Peter Molyneux wants Project MOAT to represent his life's work(gamedeveloper.com)
gamedeveloper.com
Peter Molyneux wants Project MOAT to represent his life's work
https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/peter-molyneux-wants-i-project-moat-i-to-represent-his-life-s-work
46 comments
> "And I don't believe a word of "this is my last game, so I want it to be amazing"."
This and variations of "represent his life's work" are catchphrases he always uses to announce his next game. Sense of urgency ("last"), drama ("my life"). Just another phrase for "most bestes game I ever did!". Marketing...
This and variations of "represent his life's work" are catchphrases he always uses to announce his next game. Sense of urgency ("last"), drama ("my life"). Just another phrase for "most bestes game I ever did!". Marketing...
Fable 1 is among the best games ever in my opinion. Still holds up decent as well. Insanely good atmosphere.
I mean, it’s pretty good, but I wouldn’t describe it as the best game ever.
It did have a lot of at the time revolutionary ideas though.
It did have a lot of at the time revolutionary ideas though.
True. And I foolishly have some hopes for the next Fable, but it's been 20 years and I'm not even the targeted audience anymore.
Who else gets a bit emotional knowing their personal gaming enjoyment peaked 20 years ago in front of a CRT?
Who else gets a bit emotional knowing their personal gaming enjoyment peaked 20 years ago in front of a CRT?
Sigh. I miss those stupid point and click adventure games so much.
I hoped for a closure to the monkey island series for so long. And after getting it I’m full of regret. Nothing they did would have made me happy. Nostalgia is what it is.
I hoped for a closure to the monkey island series for so long. And after getting it I’m full of regret. Nothing they did would have made me happy. Nostalgia is what it is.
Fable is a very well put together game and I spent hours with it and had a lot of fun.
That said, a cursory comparison of the game features with the initial press releases from molineaux shows the kind of disconnect that exists from his ideas to his executions.
It's not bad to have a daydreamer setting the overall project vision, but anything he say at any time of the development process is to be treated just like that, as an internal vision document unrelated to the final product.
That said, a cursory comparison of the game features with the initial press releases from molineaux shows the kind of disconnect that exists from his ideas to his executions.
It's not bad to have a daydreamer setting the overall project vision, but anything he say at any time of the development process is to be treated just like that, as an internal vision document unrelated to the final product.
Black & White was amazing.
Granted I was a kid back then so maybe impressionable, but few games have made me feel that intensely about some pixel people.
I think he hit the spot with that one- even though I agree that the vision was much more grandiose...
Black & White is good for the first level, and steadily goes downhill, as I recall.
There's a level where you're constantly under attack. There's a level where you lose your creature, which is the game's main perk. And there's a level where it's impossible to progress without using brutal and extremely tedious means. And there's only 5 levels, so that's most of the game for you.
It's like somebody said "Hey, we got the fun stuff out of the way, now let's have every kind of annoying mission a game can have, one after another".
There's a level where you're constantly under attack. There's a level where you lose your creature, which is the game's main perk. And there's a level where it's impossible to progress without using brutal and extremely tedious means. And there's only 5 levels, so that's most of the game for you.
It's like somebody said "Hey, we got the fun stuff out of the way, now let's have every kind of annoying mission a game can have, one after another".
While Land 3 arguably encourages a brutal assault, it's possible (as I recall) to beat peacefully—just harder.
I thought the game's first three lands were great, though you're right that the first area is arguably the best. I can see what they were going for with land 4, and it could have been very rewarding, but I never felt the catharsis by breaking the curses that was probably intended.
I did not like land 5, though.
I thought the game's first three lands were great, though you're right that the first area is arguably the best. I can see what they were going for with land 4, and it could have been very rewarding, but I never felt the catharsis by breaking the curses that was probably intended.
I did not like land 5, though.
> I really miss those days of being out, exploring publicly what a game is about. In the past that has led me into all sorts of trouble – as you develop a game, you try things out, and when you try things out, some things work and some things don’t. Now, in the old days, I used to talk about that process without really making it clear that some features may appear and then disappear.
