Support NeoGAF

[Axass]

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

Exhibit A:

Sorry – I’ve slightly over-promised on things on occasion. I could name at least 10 features in games that I’ve made up to stop journalists going to sleep and I really apologise to the team for that.

Peter Molyneux: I’m not aware of a single lie, actually. I’m aware of me saying things and because of circumstances often outside of our control those things don’t come to pass, but I don’t think that’s called lying, is it?

Exhibit B:

There’s this overwhelming urge to over-promise because it’s such a harsh rule: if you’re one penny short of your target then you don’t get it. And of course in this instance, the behaviour is incredibly destructive, which is ‘Christ, we’ve only got 10 days to go and we’ve got to make £100,000, for fuck’s sake, lets just say anything’. So I’m not sure I would do that again.

Exhibit C:

Peter Molyneux: Well, I think if you talk to anyone, and this is the advice I have given to people about Kickstarter, is to not ask for too much.

RPS: You asked for less money on Kickstarter than you knew you were going to need because you didn’t want to ask for too much money.

Peter Molyneux: No, I didn’t say that.

 

[Kintaro]

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.

Welp, sadly this interview won't help much in this regard. Thanks for the link though!

 

[Alienous]

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

When that circumstance is reality, and when it always has been reality, you are essentially lying.

When you make promises that are only possible in the circumstance of non-reality you are lying.

 

[RockTurtle]

Basically, Games press media treated developers/companies/famous game people with fluffy kid gloves.

Gamers demanded harsher and more in-depth "journalism". a Shotgun approach.

RPS brought out a bazooka instead of shotgun, and now some of us are like "WoAH WOAH WOAH, we said go hard but tone it down a bit"

 

[Freeman]

I don't think that is a way a proper way to treat him, its not fair to single him out like that.

How about doing the same to Bioware and all their lies before ME3, Sony and PS+ version of Driveclub, MS PR and their pile of lies?

Have some respect. Trying reaffirm themselves as journalist using a small dev as a punch bag is pathetic.

The whole Peter Molyneux over promising thing was a funny joke, now its ruined.

 

[bargeparty]

Am I the only idiot who doesn't want to bother reading the entire interview?

Why isn't this stuff recorded for listening in 2015?

 

[ScatheZombie]

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 why game developers and publishers are so secretive with their information. Because if you lay out any sort of information ... and that changes over the course of several months, even years, of game development - you get labeled a liar by people who don't know what the fuck they are talking about.

If I say "Our patch is releasing on this date" and some bug pops up and our director pushes it back a week, am I a liar?
If I say "We plan to make these changes" and upon internal testing our director decides to only go forward with half of them, am I a liar?
If I show you some new feature I'm working on, and 6 months later our publisher cuts it, am I a liar?

The only solution is to say NOTHING. Which ends up with these same people bitching that we don't interact with the community or we're being too secretive and shady. It's a lose-lose situation.

I can tell you, without a doubt, that I'll never be giving RPS an interview.

 

[system11]

That RPS interviewer comes over as a complete asshole who walks straight in looking for a fight. With that kind of attitude I think Peter was a saint putting up with it for as long as he did.

Instead of going for an ambitions/promises/failure angle it's straight in with 'YOU LIAR!'.

 

[jpax]

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.

What are you trying to pull here? You made a statement I called you out on it. Changing opinion now to bias just proves my point.

 

[FairXchange]

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.

Completely agree. While Peter Molyneux has over-promised and under-delivered in a number of circumstances, he has still delivered entertaining software over his long career in the gaming industry. To attack his character and to approach the interview in such a hostile way made for a very difficult and unpleasing read. The journalist even has the nerve to say has been receiving 'vicious venom' via Twitter? Don't dish it if you can't be served the exact same thing you put out into the universe.

 

[Figments]

I think this interview reminded me of a movie..

Would've been better had there not been a spelling error.

 

[Mael]

He thought they could do it but things went wrong so he needed more time/money and since he didn't ask for much he didn't have that time/money.

He has 30 years on the job, he is fully aware of the risks more than pretty much everyone else on the job right now.
If he didn't plan about the risks he's either incompetent or taking us for a ride.
He could have gone to publishers and asked them for money first instead of fleecing gullible customers of their moeny.

