Support NeoGAF

[bsod]

This kind of interview is more "honest" to me as a reader and respects my intelligence.

If you think this was honest, there's not much else to say. It's clear to anyone with their head sown straight that Walker came in with an agenda and didn't care about the truth. You just can't argue with some people if they think 5+5=11.

 

[GSG Flash]

I wish the website wasn't getting hit so hard, would like to read the full interview. I love the interview though and don't feel sorry for Molyneux one bit. He is a pathological liar and is living in his own fantasy world on top of that, it's time he gets hit with a nice dose of reality.

 

[crazyrabbits]

I'm not here to question if he is a (pathological) liar or not. I've talked about what I think of Molyneux and his way of handling stuff in an earlier post. Find it if you want that. My issue here is related to that first question only. It changed how the whole interview was made. It was not professional. It was emotional. And it was what John Walker was thinking when asked that. If you want proof, here is a later bit of the interview:

I don't see that as an emotional question. That's honestly a fair assessment to make to anyone who has any cursory knowledge of the man's work, and hell, there are a lot of journalists who use a loaded question to knock their interviewee off-guard.

I can tell you one thing, speaking as someone whose vocation is in PR. If I was his handler, I would have cut that interview off after the first three questions. For someone who has such a long career in the industry, Molyneux has no understanding of the impact of bad press, especially since he's someone who's rode on the goodwill of a gullible gaming public for the last decade.

 

[JackDT]

I'm not here to question if he is a (pathological) liar or not. I've talked about what I think of Molyneux and his way of handling stuff in an earlier post. Find it if you want that. My issue here is related to that first question only. It changed how the whole interview was made. It was not professional. It was emotional. And it was what John Walker was thinking when asked that. If you want proof, here is a later bit of the interview:

"Do you say stuff that isn’t true without meaning to?" would have been a more appropriate question, although still kind of awkward. He could have basically asked the same questions in a different way.

 

[inky]

Jeez. RPS really burned their bridges with this one.

Wonder if they would take the same tone with Double Fine and Schafer.

Have DF and Schafer done the things to justify the tone? Did they forget their physical rewards? Did they make these promises: LINK they couldn't keep and abandoned the PC version in favor of mobile? Did they promise d Linux and then later on said: :lol it's not happening? Did they promise a single backer special treatment and a revenue share and forgot about him for years? Did they ignore all the people asking what was going on instead of being honest every step of the way explaining it in detail?

I'm guessing no. In fact, as someone who backed Broken Age and followed the development, the documentary, the forum posts, and played what's out there, and loved it, and can't wait for more, I'm gonna say, categorically, NO. That's probably why that interview doesn't exist, but this one does.

I mean, just a guess.

 

[Phediuk]

The interviewer was being kind of a dick.

Molyneux has made some great games and has had a very successful career, "liar" or not. Compared to some of the other outright con-men in this industry, he's a fucking messiah.

 

[FunkyMunkey]

I can't believe people are saying this interview was too harsh considering the current state of "games journalism" and how they merely act as PR pieces to get people hyped and wash in developer's afterglows, and also considering PM's history with lying over the last decade. There's multiple posts in this thread detailing things that he has straight-out lied about, not misled, lied. He's made money off misinforming people and the recent kickstarter and the godus bullshit is indefensible.

Whew, busy day so could only read not reply. I feel theres a lot of culture shock here for US and no Euro board-members in what an aggressive interview this was. Here in the UK, if you fuck up publicly to this extent (and for an extended period so as to become notorious for it), this what you get faced with and rightfully so.

I'm not surprised a lot of the dev community is quivering at the lip and rabble rowsing to the tune of "too harsh, unprofessional!" because 1) you've got your typical human tribal instinct where one of the tribe in GAME DEV markings is being 'attacked', and the deep instinctual urge is defend 2) Theres the fact a lot of the game industry is founded upon pathological liars. That ranges from there being little budget for a projects development; Unpaid overtime, lie to the underlings or lying to consumers to their faces over things like "this content will never see re-release!" and so on. A huge percentage of the industry runs on a sort of locomotive "its too big to stop now" principle rather than one of tight, fiscally responsible project management. So when these big 'orrible mean questions are being fielded at someone perceived as "one of the untouchable old greats", pants begin to fill.