> Famously in Fable 1, I think I mentioned that if you planted an acorn, an oak tree would grow, but that feature was dropped from the original Fable, and I think that was the start of me getting in trouble. I’m deeply sorry if I offended or upset anybody by my often overenthusiastic and ill thought out press. The great thing about this blog is it’s not trying to do anything but explain the process (you’re probably going to see me get ridiculously exicted).
https://developmolyneux.blog/
> And I should make a note here that normally when I’m designing a game, and this is just me, it’s actually a terrible idea, so if anyone is reading this and thinking, right, this is how to design a game, don’t do this! I think, because of my dyslexia, I prefer not to write things down. I mean, you have to write things down when you’re communicating to a team, but in the early days, I think once I’ve written something down, I feel subconsciously that that’s it. It’s written in stone, there’s no more changing it. If you keep it inside your mind and keep mulling it over and thinking about it and wondering about it, and being very curious about how this idea evolves, then it’s much more likely to be fluid. And being fluid allows me to play around a lot with an idea.
> Now the downside is you are depending on yourself to remember all that shit. Because it’s so easy to get excited about something, especially when under the influence of a mood enhancer. It’s very easy to forget about.
> So I’m not saying that this game is going to be my last game, but I am saying that time is running out and that is incredibly sad, but that makes this game, in my mind, very, very meaningful. I feel it should be something which represents parts of my career and the many games I’ve been lucky to work on.
> Famously in Fable 1, I think I mentioned that if you planted an acorn, an oak tree would grow, but that feature was dropped from the original Fable, and I think that was the start of me getting in trouble. I’m deeply sorry if I offended or upset anybody by my often overenthusiastic and ill thought out press. The great thing about this blog is it’s not trying to do anything but explain the process (you’re probably going to see me get ridiculously exicted).
https://developmolyneux.blog/
> And I should make a note here that normally when I’m designing a game, and this is just me, it’s actually a terrible idea, so if anyone is reading this and thinking, right, this is how to design a game, don’t do this! I think, because of my dyslexia, I prefer not to write things down. I mean, you have to write things down when you’re communicating to a team, but in the early days, I think once I’ve written something down, I feel subconsciously that that’s it. It’s written in stone, there’s no more changing it. If you keep it inside your mind and keep mulling it over and thinking about it and wondering about it, and being very curious about how this idea evolves, then it’s much more likely to be fluid. And being fluid allows me to play around a lot with an idea.
> Now the downside is you are depending on yourself to remember all that shit. Because it’s so easy to get excited about something, especially when under the influence of a mood enhancer. It’s very easy to forget about.
> So I’m not saying that this game is going to be my last game, but I am saying that time is running out and that is incredibly sad, but that makes this game, in my mind, very, very meaningful. I feel it should be something which represents parts of my career and the many games I’ve been lucky to work on.
OK, fair point, he acknowledges the pain caused. But then goes and does the exact same thing over again.
I mean, it’s also our fault for believing it again :)
I never understood the extreme hate. "Pain"? We’re talking about video games, for Christ’s sake.
From the article:
> Project MOAT isn't his final game, Molyneux assured.
> Project MOAT isn't his final game, Molyneux assured.
"Black & White was great, but there was always something just not quite right (or not quite complete) with it."
That's how you end up getting us all extinctified by legions of Go playing deathbots.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtzwiwkfUh0&t=4s
That's how you end up getting us all extinctified by legions of Go playing deathbots.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtzwiwkfUh0&t=4s
Also: Populous, Syndicate, The Movies. He made many of the best games of all time. Sure, he had some very public failures, but he had more ground breaking successes than almost anyone else
I dunno, Peter is a great talker and I always WANT to believe him, but after his last projects I'm gonna pass on following this unless he releases something spectacular.
I was enamored with 22cans, even 'played' curiosity - it was when they reached the center of that cube that everything came to light: Peter has lost his touch.
Godus released shortly after and was a mess, terrible gameplay and terrible direction.
I was enamored with 22cans, even 'played' curiosity - it was when they reached the center of that cube that everything came to light: Peter has lost his touch.
Godus released shortly after and was a mess, terrible gameplay and terrible direction.
Peter has a classic case of "Illusory superiority". Because of the recognition he received in the very early formative years of the game development industry, he has come to believe he eternally stands on the pinnacle of game industry innovation and creativity no matter what he does, rather than treating each of his projects critically and individually.
This is like if someone was the best Chess player off of intuition in the 1500s and received great respect for it, then fell off as others studied the game more deeply, but still considered themselves the pinnacle of Chess skill in 2023 despite not coming close to a championship for centuries.
