GAME JOBS
Contents
Peter Molyneux: Everything's Changing
 
 
Printer-Friendly VersionPrinter-Friendly Version
 
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
June 7, 2013
 
Telltale Games
Lead Environment Artist
 
Trendy Entertainment
Technical Producer
 
Sledgehammer Games / Activision
Level Designer (Temporary)
 
High Moon / Activision
Senior Environment Artist
 
LeapFrog
Associate Producer
 
EA - Austin
Producer
spacer
Latest Blogs
spacer View All     Post     RSS spacer
 
June 7, 2013
 
Tenets of Videodreams, Part 3: Musicality
 
Post Mortem: Minecraft Oakland
 
Free to Play: A Call for Games Lacking Challenge [1]
 
Cracking the Touchscreen Code [3]
 
10 Business Law and Tax Law Steps to Improve the Chance of Crowdfunding Success
spacer
About
spacer Editor-In-Chief:
Kris Graft
Blog Director:
Christian Nutt
Senior Contributing Editor:
Brandon Sheffield
News Editors:
Mike Rose, Kris Ligman
Editors-At-Large:
Leigh Alexander, Chris Morris
Advertising:
Jennifer Sulik
Recruitment:
Gina Gross
Education:
Gillian Crowley
 
Contact Gamasutra
 
Report a Problem
 
Submit News
 
Comment Guidelines
 
Blogging Guidelines
Sponsor
Features
  Peter Molyneux: Everything's Changing
by Christian Nutt [Business/Marketing, Design, Interview]
14 comments Share on Twitter Share on Facebook RSS
 
 
September 28, 2012 Article Start Previous Page 4 of 4
 

I wanted to talk to you, also, about how you arrived at the idea of focus, and focusing on simple concepts.

PM: Just through the atrocious mistakes I've made in the past. Being at Microsoft, I was helping to design Fable: The Journey, and I was also going around all the different studios in Europe, and I was also the studio head of Lionhead, and I was also doing all the PR, and I was also an exec at Microsoft, and I was also looking at the new hardware stuff.



And I just personally can't do a good job on more than one thing. If you believe that you've got an idea, you believe that that idea is worth throwing all your chips back on the table and betting them all over again, then that should be your single obsessive focus, I think.

While you're talking, I was wondering if maybe these massive productions -- Fable-like games that cost tens of millions of dollars -- have maybe pushed things too far in certain directions and become unsustainable?

PM: I'd hate to think they're not sustainable. A lot of the brilliance of how Unity is developing is because Unity aspires to be the tool that will eventually create those sort of games. And I think it's incredibly good for triple-A games to push the quality envelope of where we are.

I just think that triple-A games need to adapt, just like any other genre. They need to adapt, and they need to embrace this new tidal wave of multi-device, analytical, persistent, cloud computing universes that we've put forward.

And at the moment they don't feel like they're being adapted, partly because they're squashed by the hardware evolution. I mean, Apple comes along and iterates on its hardware every six months. It takes us, in the console manufacturers, six years. By the time another console generation comes out, God knows, it'll probably be in your brain or something. That's part of the problem. But it'd be great.

I'm absolutely sure one day, development on a title on this is going to go up in the tens of millions. You can already see development like Infinity Blade. And there's going to be more of those -- and all those texture maps and animations and all that stuff, it costs money.

I've got a two-sided question. Now that you're outside of the Microsoft console world, what is holding that back? You did allude to the hardware, but what is holding that back from jumping feet first into these sorts of things you're talking about?

PM: For development?

Yeah.

PM: Well, there's two big problems. One is, making an existing triple-A game is incredibly hard to do. Insanely hard to do. Whether it be Call of Duty or whether it be a new franchise. It's insanely hard to do. To do all that stuff and to totally embrace this new, disruptive world is, it's doubling our efforts.

Quite often a publisher or whatever will turn around and say, "Oh God, I wish you supported achievements better," or, "Could you support Live more?" But it's not something that you want to have ordered on. You want to get those teams to get obsessive about it. And doing those two things together is very, very, very, very difficult. It's very difficult.

And the other side of the coin is, now that you're in the startup world, small team, you talked a little bit ago about that there isn't a game that pushes this device in the way you see its potential. What's holding that back?

PM: Well again, it's the same problem. There's just a hell of a lot of stuff to get used to. For us existing, very unfit developers, who have been in the safety of the triple-A universe for a long time, we need to get fit again. And for anybody coming new, there's so many different things going on so quickly it's hard to focus on what one.

Now it's all settling down a little bit, and we totally realize that cloud is here to stay, and cloud computing is here to stay, and analytics is here to stay, and multi-device is here to stay, we can start settling down on that. I hope. But you're starting to see some real enhancements in things like free-to-play already. It doesn't feel so greedy anymore.

We've been through a lot of evolution over the last few years in the industry, in general, and we've seen a lot of things change. Well, there's no end state, but you don't know where we're going. Or do you think you have an idea?

PM: No, I don't know where we're going. I just know we're going somewhere new. This is the best analogy I've got. What we do is like exploring a new country. It's like going after the source of the Nile.

We have no idea what's around the next bend. It could be a cliff, it could be a pit of crocodiles, it could be a path with a big arrow on it. But it does feel like, sometimes, you've got your machete out and you're beating through the unexplored country. But we know we're going somewhere. We definitely know we're going somewhere. We aren't quite sure the route we're going to take there.

And where we're going, I think, is that we're going to fulfill our potential. And our potential is a true, true, proper entertainment medium, a true entertainment medium. The first ever entertainment medium that engages people, that doesn't demand that a person sits there and sucks up information like a sponge without any form of feedback, and engages people. That's the real invention that we're going to, and that's an amazing invention. That's true democratization of entertainment, not just of development.

