Peter Molyneux RPS Interview
polycounter lvl 7
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/02/13/peter-molyneux-interview-godus-reputation-kickstarter/
Thoughts/Opinions?
I personally felt like the interview was just trying to bait Peter the whole time by repeating the same phrases over and over even after a clear response was given, and didn't seem to react at all to anything he said.
In response to the whole calling him a liar/bait crap, I know Peter Molyneux gets a bit too excited when talking about his games and concepts being worked on, but honestly who doesn't.
It's stuff like this that makes me think transparent development and talking about features and road maps, kickstarter campaigns/early access etc. probably isn't the best solution for everyone.
As for my non-rational discourse, the interviewer is a fucking asshole for directly assaulting a single individual's character even after peter already gave an intelligible response. It's like everyone on the internet forgets that game development is a business and that unfortunately in real-life bills need to be paid. God forbid a developer tries to hype up his game to generate revenue so he can actually accomplish his goals. And really, bringing up the fact that the guy stayed at a hotel room for one night like it was some sort of cardinal sin? Jesus since when were game developers forced to wear ankle bracelets by the public? I bet the interviewer never visits his family or has a beer with his friends on the weekend ever (sarcasm)
While Peter may or may not overpromise to the public on a project he's working on, I found most of that interview to be just uncalled for bullshit. Feel free to agree or disagree though.
Thoughts/Opinions?
I personally felt like the interview was just trying to bait Peter the whole time by repeating the same phrases over and over even after a clear response was given, and didn't seem to react at all to anything he said.
In response to the whole calling him a liar/bait crap, I know Peter Molyneux gets a bit too excited when talking about his games and concepts being worked on, but honestly who doesn't.
It's stuff like this that makes me think transparent development and talking about features and road maps, kickstarter campaigns/early access etc. probably isn't the best solution for everyone.
As for my non-rational discourse, the interviewer is a fucking asshole for directly assaulting a single individual's character even after peter already gave an intelligible response. It's like everyone on the internet forgets that game development is a business and that unfortunately in real-life bills need to be paid. God forbid a developer tries to hype up his game to generate revenue so he can actually accomplish his goals. And really, bringing up the fact that the guy stayed at a hotel room for one night like it was some sort of cardinal sin? Jesus since when were game developers forced to wear ankle bracelets by the public? I bet the interviewer never visits his family or has a beer with his friends on the weekend ever (sarcasm)
While Peter may or may not overpromise to the public on a project he's working on, I found most of that interview to be just uncalled for bullshit. Feel free to agree or disagree though.
Replies
To be honest, toxic PR is so rampant in this industry it was only a matter of time before someone snapped, it's just that John Walker chose an actual developer who was clearly already at his wits end due to the issues his project has faced.
For sure, Molyneux has some major issues that he needs to think very hard about addressing, but I don't think this was the right way to go about doing it. Things like this have a manner of escalating to the point where "journalists" like Walker may feel it's okay to act like a reactionary arsehole every time he misunderstands an aspect of game development. I'd say the actual industry and the games media have been at odds with one another for some time, and this could well be the beginning of the end for that relationship.
I think people need to be better at understanding that Kickstarting something is not the same as buying or pre-ordering a game. They don't owe you anything.
I love his response to this though
I get that they are angry, the backers didn't want a mobile click/idle game, they wanted the next Populous. But revenge isn't going to fix it.
Haha he should have said, "Have you ever tried making a game on your own?" but hes just too mellow for that dude.
gotta love peter.
EDIT: the sad thing is, if you read the comments they think peter is the idiot, not RPS
Lionhead made some pretty badass games...Black and White.. Fable...I never played The Movies, but I heard it was fun..
Game "journalism" seems to be a shithole anymore
On the other hand, when he oversells the game on Kickstarter, it leads to people being less willing to support future developers on it. Its worse when its a well known developer doing it.