Peter Molyneux deserves respect for the foundational impact he had on the game industry. That does not mean that respect needs to carry over to literally anything he does today if the work itself doesn't amount to much.
This is like if someone was the best Chess player off of intuition in the 1500s and received great respect for it, then fell off as others studied the game more deeply, but still considered themselves the pinnacle of Chess skill in 2023 despite not coming close to a championship for centuries.
Peter Molyneux deserves respect for the foundational impact he had on the game industry. That does not mean that respect needs to carry over to literally anything he does today if the work itself doesn't amount to much.
Even his failures today are worth more than all the lootbox spam of modern gaming, a industry unarguably in decline, were it not for the indys.
It could be a stretch to say he believes himself to be superior.
It is pretty clear that overstatement and hype has become the only (or the best) way for him to get low cost attention.
Market forces for his brand, leads to more of the same hype/let-down cycle.
It is pretty clear that overstatement and hype has become the only (or the best) way for him to get low cost attention.
Market forces for his brand, leads to more of the same hype/let-down cycle.
Everyone makes bad games, IMO he did some really exceptional ones;
so I agree its a valid marketing strat and so far it worked out for him, more or less.
I think people are so passionate in this thread because we want him to be better, to actually be the godsent genius that will make the ultimate game.
I gotta say no game designer made me dream like Molyneux and just for that I love him, even if not all of his dreams became reality.
But he has the vision and power to inspire, and that is rare as well.
so I agree its a valid marketing strat and so far it worked out for him, more or less.
I think people are so passionate in this thread because we want him to be better, to actually be the godsent genius that will make the ultimate game.
I gotta say no game designer made me dream like Molyneux and just for that I love him, even if not all of his dreams became reality.
But he has the vision and power to inspire, and that is rare as well.
He's unable to admit when something is taking the wrong direction! I play-tested Godus throughout it's journey and in the early middle, it was really enjoyable to play and it took the right direction. But then they did a 180 and could never figure out the mechanics of the AI inhabitants or "what to do next" in the game, so it became a one-trick pony that never led anywhere. And there was certainly no lack of feedback about these issues early on..
I wish Godus had turned out to be what the videos looked like, with physics and simulation. Instead it just turned into a timer farming game.
Even his greatest successes were never the breathtaking, revolutionary advances he promised. Populous, Syndicate, Themen Park, Magic Carpet, Dungeon Keeper were nothing but a fairly simple game play idea, executed well.
But for some reason, games journalism always repeated his wild and completely impossible ideas for the next product like a gospel. That is the core of the problem, and not a thirteen year old boy trapped in the bod of a grown man talking about the game he’s going to create once he has read through c++ for dummies.
But for some reason, games journalism always repeated his wild and completely impossible ideas for the next product like a gospel. That is the core of the problem, and not a thirteen year old boy trapped in the bod of a grown man talking about the game he’s going to create once he has read through c++ for dummies.
> a fairly simple game play idea, executed well.
tbh that is all you need for a truly exceptional product, not just in gaming. And it's insanely hard to do that.
Dungeon Keeper is still one of the best games I played after all these years and I will die defending it on this hill.
tbh that is all you need for a truly exceptional product, not just in gaming. And it's insanely hard to do that.
Dungeon Keeper is still one of the best games I played after all these years and I will die defending it on this hill.
Yes. But strangely, he always promised wide simulations of worlds with fascinating emergent behavior. But even his truly great games were never like that. But it took journalism roughly 25 years to notice.
I have to hard disagree with you here on a personal level, a lot of my formative years I spent playing his games and they mean a great deal to me. But I wish he would take a step back to look at the market today and make something that's really needed, not try to relive the old glory days.
I wonder if it might have been more than that: maybe the problem wasn't games journalism repeating, but games journalism listening? Every piece of entertainment that is a multi-person effort has a little more thought put into it than visible on the surface (the opposite seems to be true for most solo art). That's nothing special. But when journalists start digging for more, trying to outdo each other in deep questions at interviews, the interviewee will be flattered and try to deliver more of that. Perhaps he would have continued doing well executed simple ideas if he never got that "the big ideas guy!" spotlight pointed at him. Remember how the matrix sequels felt like force-fed intellectual posturing? Same effect I think, inability to resist the flattery of attention, and as a consequence all the subtlety of "there might be more beneath just the explosions" gone.