Thats the core of it as well. Peter Molyneux could have continued to drain EA or Microsofts coffers until someone figured things out, and its "oh well, theyre big boys, they'll deal". But the second Molyneux stepped into the Kickstarter/crowdfunding/goodwill space, that changes entirely. This is no longer a situation of something being funded by the well-to-do of the world, you're now doffing your cap to anyone in the world with access to electronic funds. People that may be living paycheque to paycheque, people that had the money then down the line fall afoul of some hideous financial emergency, so on and so forth. But they either recognised your name as one to trust, or a lot of positive PR and outreach got your project infront of them and they said "yeah why not". Fans pledging for $200 books they're no closer to getting to, a kid promised a life changing sum of money left to hang (good thing he's not terminally ill eh or living in a dangerous part of the world), and even individuals passionate yet perhaps silly enough to work for a year for free to help dig Molyneux out of his mess because of his legacy. These people don't have a name though, they're nor celebs, a figure you're supposed to protect. They're just the legion of people its okay to step on because... what they gonna do?

This article is the equal and opposing force to the good-will people like Molyneux have been cashing in to with the Kickstarter gold-rush. After a straight decade or more of lying, and yes it is lying to this point, thats when the kid gloves should come off and tough questions are asked. RPS has no doubt covered GODUS themselves, and some small part of John is perhaps acting on a touch of guilt for being one of many others propping up Molyneux's promises and letting him run with it. Thats got to end in a spectacular fashion. What we read today was accountability, and theres a great lack of it in day to day life until things get leaked or brought to the public eye through other means (journalism!).

There are several points in the article that stand out to me. The perpetuation on Peter's part of trying to paint himself as a naive thinker of our time, and how could he possibly be expected to know things like "7 months or 3 years", that simply by being a creative person he is above such trifling matters. Its here, at its zenith, that I can feel him straining to throw the muddy workers under the bus for not achieving things faster and letting him down. An ex-employee that was responsible for contacting Bryan is left as the reason for that breaking down. Shedding staff isn't a good look either, and the assertion that a fair few have "left the industry" after their time with Molyneux is damning in and of itself.

Where he gets the most evasive though is on the matter of just what money Bryan is going to be accruing and making any notion of coming to a compromise despite the bullshit contract they forced him to sign. Thats when the childlike demeanour drops and suddenly Molyneux remembers complex things like legal ramifications and "do not make money promises". Funny that. He'll quote from three months to a year or anything regarding Godus development, features to entice and bedazzle, but when it counts to his bottom line, some self preservation is kicking in and preventing him from making any concessions whatsoever.

The very first question of the article is perfect because it is, with laser precision, the root of it all. Molyneux should never lead a studio or be the one calling the shots, because he is incapable of doing so. Thats why he and people like Dyack fell onto hard times. Businesses outside of infinite money reserves like MS need to run on Reality, and not fiction or they get into trouble fast. When Molyneux makes promises pertaining to game design, he's doing so almost entirely at the cost of other people's hard work and ability regarding code, art, animation, and so on. Even the simplest of us can just say out loud "I want to make a game with 'best things ever' in", but its realising that talk is cheap and management and planning are the true requirement to such an end goal is what makes someone a great leader of development. Molyneux quite simply is not and hasn't been for a damn long time. Tough love occurred, and its up to him how he reshuffles.

Well fucking said

 

[OrlanisWorks]

If you think this was honest, there's not much else to say. It's clear to anyone with their head sown straight that Walker came in with an agenda and didn't care about the truth. You just can't argue with some people if they think 5+5=11.

Hahaha, of course he went in with agenda. He wanted to carve into Molyneux and try to get some real words out of the bastard. Not caring about the truth? Heh.

The interviewer was being kind of a dick.

Molyneux has made some great games and has had a very successful career, "liar" or not. Compared to some of the other outright con-men in this industry, he's a fucking messiah.

"He could be worse," ain't a valid excuse.

 

[Dyno]

Whew, busy day so could only read not reply. I feel theres a lot of culture shock here for US and no Euro board-members in what an aggressive interview this was. Here in the UK, if you fuck up publicly to this extent (and for an extended period so as to become notorious for it), this what you get faced with and rightfully so.

I'm not surprised a lot of the dev community is quivering at the lip and rabble rowsing to the tune of "too harsh, unprofessional!" because 1) you've got your typical human tribal instinct where one of the tribe in GAME DEV markings is being 'attacked', and the deep instinctual urge is defend 2) Theres the fact a lot of the game industry is founded upon pathological liars. That ranges from there being little budget for a projects development; Unpaid overtime, lie to the underlings or lying to consumers to their faces over things like "this content will never see re-release!" and so on. A huge percentage of the industry runs on a sort of locomotive "its too big to stop now" principle rather than one of tight, fiscally responsible project management. So when these big 'orrible mean questions are being fielded at someone perceived as "one of the untouchable old greats", pants begin to fill.

