaty as all get out. For me though, the appeal didn't lie there. The game was beautiful, and I loved seeing how people approached using the creation tools. Also, tons of fun online multiplayer- the object is having fun, which is so refreshing. I really have had a hoot playing LBP online. :)
I originally came in here to reply to the title, "Missed Opportunities: Lionhead Could Have Made LittleBigPlanet", with a "duh, because Media Molecule was founded by Lionhead devs," but then you guys mentioned The Room and I got extremely sad.
GDC '05:
See, The Room was shown at GDC 4 years ago and it was fucking amazing. They not only had a Portal system similar to Portal but it actually allowed for size scaling as well. Throw a small apple in, get a large apple out, and vice versa. The time manipulation stuff was also awesome while the 3D putty (it's obvious where The Room tech is used in LBP) was moderately interesting.
It's sad to see a lot of this tech die (time manipulation and scaling portals) or never get used, but this is what happens when a game developer spends more time creating features and less time creating games. He should have just given up and released The Room tech demo to the world and called it "a sandbox, not a game."
On a side note, when you find out who actually did the leg work on The Room, it's really annoying to see it presented as "Peter Molyneux's The Room." Life ain't fair.
@Bialia: His name help sells the game, and it's his company that's the one paying for the salaries and equipment for those who are developing for him as well. Yeah, not getting name recognition for released hits would stink to that extent, but it's largely the same at any company.
@Kobun: Yeah, I already understand that. It's just annoying bullshit to have someone else's name tacked onto your work because they're your boss. Just pointing that out.
That seems like an immature jab, since as far as I understand, a game he pushed forwards with instead - Fable II - was received well.
Also, which sold more: Fable II or LittleBigPlanet? Ultimately, the guy works at a company that makes games, and if he made the choice that sold more units, why does he need those awards?
@Shabs: Because he's been touted from here to Timbuktu as a genius, creative leader, and a visionary, maybe? We're not talking sales right now, and at any rate, LBP's sales surely indicate that he missed out big time when he kiboshed the "Room" idea.
@Shabs: Peter Molyneux is trying not to become "that one guy at Lionhead" and become a memorizable name. unfortunatley, that's what he's doing by trying to grab everything that shouldnt rightfully be his to begin with....
@Bialia: He deserves those accolades. You should brush up on his output over the past two plus decades before you smite him for passing on one good selling title for another game which ultimately sold more.
You're reading some sort of hostility into my comment that wasn't there.
Molyneux missed out on a big opportunity. The world isn't black and white, and you're *allowed* to point that out without necessarily having anything negative to say about the rest of his creative output.
If you're looking for a Molyneux hater to rail against, you are absolutely wasting your energy here.
Theme Park? Syndicate? In fact, every bullfrog game ever made? The best games ever? He's got quite an amazing back catalog... I don't see why so many people hate on him...
Dungeon Keeper is still my favouritest game ever, followed by populous.
You're reading that I'm reading hostility. :p Just was pointing out the fallacy of many include the article writer of squashing a man for a "missed" opportunity to develop a hit game when he and his studio have an entire gameography of hits from past to present. Not citing you in particular, but I understand it's an Internet fad to bash the man. His hype regarding Fable, sure, that was silly, but he's done so much more than simple overhyping one Xbox title. The bandwagon haters and hyperbolic comments are annoying, that's all. Nothing to Internet rage over like recent DLC raping. :^)
@Lyndonimus: The Movies is criminally neglected, and if someone wants to bash Lionhead for not being as experimental/creative as it could or may hype itself to be, I'd point to that title which for whatever reason never got the following it probably should have. I suspect that's due to the kinda lame title and not being in the typical game mold.
Unfortunately since B&W he's only been stumbling as his visions become more grandiose.
He is one of the designers I respect the most because he has such a catalog of absolutely amazing games under his tutelage, the problem is, he needs to take a few steps back from the ego trip and focus more on what made him successful and not in becoming a gaming superstar.