That's way too passionate, isn't it?

 
Article Start Previous Page 4 of 4
 
Top Stories

image
Gearbox's Randy Pitchford on games and gun violence
image
How Kinect's brute force strategy could make Xbox One a success
image
Microsoft's official stance on used games for Xbox One
image
Keeping the simulation dream alive
Comments

Christer Kaitila
profile image
The games industry is lucky to have people like PM. With all the vitriol, cloning, monetization-obsessed bandwagoneers and doom-and-gloom out there, it is so wonderful to see examples of enthusiastic imagination and positivity.

Muir Freeland
profile image
I love this quote: "But I think that these things now [taps iPad] are great pieces of hardware. There just aren't great pieces of software to match those pieces of hardware, and history proves that a vacuum is always filled. Something will fill that which really amazes us."

This is exactly how I feel about the mobile space. Just because we're accustomed to shoddy experiences doesn't mean it has to be that way.

Dan Eisenhower
profile image
Not really. There are "great" pieces of software, they just don't meet a "hardcore gamers" conventional definition.

Scott Sheppard
profile image
Unmitigated enthusiasm should permeate more of this industry. Enthusiasm for new untested things. I really like Peter.

Michael Joseph
profile image
The future of games is in the past.

I view the AAA shooter era born with Wolfenstein & Doom and solidified with Half Life and Counter-Strike as a divergent path that is dead ending. We need to go back to before that divergence occurred. That doesn't mean we can't borrow concepts from that path, but that path on it's own is too narrow.

The future is the return to the old school focus on mechanics and focus on simulation that is itself mindful of mechanics. (as opposed to graphical & physical simulation that is mindful of eye candy).

I'm wary of folks like Peter Molyneux who can't clearly articulate his vision of a future. He's been in PR too long me thinks.

Louis-Felix Cauchon
profile image
Totally agree. My current game has been designed in this optic. Focused more on the mechanics than eye-candy cloned gameplay.

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=92508820

Michael Pianta
profile image
There's something about Molyneux that I find off putting... I respect him for trying different, creative ideas, but something about the way he talks about his games bothers me. Much like David Cage, he makes sweeping proclamations about things - for instance, he says that the days of presenting a finished product, charging a certain amount for it and leaving it be are "over". On the one hand, I doubt that, but on the other hand, even if he's right, it comes across as arrogant the way he says it. Like he has seen The Way, and The Way is to use analytics to constantly change and update the product forever, and anyone who doesn't start doing that is not on The Path to The Future. He could say, "I think we could do something new and interesting with this" and to be fair to him he does say that but he ties it to this sweeping condemnation of the rest of the industry for not being as forward thinking as he is (or thinks he is). I don't think he intends to sound that way, but that is how it comes across to me, nor is this the first interview of his where I've felt that way.

Jonathan Jennings
profile image
i agree but I will say the man never lets anything break his stride . i will never forget the whole " project ego" pre-release stuff there's excitement and then there is over promising on a massive scale . still i am happy to see someone who constantly seems like he desires to push the boundaries of what we do , definitely a good figurehead to have if you want someone to be the driving force behind something exploratory

Ramin Shokrizade
profile image
I don't have a problem with bravado when it is earned. Peter, as an elder in the gaming industry, is coming up against these external forces: one is tempting him to use his clout to get experimental and push the boundaries of art, the other is tempting him to play it safe and milk his existing franchises in a way that is guaranteed to generate profit. I see all the great masters come up against this dynamic. Some win, and most lose. I hope he wins, and he has the clout to get funding for risky projects no one else would get funding for.

He does not have to be very forward thinking to come across as more forward thinking than his peers or apprentices. Despite the astonishing rate of hardware development, software really is in a creative slump right now for a variety of reasons, one of them being the introduction of analytics.

Mike Griffin
profile image
I enjoyed how Peter said Free-to-Play games are finally becoming "less greedy" now.
I feel the same way.

There's still an astounding quantity of in-app greed and garbage in software one can barely call a "game" in the free-to-play space, but we also have a lot of smart people and quality developers producing entertaining -- and intelligently valued -- F2P games now.

Ramin Shokrizade
profile image
Mike, I think F2P can actually *improve* gameplay instead of destroy it, if done well. The problem is that right now it is not done well. It is such a new business model, and those that have experience with it are mostly from Asia where the culture of gameplay is very different. Blindly translating that experience to the West without understanding why the model works or does not work can have catastrophic effects.

Robert Swift
profile image
Actually, Mods on the PC are a great way to prolong the life of games and improve steadily upon the original. A good example are the Total War or Elder Scrolls games.

And maybe there will be new ways of making money with Mods. Personally, I wouldn't mind to spend some money for constant improvements and new ways to play my favorite games.

Raymond Ortgiesen
profile image
Molynouveaux

Finn Haverkamp
profile image
Could anybody please clarify this quotation?

"And the number of taps required on the last surface will be the number of active users, so everyone will get one tap, and that's going to be frantic."

If I'm reading this correctly, I believe it means that at the center of the cube is one final, tiny cube. And the mystery item is inside that cube. To break that final cube, players must tap it as many times as there are players (e.g. 1,234,567 times). If a player has a diamond chisel, though, a single tap on that final cube is in fact 1,000 taps, or whatever. And, that player, and every other player, may tap the final cube as many times as he or she pleases. Whichever tap meets or exceeds the requisite number breaks the cube. The quotation does NOT mean that each player is limited to a single tap on the final cube, and a single tap is equivalent to exactly one tap, regardless of the chisel used or bonus accrued? This would mean every player who has every played curious would need to log on to give the cube their tap. So I think this second interpretation is unlikely. Correct?


none
 
Comment:
 




UBM Tech