Thats the core of it as well. Peter Molyneux could have continued to drain EA or Microsofts coffers until someone figured things out, and its "oh well, theyre big boys, they'll deal". But the second Molyneux stepped into the Kickstarter/crowdfunding/goodwill space, that changes entirely. This is no longer a situation of something being funded by the well-to-do of the world, you're now doffing your cap to anyone in the world with access to electronic funds. People that may be living paycheque to paycheque, people that had the money then down the line fall afoul of some hideous financial emergency, so on and so forth. But they either recognised your name as one to trust, or a lot of positive PR and outreach got your project infront of them and they said "yeah why not". Fans pledging for $200 books they're no closer to getting to, a kid promised a life changing sum of money left to hang (good thing he's not terminally ill eh or living in a dangerous part of the world), and even individuals passionate yet perhaps silly enough to work for a year for free to help dig Molyneux out of his mess because of his legacy. These people don't have a name though, they're nor celebs, a figure you're supposed to protect. They're just the legion of people its okay to step on because... what they gonna do?

This article is the equal and opposing force to the good-will people like Molyneux have been cashing in to with the Kickstarter gold-rush. After a straight decade or more of lying, and yes it is lying to this point, thats when the kid gloves should come off and tough questions are asked. RPS has no doubt covered GODUS themselves, and some small part of John is perhaps acting on a touch of guilt for being one of many others propping up Molyneux's promises and letting him run with it. Thats got to end in a spectacular fashion. What we read today was accountability, and theres a great lack of it in day to day life until things get leaked or brought to the public eye through other means (journalism!).

There are several points in the article that stand out to me. The perpetuation on Peter's part of trying to paint himself as a naive thinker of our time, and how could he possibly be expected to know things like "7 months or 3 years", that simply by being a creative person he is above such trifling matters. Its here, at its zenith, that I can feel him straining to throw the muddy workers under the bus for not achieving things faster and letting him down. An ex-employee that was responsible for contacting Bryan is left as the reason for that breaking down. Shedding staff isn't a good look either, and the assertion that a fair few have "left the industry" after their time with Molyneux is damning in and of itself.

Where he gets the most evasive though is on the matter of just what money Bryan is going to be accruing and making any notion of coming to a compromise despite the bullshit contract they forced him to sign. Thats when the childlike demeanour drops and suddenly Molyneux remembers complex things like legal ramifications and "do not make money promises". Funny that. He'll quote from three months to a year or anything regarding Godus development, features to entice and bedazzle, but when it counts to his bottom line, some self preservation is kicking in and preventing him from making any concessions whatsoever.

The very first question of the article is perfect because it is, with laser precision, the root of it all. Molyneux should never lead a studio or be the one calling the shots, because he is incapable of doing so. Thats why he and people like Dyack fell onto hard times. Businesses outside of infinite money reserves like MS need to run on Reality, and not fiction or they get into trouble fast. When Molyneux makes promises pertaining to game design, he's doing so almost entirely at the cost of other people's hard work and ability regarding code, art, animation, and so on. Even the simplest of us can just say out loud "I want to make a game with 'best things ever' in", but its realising that talk is cheap and management and planning are the true requirement to such an end goal is what makes someone a great leader of development. Molyneux quite simply is not and hasn't been for a damn long time. Tough love occurred, and its up to him how he reshuffles.

This read is just as good as the article. Well done!

 

[megamerican]

Walker is an asshole. He's just kicking someone when they're down. Doing this to the current bigshots at EA or Ubisoft would take courage, this is picking apart wounded prey.

 

[Robert at Zeboyd Games]

We'll be done in nine months. Give us money, backers!

Three years in, combat isn't implemented yet.

Combat.

Don't act like this isn't absurd. This isn't an extra eight months. It's the original Dev time several times over, with absolute basics still missing in a game that is, in its current state, incredibly simplistic.

It's definitely a mess, don't get me wrong. They're not 3 years over their deadline though - the original Beta launch promise was September 2013.

 

[Lucumo]

You look at the 2015 Most Anticipated Games on Neogaf thread and about half of the games in there were also on the 2014 Most Anticipate Games thread. The vast majority of developers have no clue how long it's going to take them to finish their game.