 

[old manatee]

This is why game developers and publishers are so secretive with their information. Because if you lay out any sort of information ... and that changes over the course of several months, even years, of game development - you get labeled a liar by people who don't know what the fuck they are talking about.

If I say "Our patch is releasing on this date" and some bug pops up and our director pushes it back a week, am I a liar?
If I say "We plan to make these changes" and upon internal testing our director decides to only go forward with half of them, am I a liar?
If I show you some new feature I'm working on, and 6 months later our publisher cuts it, am I a liar?

The only solution is to say NOTHING. Which ends up with these same people bitching that we don't interact with the community or we're being too secretive and shady. It's a lose-lose situation.

I can tell you, without a doubt, that I'll never be giving RPS an interview.

OK Notch.

 

[Dark_castle]

We spoke on the phone on Wednesday evening, Molyneux speaking from the Guildford offices of his studio, 22cans. Sounding stressed, but composed, Molyneux asked how I’d like to begin, whether I had questions, or should I just let him talk. I told him I had questions, many questions, and so we began.

RPS: Do you think that you’re a pathological liar?

 

[Archaix]

Every single defense of Peter Molyneux boils down to:

He made Thriller. Thriller!

 

[Alienous]

This is why game developers and publishers are so secretive with their information. Because if you lay out any sort of information ... and that changes over the course of several months, even years, of game development - you get labeled a liar by people who don't know what the fuck they are talking about.

If I say "Our patch is releasing on this date" and some bug pops up and our director pushes it back a week, am I a liar?
If I say "We plan to make these changes" and upon internal testing our director decides to only go forward with half of them, am I a liar?
If I show you some new feature I'm working on, and 6 months later our publisher cuts it, am I a liar?

The only solution is to say NOTHING. Which ends up with these same people bitching that we don't interact with the community or we're being too secretive and shady. It's a lose-lose situation.

I can tell you, without a doubt, that I'll never be giving RPS an interview.

They aren't out to destroy people. Just don't lie for 20 years and I'm sure they'll be fine with you.

 

[RockTurtle]

This is why game developers and publishers are so secretive with their information. Because if you lay out any sort of information ... and that changes over the course of several months, even years, of game development - you get labeled a liar by people who don't know what the fuck they are talking about.

If I say "Our patch is releasing on this date" and some bug pops up and our director pushes it back a week, am I a liar?
If I say "We plan to make these changes" and upon internal testing our director decides to only go forward with half of them, am I a liar?
If I show you some new feature I'm working on, and 6 months later our publisher cuts it, am I a liar?

The only solution is to say NOTHING. Which ends up with these same people bitching that we don't interact with the community or we're being too secretive and shady. It's a lose-lose situation.

I can tell you, without a doubt, that I'll never be giving RPS an interview.

reminds me of this topic:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=988247&highlight=polygon

 

[Sephzilla]

This is why game developers and publishers are so secretive with their information. Because if you lay out any sort of information ... and that changes over the course of several months, even years, of game development - you get labeled a liar by people who don't know what the fuck they are talking about.

If I say "Our patch is releasing on this date" and some bug pops up and our director pushes it back a week, am I a liar?
If I say "We plan to make these changes" and upon internal testing our director decides to only go forward with half of them, am I a liar?
If I show you some new feature I'm working on, and 6 months later our publisher cuts it, am I a liar?

The only solution is to say NOTHING. Which ends up with these same people bitching that we don't interact with the community or we're being too secretive and shady. It's a lose-lose situation.

I can tell you, without a doubt, that I'll never be giving RPS an interview.

If these are one-off things that only happen once in a while most gamers will totally let stuff like this slide. If you do stuff like this on the scale of what Molyneux does, then you are a liar.

 

[jelly]

Brutal interview and one was prepared, the other was not. Fair play to Peter for sticking around to answer. I don't think it would have been half as bad if Peter was more open to what he was doing wrong instead of excuses. I think this will be good for him, a shock to the system that shows he needs to evolve his development approach and self reflection. As for RPS, did they go in hard, sure but sometimes you need to just say it like it is to get a genuine response. There is enough regurgitated PR and soft ball interviews, we need more of this, perhaps a little less caught on their heels for the interviewee but all industry leaders should take a dip and see if they can stand up to scrutiny and explain themselves when only at the fault of their own, are in the shit. You can't have so called journalists on your side when all is good then placate them with standard non answers when things go bad. Consumers deserve more and the industry will be better for it instead of being beholding to the overlord publishers who act like consumers are shite on the bottom of their shoes and many game journalists are official PR buds.