Populous, Syndicate, Theme Park, Magic Carpet, Dungeon Keeper were nothing but a fairly simple game play idea, executed well.
Sure be they were executed well enough that they all make the list of some of my favourite games of the time.
Sure be they were executed well enough that they all make the list of some of my favourite games of the time.
My all time favorite games can be described as "fairly simple gameplay idea, executed well".
If you want to see a hardball-by-the-standards-of-the-games-press interview with Molyneux, this one from rockpapershotgun starts with the question "Do you think that you're a pathological liar?"
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/peter-molyneux-interview-go...
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/peter-molyneux-interview-go...
This kind of interview is awful.
I mean, I'm not even a fan of Molyneux. The only game from him I truly enjoyed was Dungeon Keeper. But this kind of interview feels like it just wants to drag the guy for some public humiliation. And it is not like putting the person being interviewed on the defensive will result in anything but self-defense when responding.
Beyond that videogames are just entertainment - if you play one and it is a disappointment, just go play some other one, there are plenty of games out there. It's not like the guy was a corrupt politician who stole hundreds of millions, or shit like that.
I mean, I'm not even a fan of Molyneux. The only game from him I truly enjoyed was Dungeon Keeper. But this kind of interview feels like it just wants to drag the guy for some public humiliation. And it is not like putting the person being interviewed on the defensive will result in anything but self-defense when responding.
Beyond that videogames are just entertainment - if you play one and it is a disappointment, just go play some other one, there are plenty of games out there. It's not like the guy was a corrupt politician who stole hundreds of millions, or shit like that.
This headline summarizes everything I admire about Molyneux. When he does a thing, it becomes all-consuming to him.
Whether or not he actually achieves that goal becomes almost secondary to the process of working toward it, for him.
And he’s able to communicate that passion so well, and each time you find yourself hoping he succeeds
And he’s able to communicate that passion so well, and each time you find yourself hoping he succeeds
He should have trusted support people around to aid him. Is he rich? Does the company he works at care? Why doesn't he have everything he needs?
> to represent his life's work
So it's gonna be a monument to "Over-promise and under-deliver"?
So it's gonna be a monument to "Over-promise and under-deliver"?
That's a great way to make a comment 50% mean and 50% hilarious.
In the same way, I think a lot of people are going to roast Elon Musk if he dies before he manages to get to Mars.
In the same way, I think a lot of people are going to roast Elon Musk if he dies before he manages to get to Mars.
Didn't he say the same thing about Godus?
I'm confused. What exactly is Project MOAT?
All this article says about MOAT is that it's set in the Fable universe, which I assume means Molyneux is working with Microsoft in some capacity again.
All this article says about MOAT is that it's set in the Fable universe, which I assume means Molyneux is working with Microsoft in some capacity again.
That appears to be all the infomation, got to start building that hype early.
On the plus side, Molyneux can't follow his normal MO of over-promising if he isn't providing any details.
On the plus side, Molyneux can't follow his normal MO of over-promising if he isn't providing any details.
He's mostly missed, in recent years, but in a weird way I've missed him. Whether he can live up to his own hype, whether he is as much a legend to others as he is to himself, whether he's pushing the boundaries of art and interactivity, or simply making all the obvious mistakes and claiming it's something new, he's fantastically entertaining in the process.
if anyone is nostalgic about dungeon keeper, note that's it's actively being worked on by a group of passionate fans: https://keeperfx.net
HN seems to love polarizing game devs. Phil Fish, Jonathan Blow, Casey Muratori.
We are so back!
Dungeon Keeper is right up there in my all-time best games.
Black & White was great, but there was always something just not quite right (or not quite complete) with it.
Really enjoyed the Fable games, but they still didn't live up to the hype.
And then there's the Godus saga, which I played a lot but ultimately gave up on. It felt like backing a particularly doomed Kickstarter for a game I really wanted to play.
He talks the talk, and then stumbles the walk. And I'm a total sucker for his vision of what a game should be. But almost always disappointed by the execution (Dungeon Keeper was the exception - almost perfect execution on that). It's like he has a vision of a gaming paradise that humans can't actually build.
But he never seems to acknowledge the amount of pain that his failure to build causes. And he never seems to learn to under-promise and over-deliver. Every new game is going to be this amazing work of art, and then what emerges from the development process is like a poor shadow of what he describes. I'm not falling for it this time.
And I don't believe a word of "this is my last game, so I want it to be amazing".