Still, as he said, answering to your publisher is different from answering to your backers.

 

[ALLseeingEYE]

Godus isn't late. It isn't even going to be finished. They are working on an entirely new game now even though people paid money via kickstarter for Godus. That is why this interview happened.

Rough,
although, I would argue that no work of art is ever 'finished', it is only abandoned. Molyneaux doing a kickstarter is kind of hilarious when one thinks about it. It does sound like he still plans to get the main features in (multiplayer, combat, God powers), but that Linux version does sound like a pipe dream. We'll see how it goes though.

I think the excellent Double Fine Adventure! documentary (still currently in progress) should be required viewing for folks that are interested in this topic for a raw look at how things don't always turn out the way you plan for when it comes to game development. Lots of similarities to this particular situation as well - respected old school dev with strengths in creativity and ideas but project management not as much, a kickstarter campaign and the responsibilities that are tied to fan funded projects, in depth look at the development process, the roles of the team and the hurdles that come up, having to alter plans due to over ambition, internet outrage from the perspective of those on the receiving end. It's all pretty fascinating and transparent stuff whether Broken Age is up folks alley or not, much more than a source of PR for the game. I learned a lot more about the grey area between a developer making a statement and the realities they face to achieve their goals than I did from this article, at least.

I'll have to check that out as well. If a developer is ever going to work on a completely rigid timeline, they can't take any risks, basically everything needs to be known ahead of time. Molyneaux's projects have basically always been creatively driven, hence, ideally requiring a lot of prototyping. It was no doubt absurd that he only asked for 9 months of funding, but he's also funded years of extra dev time to help it succeed, I think that's quite a positive thing.

 

[Sorian]

Hahaha, of course he went in with agenda. He wanted to carve into Molyneux and try to get some real words out of the bastard. Not caring about the truth? Heh.



"He could be worse," ain't a valid excuse.

Shame he didn't succeed. For as good of a carve job that he did, all we were left with was more bullshit. Surprise!

 

[ScatheZombie]

How can he not know how much money it costs to make a game, you set a budget it is that simple

While most of the ignorant gamer "I know game development better than a developer" posts have been absolutely infuriating to read ... this one is so ridiculously idealistic that I actually stopped being frustrated and broke into uncontrollable laughter.

Thank you for that.

 

[Jito]

Walker is an asshole. He's just kicking someone when they're down. Doing this to the current bigshots at EA or Ubisoft would take courage, this is picking apart wounded prey.

Again, you are missing that EA or Ubi would never agree to an interview of this style. This was very much Peter attempting to defend himself, with no PR spin, because of the articles shitting on him and 22Cans the other day.

 

[TheLetdown]

I'm not here to question if he is a (pathological) liar or not. I've talked about what I think of Molyneux and his way of handling stuff in an earlier post. Find it if you want that. My issue here is related to that first question only. It changed how the whole interview was made. It was not professional. It was emotional. And it was what John Walker was thinking when asked that. If you want proof, here is a later bit of the interview:

I think your quote is actually hurting your case, particularly with respect to your link to the mental health definition.

Had Molyneux stated, "Yes," the line of questioning now becomes an attack on an individual who identifies with a mental disorder. I don't and you don't need to tell anyone how or why that's not okay, because it, flat, isn't.

That he openly denies such can only mean that any lack of truthfulness is not the result of compulsivity, but rather willful and intentional deception.

If your issue is only with the opening question, I'm not sure I see your issue at all.

 

[Atrophis]

Holy shit another crybaby missive about how game development is hard. You know what's hard? Work. A job. Everyone's job is hard. Everyone has deadlines. Everyone has budgets. Everyone fucks up those things all the time. The erudite game dev doesn't need to come down the mountain to explain how tough it is writing code every time one if their peers gets taken to the woodshed. Ever since the kickstarter backlash it's become unbearable.

"Game development is hard" - the get out of jail free card for kickstarter fraudsters everywhere. Don't forget "the guy made some great games in the past" and "i love his enthusiasm!"

 

[DJSharpeCheddar]

Congratulations, John Walker, you've managed to make me feel really, really bad for Peter Molyneux.

Your next challenge is Phil Fish.

 

[GreedZen]

Is RPS getting too much traffic or something? Front page loads but the article won't.