@Kobun: The difference is Fable II is no longer selling, LBP is... any person will tell you that they prefer a steady income stream over a pile of money for a day and nothing for a year.
@zoesch: LBP is selling? LMAO Sony is so desperate to sell it that they bundle it with new PS3s, only for buyers to trade in for Resistance 2 and Killzone 2. Go into any Gamestop or EB and they have shelves of used LBPs.
03/30/09
03/30/09
/omg burn mollynoo at teh stake!1111!!!
03/30/09
03/30/09
this is like the guy who said...bah Yahoo...what kinda of company is named Yahoo...a comboy goods store? there is no way I am buying into that IPO.
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
Nobody's going to argue against him being a nice guy. He really doesn't seem like a mean person; however, his tendency to exaggerate, lie, and over-hype his games overshadows his personality in a lot of people's minds.
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
I love LBP. The music selection is amazing (Battles and Go! Team are two of my favourite bands), the idea itself is empowering, and every time I see a new custom level, I'm thoroughly impressed by the versatility of the creation tools that they have given to players around the world.
That being said, I haven't touched the thing in months. New costumes don't do it for me, custom levels (at least the last time I checked) were more about points-fests and shoddy recreations of other games and movies, and I loved the single player mode, but couldn't bring myself to 100% each of the levels.
Don't get me wrong; the game is a critical darling and a marvel of ingenuity. I think Molyneux was basically saying this: "It's cool, it's amazing, it's groundbreaking. Will it sell?"
LBP swept GDC, but last time I checked, its sales were simply average. Molyneux wasn't willing to take a risk on it, and Sony was.
03/30/09
03/30/09
Molyneux has always struck me as the kind of person who actually does care about the depth, the art, and the honest-to-god quality of a game ALONGSIDE sales. He's not a braindead businessman.
03/30/09
03/30/09
A little intresting fact: This isn't the first time a company betray one another. Did you know the Playstation would have been Nintendo's brand? the Playstation was a collaboration between Sony and Nintendo after the Sega CD for the Genesis came out. Sony and Nintendo the break up the project and Sony did the playstation by themselves If Sony and Nintendo didn't ditch each other out, then Nintendo would have had a powerful console beyond Xbox 360 and Wii. it would have been the Playstation 3. I could imagine this
-Nintendo would had owned famous characters like Ratchet & Clank, Jax & Daxter, Crash bandicoot (which is no longer owned by Sony), and Spyro the Dragon (also no longer owned by Sony), Gabe Logan from Syphon Filter, and Nathan Drake from Uncharted. Also Killzone and Resistance would have been Nintendo's Halo and Gears of War.
-Nintendo would have had the first console to play DVD movie thanks to Sony.
-Nintendo would made a Super Smash Bros in HD with Sony's Character if they didn't break up like Nariko (Heavenly Sword), Kratos (God of War), Gabe Logan (Syphon Filter), Nathan Drake. They would have made a FPS Super Shooter Bros with Nathan Drake, Gabe Logan, the Navy Seals Team from SOCOM, Nathan Hale, and characters from Killzone.
-Also Nintendo would have had Fallout 3, Bioshock, GTA 4, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (which is on DS), Dead Space (one for the Wii came out), and other good game which Sony and Nintendo could have owned.
03/30/09
I think anybody who's enough of an enthusiast to read Kotaku knows that already. :p
03/30/09
You're assuming that if the partnership lasted that all of Sony's and Nintendo's brands would have merged, including ones that were created well after the fact, like Bioshock, Fallout 3, GTA, CoD4, etc, which is a very, very bad assumption. Sony was wanted to push the envelope in terms of performance and technology (notice how they have gone to the next-gen media each console?), but Nintendo wanted to use tried-and-true, stable, but slightly old tech (aside from the Wii, but that was a result of GC). It wasn't meant to be from the start: the companies have very different visions and markets they try to play to.
If it DID happen, however, I say MS would not have entered the market. That would have been interesting (or uninteresting, as only 1 console maker could have been).
