• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The Trial Of Peter Molyneux by RockPaperShotgun

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
Did you read the full interview?

I thought John Walker gave Peter enough outs for him to look good.

Yes. And he started the interview by asking if Peter was a pathological liar.

That sets a very specific tone early on.

The likelihood is that Peter is an overly ambitious guy who thinks he can deliver more than he is capable of doing. Instead of trying to understand what went wrong with Godus, what is being worked on, why things changed, why he was wrong, why he stated things that didn't turn out to be true he starts up by framing the entire conversation with a question that makes Peter the villain.

Journalism is about getting to the truth. Coming out swinging with a pre-formed opinion and calling it a "trial" means that this "journalist" wasn't interested in finding out the truth, he was interested in making a case for his pre-formed point. It's bad journalism.
 

kiguel182

Member
Hard hitting journalism doesn't involve being an ass.

There are also a fair amount of totally unfounded acusations made against Peter during the course of the interview.

I'm sure RPS thought they were going to really impress a lot of people. All they did was act totally unprofessional to an important member of the industry.

Does Peter overpromise all the time? Of course. Does he deserve to have hard questions asked? Absolutely. Is there any need to be an asshole to this degree to ask hard questions? Absolutely not.

Unfortunately a ton of people are impressed with RPS and are calling for more of this so it worked.
 

Dyno

Member
Did you read the full interview?

I thought John Walker gave Peter enough outs for him to look good.

He did and what's happening here is typical: let's moan over the minutae of the interview. "Oh was he too mean? Oh was he too disrespectful? Is Peter going to turtle in? Does that make for the best possible interview?" Please people.

Let talk about the substance of the interview itself. Molyneax ran a Kickstarter full of pledges, like $200 for an artbook of the game. He basically took orders for a $200 art book for a game that isn't finished and is now reducing staff.

Let's discuss how the oh so respectable Peter M. deals with that question. Let's deal with facts instead of feelings.
 
Just read through the entire RPS interview. Man, that was a rough. I truly feel sorry for him, to me it's obvious that he's a dreamer and a creative person with an often unique vision, proof being several of his previous games over the years that have been actually influential and original, if flawed.

But maybe he needed something like this, on a purely personal level, to make him think about how his actions have certain consequences. I know most people will say that it's crazy, he's a middle aged man with three decades of experience under his belt, and that is certainly true. But some people will never be good at management, marketing and the business side of things so it's very unfortunate that Peter Molyneux opted for the 22cans path, running everything himself without a publisher (and then actually getting one anyway) etc. Maybe he's just the kind of person that needs to be constantly pulled back down to Earth, to have a right hand man that keeps everything in perspective. The terrible thing about all of this is that the people who've backed his project and his company on Kickstarter, the people around him, are suffering for his childlike naiveness (and I really think he is naive in this way) and incompetent management of things.

Despite everything, I think there is a difference between Peter Molyneux and the type of misinformation we continuously hear from publishers/developers like EA or Ubisoft. The problem is, the results are often the same so any good intentions on Peter's part don't really matter in the end, especially if you make such a mess with the backers' money. I really hope this situation will make him change his approach to thinking and managing things, but I sadly doubt it, especially this late in his life and career. It would be more fair and honest to just cut his losses, significantly reduce the scope of Godus if possible and just be done with it, instead of even announcing new titles and whatnot.
 

Axass

Member
I've said as much a few times, but with this community, I lean more toward morally wrong. Truthfully, just irresponsible.

It's a community famous for being irrational, angry, and sometimes threatening. It's a community that demonstrates over and over a lack of capability or perhaps just an unwillingness to act in even its own best interest, much less anyone else's. Posting an interview like this, leaving the critical thinking to the masses, and framing it as a trial with a mob as the jury, all just seems irresponsible.

It's too easy to miss the forest for the trees and inevitably leads to knee jerk reactions and congratulations passed to aggressiveness and confrontation—some of the most famous negative aspects of the community.

Nobody in his right mind would promove violence, hatred, harrassment and death threats towards Molyneux. He deserves none of that.