 

[Guri]

I don't see that as an emotional question. That's honestly a fair assessment to make to anyone who has any cursory knowledge of the man's work, and hell, there are a lot of journalists who use a loaded question to knock their interviewee off-guard.

I can tell you one thing, speaking as someone whose vocation is in PR. If I was his handler, I would have cut that interview off after the first three questions. For someone who has such a long career in the industry, Molyneux has no understanding of the impact of bad press, especially since he's someone who's rode on the goodwill of a gullible gaming public for the last decade.

To be clear, I didn't mean to say the question itself was emotional, but that it sets the interview in a more emotional way. Regardless of the interviewee, when you ask if they are a pathological liar, something health experts have been discussing frequently, it does change the rest of the interview.

I don't want to compare depression with pathological lying, since they are different things, so I hope you can see what I am trying to say here: when someone tells to a depressed person to be positive, they will be offended, because depression is a disease, they can't simply feel happy in a matter of seconds. The person has no control over their emotions. Pathological liars have no control of what they are lying. They can even lie about something that can harm them. Again, not comparing them, but can you see why it is something that can be offensive? And my answer continues with the next quote.

"Do you say stuff that isn’t true without meaning to?" would have been a more appropriate question, although still kind of awkward. He could have basically asked the same questions in a different way.

Exactly. It would have been way less offensive. Not sure if that would be the best way to start the conversation, but at least more respectful than the way John asked.

 

[DoktorEvil]

it's really hard to get through the milo presentation and come away with this stance. really, really hard.

"Look at what just happened. Clare drew a picture on a piece of paper, the piece of paper was held up to Milo, Natal recognized the piece of paper, scanned the piece of paper in, Milo looked at that piece of paper, recognized the shape, recognized the color, and was able to get on with his project."

"This is true technology that science fiction has not even written yet. This works. Today."

Oh fuck lol I never saw this. I didn't know that he made even more promises with Kinect.

 

[Future PhaZe]

Actually maybe everyone should do this, just interview people like an antagonistic douches, you'll get the praise from the forum-goers who love industry members getting their comeuppance, but then you get to watch their confused reactions when industry members just do interviews much less and stick to pre-approved interviews on PR releases.

I mean the entire interview is based off of Peters history and the things he's done. If other developers are concerned about their own history, then yea, they shouldn't be doing interviews that ask the tough questions.

A good chunk of people really have nothing to worry about however.

 

[megamerican]

Again, you are missing that EA or Ubi would never agree to an interview of this style. This was very much Peter attempting to defend himself, with no PR spin, because of the articles shitting on him and 22Cans the other day.

EGM / 1Up show went after high profile targets. They were more tactful and professional about it, which actually made it more damning.

 

[Roshin]

I am still reading that. It's such a brutal interview.

It is, but then again, it's been brewing for a while now.

It's kinda hard to read, because I'm old enough to have been around when Bullfrog was at their peak. I have so much respect for Pete, but I don't know what's going on with him.

 

[catapult37]

Cannot be quoted enough. Anyone angered by the interviewer's tone, please read this start to finish:

Whew, busy day so could only read not reply. I feel theres a lot of culture shock here for US and no Euro board-members in what an aggressive interview this was. Here in the UK, if you fuck up publicly to this extent (and for an extended period so as to become notorious for it), this what you get faced with and rightfully so.

I'm not surprised a lot of the dev community is quivering at the lip and rabble rowsing to the tune of "too harsh, unprofessional!" because 1) you've got your typical human tribal instinct where one of the tribe in GAME DEV markings is being 'attacked', and the deep instinctual urge is defend 2) Theres the fact a lot of the game industry is founded upon pathological liars. That ranges from there being little budget for a projects development; Unpaid overtime, lie to the underlings or lying to consumers to their faces over things like "this content will never see re-release!" and so on. A huge percentage of the industry runs on a sort of locomotive "its too big to stop now" principle rather than one of tight, fiscally responsible project management. So when these big 'orrible mean questions are being fielded at someone perceived as "one of the untouchable old greats", pants begin to fill.