 

[semiconscious]

The likelihood is that Peter is an overly ambitious guy who thinks he can deliver more than he is capable of doing...

certainly, that's part of it. but let's not forget that his last 'overly-ambitious' project centered on it's providing the winner with a 'life-changing experience' (which included a financial reward)...

i think it was the eurogamer article, more than anything else, that really provided the fuel for the tone of this interview. sheer callousness begets (&, to an extent, is just begging for) callousness...

 

[Neuromancer]

That's questionable. Guy worked as part of a team on some great games a long time ago, can't ride on those achievements forever. Nothing he's done lately has been good, Fable series was a joke that never lived up to expectations, Curiousty and Godus have devolved into P2W titles that aren't even finished after 3 years.

So we can't attribute the good games he's made to him because he was part of a team, but the bad games were his fault?

 

[Toxi]

I feel you lose the right to complain about an interview being confrontational when you mishandle your backers' money to this degree.

 

[Ogimachi]

This is probably going to be an unpopular opinion but I think the interview was needlessly confrontational. There is a way to ask the hard questions without coming across like that.

Same thing happened in their fake controversy surrounding Starcraft II character design.

 

[StoOgE]

.

Those were taken out of context from an original interview with TechRadar which was also taken out of context.

He was talking about the problems with funding a game with Kickstarter when the game is still an idea and how you are incentivized to change the game to make it more in line with backers wishes. And that it hurts the final product because it starts changing the game.

I'm not a Peter defender by any means. I basically take everything he says with a handful of salt because I know he has a tendency to overpromise and under-deliver.

This interview is such a total hit-piece that I find myself defending him.

 

[Pureauthor]

This is why game developers and publishers are so secretive with their information. Because if you lay out any sort of information ... and that changes over the course of several months, even years, of game development - you get labeled a liar by people who don't know what the fuck they are talking about.

If I say "Our patch is releasing on this date" and some bug pops up and our director pushes it back a week, am I a liar?
If I say "We plan to make these changes" and upon internal testing our director decides to only go forward with half of them, am I a liar?
If I show you some new feature I'm working on, and 6 months later our publisher cuts it, am I a liar?

The only solution is to say NOTHING. Which ends up with these same people bitching that we don't interact with the community or we're being too secretive and shady. It's a lose-lose situation.

I can tell you, without a doubt, that I'll never be giving RPS an interview.

You are a liar if after multiple years of the shit you still keep prancing around and making promises you know you can't keep

 

[Percy]

John doing his cut rate Paxman bit again? Can't say Molyneaux wasn't asking for it with his antics of late tbh.

 

[Wereroku]

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.

Except we have several interviews where he admits to saying things just to keep the press talking. If someone keeps talking out of their ass about things they can do when does it crossover from over ambition to just straight up lying. He knows how large his studio is and what abilities his employees have so he has to know he can't pay the bills his mouth is racking up.

Those were taken out of context from an original interview with TechRadar which was also taken out of context.

He was talking about the problems with funding a game with Kickstarter when the game is still an idea and how you are incentivized to change the game to make it more in line with backers wishes. And that it hurts the final product because it starts changing the game.

I'm not a Peter defender by any means. I basically take everything he says with a handful of salt because I know he has a tendency to overpromise and under-deliver.

This interview is such a total hit-piece that I find myself defending him.

How is this not the same as admitting that he lies about his games. My only question is how intentionally is he doing it.

 

[Mael]

RPS: You’re asking me to accept that you know you’ve run late on every game you’ve ever made but you were going to finish this one in a ludicrous and obviously impossible seven months?

Peter Molyneux: No, I didn’t say absolutely we’d be there, I said we’d try to finish it on this time. And why are you beating me up on these dates things? You sound like a publisher.

And now we know why publishers are needed in some cases.

 

[BibiMaghoo]

Then we have to put absolutely amazing, incredible combat, and this is totally unique combat, and the reason this is totally unique combat is that we have to solve one fundamental problem and that is how do you mix an RTS game with a god game. Because the problem is with combat in Godus, is that you’ve got this world that you can absolutely shape, and you can use all your god powers – we’re putting god powers in – you can use all your god powers that are cataclysmic but the wars, the fighting and the battles, have to take place between these little people and that is a real design challenge.