However we can't bend over to Molyneux's lies because we live in fear of what stupid dumbfucks may end up doing. We should condemn Molyneux's lies, while condemning and preventing any act of violence, physical or verbal, but we can't hide our heads under the terrain.
 
Game dev experts are worse.



Yes you were wrong because I was talking about Molyneux in general and not Godus. So maybe you should calm down instead of making an ass out of yourself.
Dude/Dudette, you're confusing me for someone else. I made a one-liner with a punchline that is true. Nothing wrong with my statement. I think you need to calm down because we are arguing over the specifics of the analogy. Whatever, not like its a big deal, its just wordplay. Chill.
 

kiguel182

Member
And Unfortunately too many people on here are happy with the current state of most gaming journalism, free PR.

Maybe some people don't think this is the way to go for a different number of reasons. Maybe those people don't have an "us vs them" mentality when it comes to game devs and creators.

Maybe.
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
And Unfortunately too many people on here are happy with the current state of most gaming journalism, free PR.

Lets be super clear.

Asking for good gaming journalism does not mean asking for an antagonistic press.

This is the other extreme of what you are talking about.

You want an impartial press that is able to call it like they see it. This is tantamount to watching MSNBC or Fox News because you agree with the bias they are slinging at the TV so it trigger a rush of serotonin to your brain and makes you happy.

It's not journalism. It's a sensationalistic hit piece because someone had an axe to grind and came out swinging.
 
Yes. And he started the interview by asking if Peter was a pathological liar.

That sets a very specific tone early on.

The likelihood is that Peter is an overly ambitious guy who thinks he can deliver more than he is capable of doing. Instead of trying to understand what went wrong with Godus, what is being worked on, why things changed, why he was wrong, why he stated things that didn't turn out to be true he starts up by framing the entire conversation with a question that makes Peter the villain.

Journalism is about getting to the truth. Coming out swinging with a pre-formed opinion and calling it a "trial" means that this "journalist" wasn't interested in finding out the truth, he was interested in making a case for his pre-formed point. It's bad journalism.

I would have been more interested in the breakdown between the vision and it being translated to development, stories on why and where they hit major roadblocks etc

This is like that politician who screamed out "you lie!" To Obama out of anger.

People like theatrics though.
 

Archaix

Drunky McMurder
Yes. And he started the interview by asking if Peter was a pathological liar.

That sets a very specific tone early on.

The likelihood is that Peter is an overly ambitious guy who thinks he can deliver more than he is capable of doing. Instead of trying to understand what went wrong with Godus, what is being worked on, why things changed, why he was wrong, why he stated things that didn't turn out to be true he starts up by framing the entire conversation with a question that makes Peter the villain.

Journalism is about getting to the truth. Coming out swinging with a pre-formed opinion and calling it a "trial" means that this "journalist" wasn't interested in finding out the truth, he was interested in making a case for his pre-formed point. It's bad journalism.


This is not the likelihood at all. This might have been a reasonable assumption after Black and White, or after Fable. But the past decade of Peter Molyneux's lies and deception in the public along with the way he tries to spin interviews to make him look like a victim add up to paint a very clear picture: Peter Molyneux is a liar and people need to stop coddling him for having made some great games in the past.
 

kiguel182

Member
Dude/Dudette, you're confusing me for someone else. I made a one-liner with a punchline that is true. Nothing wrong with my statement. I think you need to calm down because we are arguing over the specifics of the analogy. Whatever, not like its a big deal, its just wordplay. Chill.

You didn't make a simple one-liner. You came at me cursing and insulting. I explained to you what I meant and that you should tone it down and now you act like I was the one being aggressive.
 
It still sounds like you didn't read the interview, because he explains why he asked that question later on.

That literally has no bearing on it though, it still means that most people would be naturally quite defensive from then on. It's not like Molyneux knows what happens later on in the interview before the first question.
 
100% agree. You're not alone.

You can find a balance between going easy and basically roasting the person you are interviewing.