Thats the core of it as well. Peter Molyneux could have continued to drain EA or Microsofts coffers until someone figured things out, and its "oh well, theyre big boys, they'll deal". But the second Molyneux stepped into the Kickstarter/crowdfunding/goodwill space, that changes entirely. This is no longer a situation of something being funded by the well-to-do of the world, you're now doffing your cap to anyone in the world with access to electronic funds. People that may be living paycheque to paycheque, people that had the money then down the line fall afoul of some hideous financial emergency, so on and so forth. But they either recognised your name as one to trust, or a lot of positive PR and outreach got your project infront of them and they said "yeah why not". Fans pledging for $200 books they're no closer to getting to, a kid promised a life changing sum of money left to hang (good thing he's not terminally ill eh or living in a dangerous part of the world), and even individuals passionate yet perhaps silly enough to work for a year for free to help dig Molyneux out of his mess because of his legacy. These people don't have a name though, they're nor celebs, a figure you're supposed to protect. They're just the legion of people its okay to step on because... what they gonna do?

This article is the equal and opposing force to the good-will people like Molyneux have been cashing in to with the Kickstarter gold-rush. After a straight decade or more of lying, and yes it is lying to this point, thats when the kid gloves should come off and tough questions are asked. RPS has no doubt covered GODUS themselves, and some small part of John is perhaps acting on a touch of guilt for being one of many others propping up Molyneux's promises and letting him run with it. Thats got to end in a spectacular fashion. What we read today was accountability, and theres a great lack of it in day to day life until things get leaked or brought to the public eye through other means (journalism!).

There are several points in the article that stand out to me. The perpetuation on Peter's part of trying to paint himself as a naive thinker of our time, and how could he possibly be expected to know things like "7 months or 3 years", that simply by being a creative person he is above such trifling matters. Its here, at its zenith, that I can feel him straining to throw the muddy workers under the bus for not achieving things faster and letting him down. An ex-employee that was responsible for contacting Bryan is left as the reason for that breaking down. Shedding staff isn't a good look either, and the assertion that a fair few have "left the industry" after their time with Molyneux is damning in and of itself.

Where he gets the most evasive though is on the matter of just what money Bryan is going to be accruing and making any notion of coming to a compromise despite the bullshit contract they forced him to sign. Thats when the childlike demeanour drops and suddenly Molyneux remembers complex things like legal ramifications and "do not make money promises". Funny that. He'll quote from three months to a year or anything regarding Godus development, features to entice and bedazzle, but when it counts to his bottom line, some self preservation is kicking in and preventing him from making any concessions whatsoever.

The very first question of the article is perfect because it is, with laser precision, the root of it all. Molyneux should never lead a studio or be the one calling the shots, because he is incapable of doing so. Thats why he and people like Dyack fell onto hard times. Businesses outside of infinite money reserves like MS need to run on Reality, and not fiction or they get into trouble fast. When Molyneux makes promises pertaining to game design, he's doing so almost entirely at the cost of other people's hard work and ability regarding code, art, animation, and so on. Even the simplest of us can just say out loud "I want to make a game with 'best things ever' in", but its realising that talk is cheap and management and planning are the true requirement to such an end goal is what makes someone a great leader of development. Molyneux quite simply is not and hasn't been for a damn long time. Tough love occurred, and its up to him how he reshuffles.

 

[ieptbarakat]

Glad to see a journalist that doesn't just equate to a freelance pr guy, anyone calling John Walker a bully should look at the infamy surrounding Peter Molyneux's delusional claims and over-promising that is borderline false advertising.

 

[Jito]

EGM / 1Up show went after high profile targets. They were more tactful and professional about it, which actually made it more damning.

Regardless this is an interview in response to the articles the other day.

 

[NickFire]

Exactly. It would have been way less offensive. Not sure if that would be the best way to start the conversation, but at least more respectful than the way John asked.

Sure it would have been less offensive. Also far less effective at getting under his skin, which is when PR training starts breaking down.

 

[malingenie]

Completely useless questions. The guy is a 30 year veteran well versed in PR spin. His answers would be:

No
No
I think my fans already trust me.

Well, I'm no reporter and it took me 10 seconds to come up with these so yeah they suck. But I don't subscribe to the idea that asking the questions in a ruthless way provided better answers

Edit: Again remember I'm coming from the point of view that yeah he should respond to these failures. Dignity and respect shouldn't be incompatible with getting to the truth.

 

[Phediuk]

It blows my mind that people are celebrating the bullying of a guy who has actual passion for video games and makes good ones too.

 

[bsod]

Glad to see a journalist that doesn't just equate to a freelance pr guy, anyone calling John Walker a bully should look at the infamy surrounding Peter Molyneux's delusional claims and over-promising that is borderline false advertising.