So from that POV, Peter fucked us all over, not just backers.
kickstarter lives on trust, and every failed project harms that trust. to lie about what the finished poject would be like, like Peter M admit he did, is almost intentionally misusing that trust for your own gains.
i dont think he deserves any symphaty, but neither the hate that he gets. if what he said would be viewed with a lot more skepsis instead, these situations wouldnt happen.
if the boy cries wolf for the 100th time, you have to blame the villagers if they come running.
This ridiculous, extremely unprofessional interview tries to paint him as some sort of evil villain. The guy is overly ambitious and gets overly excited about his design ideas. He's optimistic to a fault, that's his real crime.
That first question just sealed the deal on what I think of John Walker, what an asshole.
As for Peter: The guy is always out too early and invests too much of himself emotionally in everything he makes, the world is not a nice place and when you ask for peoples money they get very very vile very very fast.
Honestly at this point, designing, developing and shipping a lil game under a pseudonym might be his best bet.
Peters problem is that he's to much of a dreamer, he has always been a dreamer and will always be a dreamer.
That's his strength, not a weakness.
Being a dreamer is great, but it can go too far. Maybe he needs a very grounded friend to even things out.
Yes hard hitting journalism is great, this is not.
Could be both. Like chemotherapy, its action has both negative and positive consequences.
He overly focused on the mobile version of godus from the get go even though promising that the pc version would be the focus and not affected by that target.
He suddenly discovered his new found love for free to play and had to have that included on the mobile version even though it's fully possible to release a normal game on these platforms.
PC version is now stuck with tablet controls, gems everywhere, collectables, gameplay fed in time-portions.
He also brought in a publisher with the promise that this would not affect anything, but the pc version since it was tailing after the tablet version now had to use the same server systems (which had to be switched later on due to publisher). Again, active choice.
Most of the design choices have been gone through just because molyneux wanted them and because they had to co-allign with the mobile version, even with the backers screaming no to all of these choices.
On top of all this Molyneux is incapable of giving a clear apology or explanation, it's always long weird stories without content, he then goes off in the worst moment to announce a new thing he is excited about.
So yes, there's some basis for anger when you look at this kickstarter and compare it to others, there's most likely WAY MORE that haven't been explained at all around the whole thing and why people have seemingly just left the project and studio.
lets get a proper interview with a reputable journalist and have a sane conversation on video. One without bias and an agenda.
I mean its simultaneously, unprofessional, disrespectful and show'd a lack of understanding of both game dev and the economics of kickstarter. I mean at one point John seems to thing minecraft was sold feature complete..
I don't think Peter is innocent in all this but it certainly could've been handled better.
P.s. With interviews like this and the Grayson HoTS shitfest it seems like any contact with games journalism is a pretty big risk. I wonder how the PR types will react.
Its really hard to control group dynamics, also how it is his "fault" if its clearly a group effort ?
On the other hand, if one person can get all the fame, they can get all the blame too I guess, sounds fair, still we don't need
a witch hunt in that form.
It was molyneux that used the minecraft example, saying that to make something "unique" takes a super long time to reach final, where as walker responded that minecraft wasn't sold on promises, people bought it for what it was that exact moment they did.
Minecraft had its gameplay defined from the very start.
Molyneux seems to disagree here for some weird reason.
And as walker himself agrees to the fact that game development is hard, but it's not the excuse one gets to use all the time something goes wrong.
With that said, I don't think the focus on Molyneux is entirely justified here. Yes, he made promises he couldn't keep left and right and the way that Godus was handled was awful. But that's just a reality of being in any business, there will always be people who mishandle things. What we ought to be critical of is the role of Kickstarter in the whole affair.
By its nature, crowdfunding does not allow the person who hands over his or her money to hold the creator accountable. Even in the very few cases where you have a right to things -- such as the backer rewards -- nobody can actually enforce that they are delivered. For all intents and purposes, you're entirely reliant on the capability and goodwill of the developers. You neither have the ownership of the product, as a publisher would, nor the right to get what you paid for, as a customer would. You'll always have people like Peter Molyneux (and much, much worse), but traditional methods of funding at least made sure it was limited to the realm of disappointed and not to (unintentional) scam.
