Molyneux: This is NOT Fable 2

[UPDATE] Lionhead founder uses GCDC 2006 keynote to talk about the evolution of combat in games other than Fable sequel. Video of keynote inside.

by

LEIPZIG, GERMANY--Peter Molyneux's luggage didn't arrive at the Leipzig airport on the same flight as he did. We know this because we were on the same flight, and because we were talking with him at the baggage pickup point when he realized that the laptop with his GCDC 2006 keynote presentation on it was missing. It came as little surprise to us, then, that this morning's keynote address got under way two hours late.

What was surprising, though, was that the keynote--delivered to a capacity audience of around 400 developers--focused almost entirely on video game combat. Titled "Combat: Time to Evolve?," Molyneux's address kicked off with a brief video clip of Street Fighter II' Hyper Fighting, after which the seasoned designer proceeded to question the need for many of that game's enduring gameplay mechanics in this day and age. Hit points, blunt weapons, and meaningless environments were the first to come under fire, as Molyneux discussed some of the experiments that he's been conducting with his Lionhead team, none of which have anything whatsoever to do with Fable 2, apparently.

Molyneux's goal is to make combat in games less repetitive, less dependent on the player memorizing button combinations, and more dramatic. He believes that Hollywood, rather than real life, is the place to look for inspiration when thinking about combat in games, a point that he illustrated by contrasting footage from Kill Bill with a movie made by role-players running around a forest with wooden weapons. "Real-life combat is rubbish" exclaimed Molyneux at one point, before going on to explain that while the swords in Kill Bill were invariably sharp enough to dissect enemies, those in most games (including Fable, which the audience was shown a brief clip of) behave more like blunt or only quite sharp objects. There are exceptions of course, Dead Rising's zombie-slicing katana being a recent example that springs to mind. But Molyneux's assertion that it should be possible to kill an enemy with just one well-placed swing of a sword definitely appeared to get members of the audience thinking.

Another feature of combat in games that Molyneux hopes will benefit from today's powerful game hardware is the role of environments. Referencing Hollywood again, and specifically the movie Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, which features a memorable fight scene on a spiral staircase, Molyneux asked the audience how often combat in movies takes place in a perfectly flat arena. The answer, of course, is not very often, and he went on to cite a number of examples of locations that moviemakers often use to make fights more interesting, such as bars, rope bridges, and staircases. The point was not only that different elevations and interactive objects can make a fight more varied and dramatic, but also that the range of moves available to you should vary according to the amount of space that you have to work in because of the proximity of walls or allies, for example.

The challenge that Molyneux posed to his team was to come up with a combat engine that requires no user interface (health bars and such), includes one-hit fatal blows, lets players use the environment to their advantage, and which can be played using just one analog stick and a single button. Context-sensitive controls are the answer, according to Molyneux. He suggested that if you were using just one button to perform all actions, the challenge would then come from the positioning of your character and the timing of your button presses rather than from your ability memorize button combinations or mash a button faster than your opponent. Molyneux also touched upon his desire to do away with the idea of a block button, although when talking about boss fights with one-hit or, at least, very-few-hit kills, he said that much of the challenge would come from evading the enemy's attacks and from finding a way around their defences.

To illustrate the kind of combat that he would like to see in games in the future, Molyneux showed a couple of brief videos in which characters reminiscent of those in Fable ("Again, for the press in the room, this is not Fable 2") did battle with each other in textureless but highly interactive environments. In the first clip, the player was able to pin an enemy to a wall using a nailgun before getting into a swordfight on a staircase. The player was disadvantaged by the fact that he was positioned two or three stairs lower than his enemy, but he was presented with an opportunity to turn things around when the enemy's sword got stuck in a banister after a particularly wild swing. The second movie was set in a bar, and illustrated the variety of moves that Molyneux believes could be performed with a single action button--at least after overcoming some serious development challenges relating to animation, artificial intelligence, and physics. When the player was attacked while sitting at the bar with his drink, the first press of the action button saw him picking up his bottle and hitting an enemy with it. After putting some distance between himself and the other two enemies, subsequent button presses saw him launching tables and chairs across the room (because the enemies weren't close enough to simply swing them at) and then swinging from a chandelier. When or if this type of combat will be possible in games remains to be seen, but Molyneux's four conclusions at the end of his presentation read like a wish list (or perhaps instructions) that he might as well have handed to every developer in the room:
We are making entertainment.
Combat must make me feel heroic.
More like Hollywood.
Experiment.

The presentation was followed by a brief question-and-answer session in which Molyneux was prompted to explain that enemies should have swords just as sharp as those wielded by the player and, at least where bosses and powerful enemies are concerned, they should be able to utilize the environment just as effectively. One of the more interesting questions posed by the audience concerned the Wii controller, which the owned-by-Microsoft Molyneux seems less than enthused by, going so far as to say that immersive combat "isn't about turning the controller into a sword". Molyneux's main concern seemed to be that, as a self-proclaimed "lazy gamer", he can't imagine swinging the Wii controller around in his living room for more than 20 minutes at a time--preferring to slouch on his sofa with a controller resting on his beer belly.

Molyneux ended the session not with that bombshell, but by showing a concept shot of Fable 2--the image showed a hero armed with a sword and shield walking through a wooded area and, regardless of the fact that it appeared to have been drawn by a 5-year-old using felt-tipped pens (yes, it was a joke), it was met with enthusiastic applause. Fable 2 is one of two games currently in development at Lionhead; we look forward to bringing you more information on those as soon as it becomes available.

Discussion

220 comments
avarice789
avarice789

mkurts wtf is the matter with you.havent you seen the videos this going to be f***ing awesome.

vaanofthewind
vaanofthewind

What's up with all you guys.Just because you failed once doesn't mean you can't try again.So shut up and stop acting like he is the only game developer who didn't get his things in a game!