If we already know Peter's claims are delusion and he's known for over-promising, tell me what exactly did the interviewer accomplish outside of point out the obvious.?I just wish people would be honest with themselves and admit that they don't know the difference between honest journalism and getting your nut off because an interviewer picked on someone they don't like.

It will be funny when this tactic is used again on a developer people like and all of a sudden the people whining about how this was fair suddenly change their story.

 

[Vlade]

If you think this was honest, there's not much else to say. It's clear to anyone with their head sown straight that Walker came in with an agenda and didn't care about the truth. You just can't argue with some people if they think 5+5=11.

false. it would have been coming in with an agenda if he treated peter's past as if he was confused about what happened and needed peter to explain it.

 

[dose]

Jeez. RPS really burned their bridges with this one.

Wonder if they would take the same tone with Double Fine and Schafer.

I don't remember Double Fine or Schafer promising and lying multiple times about what their games were going to feature.

 

[Tangeroo]

Jeez. RPS really burned their bridges with this one.

Wonder if they would take the same tone with Double Fine and Schafer.

They probably reserve vitriol for developers who perpetually lie over multiple decades without any indication that the behavior will change.

 

[Freeman]

did they call him out on the milo bullshit? That shit still isn't possible with xbone kinect. what a fake ass demo that was

Now why didn't journalists said it was fake?(or did they?) Same goes for the presentation where there were actors/dancers pretending to be playing Kinect.

Kick the guy that is down, but let the corporations that compulsively do it with impunity.

There are much better ways to ask the same questions that were directed at PM.

 

[Circle Jerk]

If you think this was honest, there's not much else to say. It's clear to anyone with their head sown straight that Walker came in with an agenda and didn't care about the truth. You just can't argue with some people if they think 5+5=11.

Yea man, people with agendas that just immediately discount others are just the worst you know.

 

[crazyrabbits]

To be clear, I didn't mean to say the question itself was emotional, but that it set the interview in a more emotional way. Regardless of the interviewee, when you ask if they are a pathological liar, something health experts have been discussing frequently, it does change the rest of the interview.

I don't want to compare depression with pathological lying, since they are different things, so I hope you can see what I am trying to say here: when someone tells to a depressed person to be positive, they will be offended, because depression is a disease, they can't simply feel happy in a matter of seconds. The person has no control over their emotions. Pathological liars have no control of what they are lying. They can even lie about something that can harm them. Again, not comparing them, but can you see why it is something that can be offensive? And my answer continues with the next quote.

There's a lot to be said for the tone of a statement - something that a lot of people don't understand. Asking a question is different than making a blanket statement, and I'd much rather have someone ask me if I'm a liar than outright telling me, because the latter is a lot more emotionally-charged.

Like I said, it's semantics. I somehow doubt that in that moment, Molyneux was thinking "is he implying that I have a mental illness?" It's beside the point.

This kind of journalism has been around for a long time, and is often considered to be an effective form because it can throw off individuals who are hiding information or refusing to answer questions. By doing so, Walker threw off Molyneux and forced him to spin (even more than he usually does), thus validating the opening question.

You yourself posted the excerpt from later in the interview - Molyneux was more focused on the clarity of that opening question than he was with anything he said afterwards.

 

[Neuromancer]

Regardless this is an interview in response to the articles the other day.

If you're talking about the less antagonistic article The Guardian ran, RPS's interview seems to have taken place before that.

An hour before publication, however, we discovered that he had spoken to the gaming news site Rock, Paper, Shotgun the day before, and had given their interviewer the same impression – that he would no longer be speaking to the press.

 

[bsod]

false. it would have been coming in with an agenda if he treated peter's past as if he was confused about what happened and needed peter to explain it.

Do you even know what the word agenda is? Because what you've just described has nothing to do with that.

 

[Jito]

If you're talking about the less antagonistic article The Guardian ran, RPS's interview seems to have taken place before that.

No I'm talking about the RPS Godus article from the other day and Eurogamer article from the same ?day?

Edit: It wasn't Monday

 

[civilstrife]

That was an... uncomfortable read.
Watching Peter oscillate between taking his ball and going home (swearing off interviews), and bragging about his skills as a showman ("I kept Black and White in the media for four years!") is really elucidating.

The overall effect is like listening to your drunk uncle getting deposed.

Yeah, he had it coming... but he's your uncle.

 

[Freshmaker]

It's rather telling that when pressed on the absurd 7month development time promise PM just complains, "Now you're sounding like a publisher!"