Funding something on Kickstarter is like buying products without a warranty. It would probably work out most of the time, but when it doesn't, you don't have a leg to stand on. Don't hand over money to people whom you can't hold accountable.
The overall handling of the interview is just disgraceful. The point is, yes, Peter Molyneux is known for his really excited statements and hyping of the projects he works on and the games never hold up to the hype after release. Also the whole kickstarter "debacle" is not something to be ignored and should be talked about. As some people in this thread pointed out, it is part of journalism to confront their sources and all that, but I strongly disagree with the way it was done. For example, it is just childish and unnecessarily aggressive to start an interview off with "are you a pathological liar". They could have started a non-aggressive, unbiased and informative discussion about problems in the very nature of kickstarter, how it's giving room to possible failure right from the start and what his opinion is on what happened with his project and how he will fix it, what he will do better next time and so on. It is not RPS's job to "fix" or put Molyneux "in his place", their job is to get informed and in sequence, inform their viewer base.
But no, let's make Molyneux look like a comic book villain and RPS the guardians of justice, the warriors of customer protection, the cerberus of the truth and spend the entire interview talking to him like he's is a 8 year old, who broke mom's porcelain vase. That's game journalism for you right there.
Here is a fair look at Peter.
The thing you guys are missing is that from an industry perspective this could be any of us being attacked. But you have to come to grips that Peter makes our jobs all harder when we're making games and trying to sell then to crowd. His lies make people mistrust the rest of our projects when they're on Kickstarter, get Greenlit, or are trying to even get people to check out WIP demos.
Peter Molyneux is a liar. He is a shill. And this interview was necessary so that everyone is put on notice that lying to get people invested in your game isn't going to work anymore. This I suppose makes the people who feel like they have to oversell in the first place to get any interest in their project worried but the truth is that you can't screw over customers with bullshitery to get sales. It kills their reputation and makes people far more skeptical of investing other people's projects. He got what he deserved and he should be ostracized from the industry until he can prove the next words out of his mouth aren't a lie.
Anyone feeling sorry for Peter doesn't really care about the customers that have fallen for his lies. And saying that those customers deserved to get screwed is a seriously unscrupulous viewpoint. Victim blaming isn't cool. The scam artist is the person to blame. Not the person who he scammed.
I haven't been following Molyneux or his game very much so I could be wrong, but my understanding of the situation is that he promised some big features or changes to his Early Access game that was kickstarted, then failed to meet those promises.
If that is the case, then I don't see how that makes him a liar. A liar would say something like "We plan to create a multiplayer-focused game with PvP features!" when in reality, they had no intention of even implementing multiplayer. Looking at the Godus development team, it seems like they tried to deliver on the promises but they went over-budget and had to give up on some of those promises.
You're right, I don't care about the stupid people who are throwing a tantrum now because they don't know how to properly buy games. Early access, kickstarter, and even pre-ordering aren't new concepts. If you want to buy games and not get burned on the purchase, then simply buy games for what they are at the moment of purchase. Don't look at what could be, look at what is. It is very well known that things can be cut from games for a lot of different reasons, and that isn't exclusive to kickstarter games or early access titles, I've seen plenty of failed promises come out of large AAA studios too, do they deserve to be attacked? Of course not.
I couldn't even finish reading half of this joke of an interview. The interviewer clearly seems like he has no idea what he's talking about and Molyneux's words are just getting twisted against him. All this interview proves is that no developer should waste his or her time and energy trying to be transparent because it will just hurt you in the end.