I can't think of any middling way of approaching PM's deceitful tendencies without outright calling him a liar. Asking him "do you think you might, on occasion, over-promise on certain things? Do you think your games might be over-ambitious?" would definitely be playing softball. The dude's been in the industry long enough to know what should and should not be possible. I don't know what other conclusion you can gather.
 
Yes. And he started the interview by asking if Peter was a pathological liar.

That sets a very specific tone early on.

The likelihood is that Peter is an overly ambitious guy who thinks he can deliver more than he is capable of doing. Instead of trying to understand what went wrong with Godus, what is being worked on, why things changed, why he was wrong, why he stated things that didn't turn out to be true he starts up by framing the entire conversation with a question that makes Peter the villain.

Journalism is about getting to the truth. Coming out swinging with a pre-formed opinion and calling it a "trial" means that this "journalist" wasn't interested in finding out the truth, he was interested in making a case for his pre-formed point. It's bad journalism.

Agreed. I honestly think Molyneux just gets genuinly excited for what he is working on next. And since there's no filter or PR company in front of him, you get this big mess.

I think it would be a shame if he genuinly follows up on not talking to the media anymore after this, I'd rather he try to be more moderate in what he says.
 

Alienous

Member
You shouldn't use quotations marks for something someone "essentially" said.

I would use " ___ " if I was directly quoting, and I used ' ____ ' instead. I did think reading that back (especially with the word "essentially" prefacing it) it was obvious that it wasn't a direct quote, but obviously not. I did want to separate the notion from the text itself, however.

If I could do it again, I would do it like this:

Peter Molyneux, regarding the Kickstarter for Godus, essentially said: I did not know how much the game would cost, but I asked for less than that on purpose as a Kickstarter tactic to get any money at all, and I didn't keep track of the Kickstarter promises.

It makes it hard to feel sympathetic for the situation he found himself in. I hope selling his credibility was worth it, because he is just as likely to be remembered as a developer who consistently lied as he is to be remembered as a guy who introduced a new gaming genre.

But I don't know if that's any better.

If you have any suggestions, I'd be glad to hear them.
 
I would have been more interested in the breakdown between the vision and it being translated to development, stories on why and where they hit major roadblocks etc

This is like that politician who screamed out "you lie!" To Obama out of anger.

People like theatrics though.

Except he's not just screaming you lied. He asks him about those things, counter points his excuses with facts until Molyneux takes the victim role, and says he just wants him out of the industry.
 

jpax

Member
Yes. And he started the interview by asking if Peter was a pathological liar.

That sets a very specific tone early on.

The likelihood is that Peter is an overly ambitious guy who thinks he can deliver more than he is capable of doing. Instead of trying to understand what went wrong with Godus, what is being worked on, why things changed, why he was wrong, why he stated things that didn't turn out to be true he starts up by framing the entire conversation with a question that makes Peter the villain.

Journalism is about getting to the truth. Coming out swinging with a pre-formed opinion and calling it a "trial" means that this "journalist" wasn't interested in finding out the truth, he was interested in making a case for his pre-formed point. It's bad journalism.

What can an opinion be, other than pre-formed?
I think he was interested in finding the truth but was met with the lame pr nonsense we are plagued with since years. So he kept digging.
 

Hanmik

Member
I think this interview reminded me of a movie..

x3eZTnG.gif
 
I just read the interview. I feel like the interviewer was being quite aggressive, but I do understand that he was just trying to get to the bottom of it. I feel quite bad for Peter, though. It's almost like he's too passionate about his work, and that sort of bleeds through when he speaks publicly and people end up disappointed.
 
I would use " ___ " if I was directly quoting, and I thought reading that back (especially with the word "essentially" prefacing it) it was obvious that it wasn't a direct quote. I did want to seperate the notion from the text itself, however.

If I could do it again, I would do it like this:



But I don't know if that's any better.

If you have any suggestions, I'd be glad to hear them.

No, you seemed to have realized your oversight, thank you.
 

NervousXtian

Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
If John Walker's goal was to make me actually feel sympathetic towards Peter Molyneux, he succeeded.