This is the only thing I've read so far that strikes me bullshit detector. Because not only has he already done this in other games, but it's seemingly just pathfinding on a player alterable map, which is not a design challenge or a fundamental problem to someone of his experience at all.

Hmm.

RPS: But you said that the PC version doesn’t have a publisher, but the publisher is the reason you had to take away the framework that allowed the multiplayer.

This shit is also unfair. Of course he needs to keep the released version playable at all over finishing the PC version. I only play the PC version, but it's obvious he can't just let the game that people paid for stop working.

 

[doomquake]

awesome interview. keep kicking ass Peter and RPS

 

[ScatheZombie]

If these are one-off things that only happen once in a while most gamers will totally let stuff like this slide. If you do stuff like this on the scale of what Molyneux does, then you are a liar.

All of that happened in the space of one month. Expand that for thirty years coming from someone with no PR-filter and unlimited enthusiasm and you get Peter Molyneux.

 

[jmood88]

Nope. You're reading what you like from my words. I never said that asking weak questions leads to the truth. I'm saying that goading them into absolute defensiveness won't yield truth either. Which is all that RPS managed to accomplish today.

How in the world was he goaded into anything? Instead of answering the questions, he made excuses and whined about being driven out of the industry. The games press has been far too kind to him for years and now that they're actually asking why he keeps doing this time and time again, the interviewer is called harsh. It's amazing.

 

[Slayven]

That is gotcha journalism, there is a way to ask hard questions and not looking like you are ready to throw hands. Terrible interview all around.

 

[DoktorEvil]

This is why game developers and publishers are so secretive with their information. Because if you lay out any sort of information ... and that changes over the course of several months, even years, of game development - you get labeled a liar by people who don't know what the fuck they are talking about.

If I say "Our patch is releasing on this date" and some bug pops up and our director pushes it back a week, am I a liar?
If I say "We plan to make these changes" and upon internal testing our director decides to only go forward with half of them, am I a liar?
If I show you some new feature I'm working on, and 6 months later our publisher cuts it, am I a liar?

The only solution is to say NOTHING. Which ends up with these same people bitching that we don't interact with the community or we're being too secretive and shady. It's a lose-lose situation.

I can tell you, without a doubt, that I'll never be giving RPS an interview.

The lazy solution is to say nothing.

P.C. Answer: We are still working on xyz. Bear with us.

You're saying devs can't do that until release?

 

[ScatheZombie]

The lazy solution is to say nothing.

P.C. Answer: We are still working on xyz. Bear with us.

You're saying devs can't do that until release?

The Last Guardian.

Because that game hasn't gotten any shit from the press or gamers.

 

[Osahi]

This is probably going to be an unpopular opinion but I think the interview was needlessly confrontational. There is a way to ask the hard questions without coming across like that.

I agree. It actually made me feel sorry for molyneux. And that guy has lost all his credit with me

 

[antitrop]

What an interview! Molyneux has been a scourge on the gaming industry for over a decade, he'll get no sympathy from me for being on the receiving end of the cold, hard truth.

 

[watership]

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.

Exactly this.

 

[Christof]

I finally read the whole interview and overall I think it was very good. I would suggest everyone to read it in its entirety because only reading a subsection (like in the OP) gave me a different impression at first.

Peter:
I think from his own statements that some of his "over-promising" qualify as being unethical. His humanity definitely comes across in the interview and I hope he is sincere in his efforts in improving himself (as we all need to do).

Godus:
Game needs to continue to be worked on until it is finished per promises made iin its kickstarter. The backers aren't publisher who invest to make money but instead funded the game for its own sake (as described).

I am not in the industry but I understand working on the next game too if it means you keep your staff employed who no longer have tasks on Godus.


journalism:
If the harsh journalism is what it takes for him to fix his past mistakes then I say it is warranted.

It does come off as badgering a couple times but I wonder if that is because I am used to press conference style political journalism that often times does not include follow-up questions, which allows politicians to get away without answering the question.

I hope the journalist also takes what value there is in the criticism of his style/tact to improve it as well. We need more and even better content like this going better.