Walker and Jim may act like Molyneux needs to be put in his place, but prior to this controversy the press never had any qualms about promoting his interviews, games or Kickstarter campaigns. Not just that but "Peter Molyneux and his crazy antics" has been an extremely popular topic within the gaming press for years. Jim says there is nothing funny about Peter's grandiose statements and his inability to live up the them, but that's precisely how Molyneux has been portrayed in the media since Fable 1 was released. I can't even remember how many articles I've read over the years that amounted to "Hey look! Crazy Peter Molyneux is here again, everyone laugh!".
Yes Peter Molyneux over promises and rarely delivers. But everyone in the press knew about it and yet they would rush to offer him the spotlight, only to slam him afterwards. Jim points out happily the Molyneux-circle but completely ignores the circle that his own peers perpetuated.
That's what my problem is. Peter Molyneux isn't some Machiavellian liar like the RPS interview is trying to portray him. In fact, I wouldn't even say he strikes me as someone unique in terms of not delivering on his promises or planned features. The difference is that unlike others who do not succeed at meeting their goals, he's been always given a platform to speak by the same group that is now trying to rip him a new one.
I don't mean to defend Molyneux from his failures. I don't know the man, have no idea of what kind of leader he is and I've played very few of his games. Criticisms of Godus's development also raise a number of valid points.There is a discussion to be had here about mismanaging Kickstarter campaigns and the damage it does to consumer trust. In fact, I strongly believe that as an industry we are too lenient on ourselves and too quick to dismiss the criticisms. But reading about this whole debacle, I can't help but feel a strong sense of hypocrisy coming from journalists who are largely complicit in overhyping games, just to turn around 180 degrees when things fall apart.
As for the interview itself. It's pathetic. Walker's attempts to catch Molyneux in a lie are simply embarrassing and show a complete lack of understanding of how games are developed. The interview reeks of confirmation bias and is based around the belief that Molyneux is a liar. When in fact, if one would do such a thorough search for inconsistencies they would find that almost any developer has made a similar number of "lies".
Yes, game developers should avoid talking about their games too much when they are still early on in development. There certainly is a trend to announce things too early. But one would think that the press would be aware of that and show some skepticism. But more often than not, they willingly play along and rather than act as a filter, they amplify every statement and turn "wishes" into "promises".
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/02/09/oh-godus-what-the-hells-going-on/
now ive seen the interview, and i have to agree, its not very good. even if the goal was to antagonize peter m, it could have been done in a classier way. that stuff was just painful to read, and i feel MORE sympathetic towards peter m afterwards. didnt even manage to read the whole thing.
so yes, its was a very poor interview.
but, i still think that peter m is misusing the trust of the kickstarter backers. and, he has no reason to use the kickstarter platform at all, he could fund his own projects or find a publisher (which he did after a while, anyway).
Investors and backers have the right to be upset, but it was also a risk they took. A studio shouldn't owe the investor anything if they tried and the product failed, besides a statement and an explanation. But some fault does lie with the backer, you funded this game knowing this person's history, and you were satisfied enough with the current state of the game to take a risk in order to hope this product gets made that otherwise probably wouldn't exist.
At this point the only two sites I can still actually bring myself to read/watch are Giant Bomb and Eurogamer. Giant Bomb in particular is still actually focused on you know video games and the fun and giggles around them not the super serious crap most other outlets are into these days.
But RPS just comes across as toxic and it reads like youtube comments. Jimquisition walks that line, but doesn't cross it as much as RPS. It's like RPS is trying to pretend to be a bad cop on a TV show interrogation.
The decline began long before the "Gamers are Dead!" articles and the recent slew of trash articles they've posted since then.
you're not a journalist. you're a hype monger. disgusting unprofessional crap. RPS should be ashamed of publishing this tripe.
That's not how investments work. There's a reason the top guys in Enron are either behind bars or dead. Businesses have to lay out the risks involved with a particular investment. If they lie or misrepresent themselves they get thrown in prison.
No fault lies with the victim. It's like if your car were broken into and someone asked why'd you buy such a nice car if you didn't want to get it broken into. It's scummy behavior and you should know better. Peter lied about the risks involved. He lied about what he would accomplish with the project. And this interview is exactly the response he deserves.