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
Rampant, misinformed speculation and irresponsible knee-jerk reporting from usually decent outlets resulted in the big bru-ha-ha we witnessed last November. Media Molecules inadequate communication to users who were affected by the moderation process only compounded the problem.
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
People were reporting that MM had deleted beloved community levels on a whim when they simply hadn't. Some asshole decides to flag, say, the Azure Palace for no reason, it gets yanked on a temporary basis and the internet basically implodes. This wasn't the hand of Media Molecule hand at work- this was users abusing the system.
Obviously there was a huge oversight when they worked out their moderation process, but they just weren't destroying people's creations immediately and slapping their userbase in the face for no reason with no gratitude for their hard work. I think the spin that news outlets put on the whole deal was just fucked up and misled.
It's not just semantics- intent is important here, especially when they were raked over the coals like they were.
03/30/09
03/31/09
You obviously have a skewed view. The man is defending PM, and he's taking flack for it. PM is a great dev, and has done WONDEROUS things for gaming. Too many people forget how influential this man was, or are too young (12 year olds like yourself) to remember Bullfrog
@Bialia:
On the other hand, Bialia always seems to have some sort of excuse for something that he previously posted.
03/31/09
MM should have done a better job with the media. LBP is great for what it is, but I just don't see it's linear side-scrolling game-play as anything revolutionary, or anything that will hold my attention for more than 10 minutes.
03/31/09
03/31/09
03/30/09
GDC '05:
See, The Room was shown at GDC 4 years ago and it was fucking amazing. They not only had a Portal system similar to Portal but it actually allowed for size scaling as well. Throw a small apple in, get a large apple out, and vice versa. The time manipulation stuff was also awesome while the 3D putty (it's obvious where The Room tech is used in LBP) was moderately interesting.
It's sad to see a lot of this tech die (time manipulation and scaling portals) or never get used, but this is what happens when a game developer spends more time creating features and less time creating games. He should have just given up and released The Room tech demo to the world and called it "a sandbox, not a game."
03/30/09
On a side note, when you find out who actually did the leg work on The Room, it's really annoying to see it presented as "Peter Molyneux's The Room." Life ain't fair.
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
That seems like an immature jab, since as far as I understand, a game he pushed forwards with instead - Fable II - was received well.
Also, which sold more: Fable II or LittleBigPlanet? Ultimately, the guy works at a company that makes games, and if he made the choice that sold more units, why does he need those awards?
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
You're reading some sort of hostility into my comment that wasn't there.
Molyneux missed out on a big opportunity. The world isn't black and white, and you're *allowed* to point that out without necessarily having anything negative to say about the rest of his creative output.
If you're looking for a Molyneux hater to rail against, you are absolutely wasting your energy here.
03/30/09
Theme Park? Syndicate? In fact, every bullfrog game ever made? The best games ever? He's got quite an amazing back catalog... I don't see why so many people hate on him...
Dungeon Keeper is still my favouritest game ever, followed by populous.
03/30/09
You're reading that I'm reading hostility. :p Just was pointing out the fallacy of many include the article writer of squashing a man for a "missed" opportunity to develop a hit game when he and his studio have an entire gameography of hits from past to present. Not citing you in particular, but I understand it's an Internet fad to bash the man. His hype regarding Fable, sure, that was silly, but he's done so much more than simple overhyping one Xbox title. The bandwagon haters and hyperbolic comments are annoying, that's all. Nothing to Internet rage over like recent DLC raping. :^)
03/30/09
03/30/09
Unfortunately since B&W he's only been stumbling as his visions become more grandiose.
He is one of the designers I respect the most because he has such a catalog of absolutely amazing games under his tutelage, the problem is, he needs to take a few steps back from the ego trip and focus more on what made him successful and not in becoming a gaming superstar.
@Kobun: The difference is Fable II is no longer selling, LBP is... any person will tell you that they prefer a steady income stream over a pile of money for a day and nothing for a year.
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
03/30/09
"AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWW!"
03/30/09
03/30/09
All I can see is Sackboy making his "terrified" face.