I've always thought of Peter as a guy who truly, in his heart of hearts, wants these things to come to fruition that he says.. that he believes that he can make these things happen. Does that make him a pathological liar? In retrospect it'll always look that way, because you never deliver the things you say, but I don't think he ever does it with the intention to NOT try to deliver the things he says.
 

GavinUK86

Member
Peter just doesn't know he ass from his elbow.

He doesn't outright lie, but he hasn't got a clue what's going on his in own studio.

Not knowing when Konrad joined and thinking someone was handling Bryan Henderson when they clearly weren't is proof of that.
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
It still sounds like you didn't read the interview, because he explains why he asked that question later on.

I read it.

I don't care if you later explain why you started a conversation with a punch to the gut, the fact still remains you started an interview very pointedly. Doing so basically put Peter on a defensive footing for the remainder of the interview.

Which is what he wanted. He wanted an interview that was the verbal equivalent of connecting body blows to a guy that is protecting his head and taking the shots.

It's not journalism. At no point was he trying to get an honest assessment of what was going on in Godus, he was paying lipservice to getting information while throwing haymakers. Which was his actual intent with a thin veneer of 'journalism' painted over the top as his excuse.

His later tweet basically confirms that. He wanted to attack Peter and paint himself as the conquering consumer rights advocate.
 
I can't think of any middling way of approaching PM's deceitful tendencies without outright calling him a liar. Asking him "do you think you might, on occasion, over-promise on certain things? Do you think your games might be over-ambitious?" would definitely be playing softball. The dude's been in the industry long enough to know what should and should not be possible. I don't know what other conclusion you can gather.

Calling him a liar means there must be proof of ill-intent from the get-go. It isn't that far-fetched to me that Molyneux sucks at the business aspect/lost touch with what gamers' want (besides the point)/gets too excited (openly) and has his head in the clouds during development.

But I also think he's someone that is restless, and before too long will lose interest in the project he's working on, as it becomes more nailed down in the real world. And thus will start dreaming about the next project.

He is being treated like we have proof that he is in it to screw customers over.
 
An absolutely ridiculous "interview".

This is the same kind of confrontational bullshit you'd normally see from something like the O'Reilly Factor or some other asinine Fox News program.

No one should be applauding this. It's embarrassing.
 

Mr Git

Member
If someone consistently over-promises on their work and they are actually aware of that yet continue to do so - how is that not lying? It's still deception, whether he intends it or not. I'm struggling to see why the two are being hotly differentiated. Exaggerated claims and lying are forms of deception, but he could have been asked if he was a serial over-promiser?
 
Agreed. I honestly think Molyneux just gets genuinly excited for what he is working on next. And since there's no filter or PR company in front of him, you get this big mess.

I think it would be a shame if he genuinly follows up on not talking to the media anymore after this, I'd rather he try to be more moderate in what he says.

He has tried to be more moderate for years. It hasn't worked, not even when he did have some kind of filter between him and the press, this is what he got:

I wish too.

Molyneux should have a PR guy who just says, "Shut the fuck up, Pete. Just shut your fucking mouth before it writes a check the team can't cash." He builds a promise bubble and it always bursts because he can't fucking shut his mouth.

That used to be me. Problem is he never listens to advice and instead will bully and insult you into oblivion if you dare to disagree with him.
 

jpax

Member
It's not journalism. At no point was he trying to get an honest assessment of what was going on in Godus, he was paying lipservice to getting information while throwing haymakers. Which was his actual intent with a thin veneer of 'journalism' painted over the top as his excuse.

It was the very definition of journalism... You not liking it does not change the fact.
 

Krakn3Dfx

Member
People are quick to roast a man who was behind some of the most seminal games in history for one misstep. We're talking about the man who was a driving force behind Dungeon Keeper, Black And White, Populous, Syndicate, and half a dozen other outstanding titles over the years.

Just when I think I can't get more disgusted by the internet community who lives to tear people down on a daily basis, those people manage to outdo themselves. Molyneux is one of the few game designers since he was at Bullfrog that I truly think of as a visionary, but one misstep and people are more than happy to throw him under the bus.