 

[2 Slice Toaster]

Basically, Games press media treated developers/companies/famous game people with fluffy kid gloves.

Gamers demanded harsher and more in-depth "journalism". a Shotgun approach.

RPS brought out a bazooka instead of shotgun, and now some of us are like "WoAH WOAH WOAH, we said go hard but tone it down a bit"

John Walker has done numerous interviews where he has asked questions that are extremely tough and challenging to the subject, to the point where he will call out the inconsistencies throughout and make them answer to them. He posted links to two of them earlier today in response to someone.

The difference today in this one is that it was personal, and it clearly inspired him to go beyond even his normal bounds, something he realized and acknowledged himself. John Walker doesn't need a defence force, he already knew the interview was going to be more divisive than anything he'd done.

The persistence in trying to frame people uncomfortable with the tone of this particular interview as automatic supporters of weak, publisher-PR wank material is pretty disappointing all around.

 

[old manatee]

And now we know why publishers are needed in some cases.

And now we also know why someone in his position had to go to Kickstarter in the first place.

 

[Neuromancer]

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.

It's been a few missteps, but other than that I agree with you.

 

[Qwark]

Pretty disrespectful interview, imo. If I was in Molyneux's shoes, I would've just hung up after the first question.

The guy exaggerates a lot, we know that. No need to crucify him. He's done a lot for the industry and he's passionate about what he does, and now we're trying to drive that passion out.

 

[Auto-Reply]

I don't know why but I just can't be mad at Molyneux... no matter how often things wont come true.

 

[Mknzy]

I am not a fan of Peter, but I have to agree, this went to far. I personally think that in an interview setting, while yes you have to ask the hard questions, there is also a certain amount of respect you have to show the person you are interviewing. If you just go straight in and attack like this, not only are you likely not to get any good answers, but it will likely put off OTHER people that you may want to interview in the future. I'm not a developer or anything, but I can say that after reading this I would never accept an interview request from them. There is a right way to do an interview, and it involves respect and building to the hard questions in a way that makes the person you are interviewing comfortable. An approach like that will be far more likely to get you the answers you want, and wont hurt your chances of getting other interviews in the future.

 

[MrHoot]

That interview is brutally honest. Reminds me a lot of the Metro interviews with the Sony execs which I also found very good. Although RPS I thought was sometimes too "angry" (like immediatly start with a loaded question ? I know it's molyneux but c'mon)

With that said, I wish they keep this form of more honest, straight to the point interviews (although without getting populist, that would be the bad extreme) with big AAA devs that actually fuck up like Ubisoft or EA have done in the past years and, despite general backlash from the gamer population and post-release articles, still seem to be rather rosy with actual interviews

 

[Wereroku]

Exactly this.

What truth is there with Molyneux? He can't keep his answers straight. First he tells one group that there is only a few people working on Godus now then he says the whole studio is working on it then he doubles back to say that it isn't the whole studio. He is lying through his teeth the game can't ever reach what he promised because there was never an actual design in place he was just shooting from the hip.

 

[Mael]

And now we also know why someone in his position had to go to Kickstarter in the first place.

Well obviously he wasn't going to fleece publishers till the end of time.

RPS: How long should backers wait for you to deliver the game they paid for three years ago?

Peter Molyneux: I don’t know. All I know is that there are people here that have been working on Godus, that we have worked on Godus for one hundred and twenty thousand man-hours. We have got three terabytes of documentary feature. We’ve replied to 31,000 posts and tickets. We’ve done 57 community videos. Do you know how many updates we’ve done on Steam?

There's no end in sight for this Godus project, anyone with half a brain would have canned the project and fired the guy.

 

[hamchan]

One of the positives that comes from these recent Molyneux interviews is that the spotlight is firmly focused on his unfinished game, the unsent rewards for the Kickstarter, and the unfulfilled reward to the Curiosity winner. I have a feeling that journalists won't let this one go until those things are properly fixed by Molyneux.

 

[Patryn]

Thinking about it, I think the pathological liar question was one John could ask... but he should have saved it for the end of the interview.

At that point, he could have pointed out the very inconsistencies in the interview already conducted and gotten a more interesting answer. Plus, he wouldn't have set an unnecessarily hostile tone right out of the gate.