You just offloaded the duties of the publisher onto your prospective audience Peter. You didn't get rid of them by going Kickstarter.

 

[bsod]

false. it would have been coming in with an agenda if he treated peter's past as if he was confused about what happened and needed peter to explain it.

Reporter: Mr. President, why are you lying about the healthcare website not operating sufficiently, preventing thousands of people from getting health care?
Obama: I didn't know how the site would run, that's not my department
Reporter: You're the President of the United States. You should know everything!

I guess this is quality reporting in your eyes, huh?

 

[Vlade]

Do you even know what the word agenda is? Because what you've just described has nothing to do with that.

if his agenda was to call peter to answer for actual happenings, thats relatively honest. if he wanted to give peter a stage to whitewash the past, thats lest honest. i can come up with grand motivations for both.

 

[megalowho]

I'll have to check that out as well. If a developer is ever going to work on a completely rigid timeline, they can't take any risks, basically everything needs to be known ahead of time. Molyneaux's projects have basically always been creatively driven, hence, ideally requiring a lot of prototyping. It was no doubt absurd that he only asked for 9 months of funding, but he's also funded years of extra dev time to help it succeed, I think that's quite a positive thing.

One very small example from DFA is when the team got back concept art from a long time collaborator that they were counting on basing a lot of game locations around and it wasn't what they were looking for. Do you move ahead and have the game artists just work with it, even if it's not that good? Pay more money than was originally planned for more work to reference? Move the burden onto a different artist whose style was being used for the look of the game instead, double his workload? How does this one small hiccup ripple out and affect both the timeline and budget of the project? They're all interesting problems with few good answers.

That being said I don't think the budget or scope of Godus was ever realistic even considering extra funding, it's not an apples to apples example. Schafer and Double Fine have handled the many hurdles presented and extra costs required for the sake of a better final product much more successfully, even if it hasn't gone entirely as planned. Still an illuminating look at the highs and lows of game development, especially development free from big publisher demands and restrictions. The reality of the situation is much more nuanced than "they should know how long it takes to make a game by now."

 

[DoktorEvil]

It blows my mind that people are celebrating the bullying of a guy who has actual passion for video games and makes good ones too.

Fucking please. This article is not bullying.

 

[semiconscious]

So why was Peter doing a press tour anyway?

Damage control after that Eurogamer article?

yeah, this's fundamentally all about that eurogamer article. about molyneux loving the 'idea' of the kid winning, while, at the same time, having no real interest whatsoever in how the guy might actually feel about the way he's been treated since. it's callous, it's very telling, & it's just really damning...

the guy's sorta a living example of molyneux's seemingly fatal tendencies to over-promise & under-deliver...

 

[frostyxc]

This is no more journalism by Mr. Walker than a salesperson in the plumbing section of Lowes is practicing plumbing. They are just (hopefully) there to help you buy something and nothing more. If you start trusting them to do your plumbing, suddenly you're sealing pipes with Elmer's glue and there's a shark holding dominion over what was once your basement.

What I'm saying is, all these folks are good for is purchasing advice, so considering this hostile interview an act of "good journalism" is laughable. And on the flip side, those expecting professionalism from a games critic... c'mon. Really? Of course you're not going to get any professionalism out of them, so just spit that thought out of your head onto a bag of expired cabbage. Or don't... that's kind of gross. The cabbage isn't even expired. It's still on the counter IN the grocery store, for goodness sake! You disgust me...

I'm going to lump Peter Moxcaidfavlenyseux and Double Fine together and say: Aren't most of us at the point where whenever Peter or anyone from Double Fine speaks, or issues a Kickstater, we induce reality on the situation, cut down expectations by at least 75%, and then move on with our day without donating any money to them? These folks aren't business-minded, they obviously don't know how to budget, and can never deliver anything on time. They belong within the confines of the publisher system, not indulged by "free" money with no real consequences. Sometimes ideas are just bad and/or overwrought, and need people disciplined with the purse strings to have control. Some people can handle the freedom (Chuck Norris), some cannot (Richard Grieco).

Why am I holding a bike chain and where is my Caesar salad?

 

[Comfort Jones]

It blows my mind that people are celebrating the bullying of a guy who has actual passion for video games and makes good ones too.

Yeah it's just passion that gotten him labeled as a straight up liar and guy who doesn't get it. Totally.

Seriously people actually trying to discuss how mean the interviewer was over why it happened in the first place are the reason why games journalism is so terrible.