Godus is a shitty situation to be sure, but from what I've been told, game development is hard. Maybe cut him a bit of slack as a human being if nothing else, instead of referring to him as a "pathological liar" out of the gate. RPS was built on the backs of men like Molyneux.
 
Not sure if this has been mentioned (read half the thread so far), but as a dev, one of the strangest things about this interview is that Peter took the call within earshot of his team. I imagine everyone was likely straining their ears to hear this go down - talk about discouraging! Why the heck would someone do that?

That "raise your hand if you are working on Godus" moment... Sheesh.
 

kiguel182

Member
You know what I want from gaming "journalism"?

Better criticism of the actual games with in-depth analysis and pieces that explore them in a meaningful and interesting way, I want interviews with devs to go over what went wrong and what the thought process was and about what went right and how they got to it. Just generally a better way to look at games that isn't shallow and devoid of any meaning.

You know what I don't want? "Journalists" calling devs liars or thinking they need some sort of trial.
 

Einbroch

Banned
Yikes. He set that antagonistic tone early and never let up. There's a way to call someone out and not be so negative. I would've walked out if I were Peter.
 
Yes. And he started the interview by asking if Peter was a pathological liar.

That sets a very specific tone early on.

The likelihood is that Peter is an overly ambitious guy who thinks he can deliver more than he is capable of doing. Instead of trying to understand what went wrong with Godus, what is being worked on, why things changed, why he was wrong, why he stated things that didn't turn out to be true he starts up by framing the entire conversation with a question that makes Peter the villain.

Journalism is about getting to the truth. Coming out swinging with a pre-formed opinion and calling it a "trial" means that this "journalist" wasn't interested in finding out the truth, he was interested in making a case for his pre-formed point. It's bad journalism.

I agree with you but for years it has always been about tippy toeing around the developer and the publisher because contacts are important to survival in that kind of journalism. It's nice to read an article every now and then that starts with an established position and gives the interviewee the opportunity to defend themselves as opposed to endless softball interviews that don't answer why people should buy or avoid X game or what's going on development wise.

Trial is in the OP. Not as it reads on the site:

www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/02/13/peter-molyneux-interview-godus-reputation-kickstarter/

YdcVS6B.png


Any opinion that people have or had of PM as a villain or liar was formed before John Walker even interviewed him, but considering the limited interview opportunities most journalists would have to even interview PM openly, I appreciate a journalist that'll stick to their guns and ask questions that most developers and game companies avoid.

Starting off calling him a pathological liar wasn't the best way to do that, granted.
 
Just wanted to comment on this...



If you're going to go after every company or man who takes the money of hard working gamers, John Walker has a LOT of work to do. I hope to see more interviews like this with Ubisoft, EA, and more. =P
I doubt they would agree to do such an interview.
RPS tried to contact EA a bunch when the SimCity fiasco went down. This happened.
 
He has tried to be more moderate for years. It hasn't worked, not even when he did have some kind of filter between him and the press, this is what he got:

Thats a shame to read. Where is SamVT now btw? Lionhead?

Steve Jobs and Picasso were also assholes. :)
Molyneux should not be on trial for being an asshole.

I am not comparing Molyneux to SJ or Picasso, although in my mind his contributions to gaming are extremely important.
 

Sephzilla

Member
I read it.

I don't care if you later explain why you started a conversation with a punch to the gut, the fact still remains you started an interview very pointedly. Doing so basically put Peter on a defensive footing for the remainder of the interview.

Which is what he wanted. He wanted an interview that was the verbal equivalent of connecting body blows to a guy that is protecting his head and taking the shots.

It's not journalism. At no point was he trying to get an honest assessment of what was going on in Godus, he was paying lipservice to getting information while throwing haymakers. Which was his actual intent with a thin veneer of 'journalism' painted over the top as his excuse.

His later tweet basically confirms that. He wanted to attack Peter and paint himself as the conquering consumer rights advocate.