Peter won't get arrested because Kickstarter works under the label of donation rather than investment. That said he needs to be made accountable for his lies. It's not like RPS went and burned his house down. It's not like they've said for anyone to violently attack the man. They called him out as having been consistently inconsistent on his promises to CONSUMERS and the best way they could force him to confront that is by asking if he was a pathological liar. Just because they were brutal about it because they were tired of his shit doesn't mean the conman deserves sympathy.
But hey if you think they were too hard on him feel free to fund his next project. Just to show RPS how wrong they have it. Hah!
This is the kind of Hyperbolic nonsense that comes out of interviews like this.
edit: that may have been the most poorly constructed sentence i've ever typed. sorry.
That has been thrown around quite a bunch, but in reality no one knew Peter the irresponsible, they just knew Peter the overhyper.
No one could've dreamed that this passionate creator would abuse peoples trust in this kind of way. The Peter that during development went from disliking what had been done to dungeon keeper to actually finding it interesting, the Peter that saw how willing people were parting with their money in curiosity.
He pretty much gave up on having an actual substantial pay-once title on the mobile platforms before even trying, and has written off the pc-version because it isn't bringing revenue even before it is even near complete or even entertaining.
Oh my God ! He remembers the "acorn tree" too !
Would you believe me if I said that I am still waiting for that tree ? No I am serious ! Really. I was really sad and upset when I found out it wasn't there. For some reason that was the only thing that really hurt me.
Where is the hyperbolic nonsense. All I see is someone differentiating between investors and donations. An investment is not a donation and there are clear federal laws in the US dictating as much.
it's absurd.
one is a group of people that effectively stole BILLIONS of dollars in UNLAWFUL ways, the other is a (possibly) irresponsible game developer who's failed to deliver on the promises he made during a kickstarter campaign...thus accepting DONATIONS from people then not giving them what they hoped they would get (and i'm sure he hoped he could deliver)
juxtaposing statements like "peter won't get arrested" with references to enron is ludacris. it suggests (whether it's your meaning or not) that perhaps peter SHOULD be arrested for his potentially fraudulent claims durning a fundraising campaign.
i'll just start with the obvious: if we held everybody to that standard there wouldn't be a politician ALIVE who didn't go to jail within a year of taking office. ANYWHERE.
aside from that are you seriously of a mind that people who fail to live up to the expectations of their KICKSTARTER backers should be held accountable to the extent of incarceration? good luck EVER seeing anybody take a risk and using crowdfunding again. i sure as hell wouldn't. we all know that unexpected things happen and adjustments have to be made. Molyneux may have been behaving irresponsibly but it's not exactly criminal. thus...hyperbole.
the man's career is going to be stained by this for the rest of his life - if he sticks around in the industry after this crap at all. i pose that this is enough punishment for poor planning and irresponsible communication...and i'm really tired of the whole gamer community acting like a bunch of entitled little brats. giving somebody your 60 bucks doesn't make you a damn investor and it doesn't give you the right to micromanage somebody's business - let alone bully and harass them for not giving you exactly what you want exactly when you want it. it gives you the right to hope for something then whine about that thing on forums if you don't like it. that's just about it.
ZacD was referring to Kickstarter backers as investors.
JasonHeckman explained Kickstarter backers aren't investors. They donations. If they were investors then legal precedence says that Peter could liable to be arrested like those from Enron who committed investment fraud. But because they're not investors, Peter isn't on the line.
The point of JasonHeckmen's response was that ZacD has misinterpreted Kickstarter donations as investments. Not that Peter should be in jail. Just that if they were construed as investments Peter could be in jail for misrepresenting his investment opportunity. But Kickstarters aren't investments.
Sidenote: If you don't like entitled gamers, then don't make games. Get out of the industry and do something else. Otherwise stop shitting on your customers. It's ballsy that you want their money but don't want to be beholden to them for the product you push on them.