And you know what? To be honest, I'm perfectly okay with it. Peter is exactly what RPS called him, a pathological liar. This needed to happen to Peter because his ego and self delusion has gotten out of control. I hope this takes Peter down a few notches and gets him back into a better, more reputation saving, mindset. Molyneux has become an absolute joke and needs a metaphoric slap in the face in order to realize it.

I in absolutely no way want this to become any kind of norm for gaming press what so ever, but in this one case of Molyneux I think it was warranted. (Okay, Randy Pitchford could use something like this too).
 

Alienous

Member
Calling him a liar means there must be proof of ill-intent from the get-go. It isn't that far-fetched to me that Molyneux sucks at the business aspect/lost touch with what gamers' want (besides the point)/gets too excited (openly) and has his head in the clouds during development.

But I also think he's someone that is restless, and before too long will lose interest in the project he's working on, as it becomes more nailed down in the real world. And thus will start dreaming about the next project.

He is being treated like we have proof that he is in it to screw customers over.

If, knowing your own history for over-promising and under-delivering, you still make assurances of features and elements in your games that you are not absolutely sure you will achieve isn't lying, it's something just as bad and should have been addressed by Molyneux years ago.
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
What can an opinion be, other than pre-formed?

So your idea of good journalism is coming in with a pre-conceived bias and framing the argument to make sure that it backs up your original assumption?

Of course the journalist has a bias, but it is your job to try to be impartial and ask the hard questions and as it becomes clear that someone is being cagey to start shifting your approach.

He was acting like the DA in a poorly written TV procedural with a hard hitting cross examination that makes the witness scream out "I did it, ok I did it". Theatrics isn't journalism.
 

NervousXtian

Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
I read it.

I don't care if you later explain why you started a conversation with a punch to the gut, the fact still remains you started an interview very pointedly. Doing so basically put Peter on a defensive footing for the remainder of the interview.

Which is what he wanted. He wanted an interview that was the verbal equivalent of connecting body blows to a guy that is protecting his head and taking the shots.

It's not journalism. At no point was he trying to get an honest assessment of what was going on in Godus, he was paying lipservice to getting information while throwing haymakers. Which was his actual intent with a thin veneer of 'journalism' painted over the top as his excuse.

His later tweet basically confirms that. He wanted to attack Peter and paint himself as the conquering consumer rights advocate.

That's exactly how I perceived the whole thing.
 

Patapwn

Member
I like peter alot. I don't think he ever tries to purposefully mislead people. Sometimes circumstances fuck things over

People treat him so badly, its just not right
 
I read it.

I don't care if you later explain why you started a conversation with a punch to the gut, the fact still remains you started an interview very pointedly. Doing so basically put Peter on a defensive footing for the remainder of the interview.

Which is what he wanted. He wanted an interview that was the verbal equivalent of connecting body blows to a guy that is protecting his head and taking the shots.

It's not journalism. At no point was he trying to get an honest assessment of what was going on in Godus, he was paying lipservice to getting information while throwing haymakers. Which was his actual intent with a thin veneer of 'journalism' painted over the top as his excuse.

His later tweet basically confirms that. He wanted to attack Peter and paint himself as the conquering consumer rights advocate.

He goes out of his way to clear up some areas where Peter Molyneux has an actual explanation, though. It isn't his fault there aren't many of those areas.
 
Thats a shame to read. Where is SamVT now btw? Lionhead?

Steve Jobs and Picasso were also assholes. :)
Molyneux should not be on trial for being an asshole.

I am not comparing Molyneux to SJ or Picasso, although in my mind his contributions to gaming are extremely important.

Sam went to 22cans with Molyneux. But he obviously isn't there anymore. and I'm not saying he should be on trial for being an asshole, I was just saying that this Molyneux talking about his games in moderation without promising crazy things isn't about to happen any time soon.

I'm a huge fan. I went to Lionhead as a 16 year old from Denmark, slept on a bench the night before, was toured around the studio by Molyneux. He seemed nice. Was allowed to sleep on the couch of Sam that night, or well rather I just fell asleep on it. He has done extremely good work in the industry, but that shouldn't stop criticsism.
 
Top Bottom