Slash_out
Slash_out

Molyneux made some good points, but the answer however, I believe those are not really HIS point, since the answers given already exists in many games. He just listed what others though of before. Secondary, I do agree when he says that life bar, hit point, all that should not exist. But if we want to remove those, other things need to be implemented, like one shot kill by using the sword the right way and hitting a critical point. For that, a controler like the 360 or the ps3 is not good enough. You need something like the wii mote. It is also necessary because the enemies will have the same capability as you, if they do not, then it's not interesting. And the ennemies are IA, they do not need to bother with boutons of the controlers. Lastly one button for all the actions, is really NOT a good thing. Totaly, absolutly not a good thing. It that was the case, I could just move randomly pressing buttons, and even reading some books while pressing the button without looking at the screen. Also It won't make me feel heroic at all, since I would just press the button while being near some objects, hoping to do something good.

Lightandarkside
Lightandarkside

march 2007 they will show us gameplay do you guys even know how hard it is to develop a game dip **** a rpg especially

DefConcept
DefConcept

[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]

GrandXhenron
GrandXhenron

Wow... I've come to conclude that Peter Molyneux is the greatest. deutsch. ever. Other game developers, the smarter ones, give us Hard and softcopies of the games that they are developing... they give us previews of the games (telling us what Fable 2 will be like and showing us movies that are NOT Fable 2 are not previews, their dreams.), they let us try the demos (yes... once again, telling us how the battle system should be like in the future is not a demo), and balling on another game just coz you think Fable 2 will be better on it is unsportsmanlike... This guy, I love his games... wait no, not HIS games-- LIONHEAD's games-- but he's starting to become a real jerk... So, what now Peter? Huh? Do you think you're better than everybody else? Do you think you're more creative than most developers for chasing your Hollywood fantasies? Well? Do ya? I didn't think so.

Soultaker_22
Soultaker_22

Wow this sounds cool. The idea of using context-sensitive moves instead of memorizing button combos is great. If done right a it's a lot more intuitive. This is a lot like how Dark Messiah of Might and Magic is supposed to be. Check it out in the PC section. Seriously either Molyneax moonlights with Ubisoft or they ripped off his idea. He said get rid of the block button kamicolo...I don't think he meant get rid of blocking entirely. Maybe make it automatic, or integrate it into the context-sensitive functionality.

kamicolo
kamicolo

no block, but heroes can block....sounds fun anyhow and challenging

SapenNamen
SapenNamen

MasterManiac772, Molyneux said ACTION should be more like Hollywood. He's not wrong. For all the mainstream media do wrong with TV and movies and the like, their combat is frequently more interesting than video games. Especially more so than video games that aren't solely about combat. That he cited Kill Bill as a source for inspiration doesn't mean all action should be like that. He cited it IN COMPARISON to watching a bunch of RPers playing with sticks in the woods, which is more like what most games offer as action.

troness
troness

one hit kills is something i've been wanting for a long time now. I just hope that this guy can deliver on some of the ideas he's coming up with. But if you take a look back at a game like Bushido Blade 2 on playstation that was a game that had one hit kills. You could be loosing a fight, your arms and legs damaged and still with one swing of the sword you could end up winning the fight. That's how games need to be. I think Assassin's Creed is the game that will have a very innovative fighting system if it holds up to the hype. Good thing its coming to the 360.

soulknight63133
soulknight63133

For movies "over the top" is for the most part accepted. For games..not so much. Though I enjoyed the way PON ( Path of Neo) put together real-time 3D fighting mix with CG cut-scenes( hope a more polished version of this fighting system hit next-gen soon}. Playing a game with just one button and full of nothing but pre-rendered moves and cut-scenes could get boring REAL fast.

esk1m00k
esk1m00k

LOL MasterManiac totally agree with your post m8,every game he seems to put out comes with that quote..'oh this is the game i've always wanted to make' crap like a gushing teenager. Kill Bill one oddly seemed like an over the top arcade game at times to me,as does alot of other Hollywood dross coming out at the moment (Ultraviolet anyone?).

MasterManiac772
MasterManiac772

"More like Hollywood." Wow, hearing Molyneux speak those words is enough to make me sick. I'll be frank here and say that I'm not too familiar with his work - sure, I've played Fable, just like pretty much everybody else has by now, and just like everybody else, I think it's just another average hack-and-slash RPG. No big deal. As far as his other work is concerned, I've never gone beyond looking at the box-art for Black & White 2. But according to the industry's hype machine, Mr. Molyneux's a champion of creativity in videogames, and judging from the relative success of his studio's titles, not to mention the fact that he's a household name for many gamers, I was inclined to believe it. But now here he is flapping his mouth - Hollywood this, Hollywood that, all talk and no substance. Apparently he's in the same boat as Warren Spector. I don't know how one could possibly be heralded as a champion of creativity while at the same time invoking the name of that god-awful Kill Bill mess (even my anime-loving little sister rolled her eyes at the "action" in that one) as a symbol of what the industry should be doing. Look, when I think of "Hollywood," I think brain-dead teenage humor usually involving bodily fluids of some sort, not involving storylines, interesting characters, or pulse-pumping action. Molyneux can take that over-wrought "cinema is superior to videogames" nonsense and shove it. Maybe things are different elsewhere, I don't know, but when some crackpot game designer who should be relegated to flipping burgers at a McDonalds somewhere stands up and says we should be "more like Hollywood," I can't help thinking of that sweaty little prick who makes a living "rating" movies and bashing videogames as inferior. That's right. One look at Beerfest, and I completely forget X-Com ever existed. But I do agree - combat does need to evolve from button-mashing or repetitive, throwaway shooting-gallery crap. But Hollywood is the LAST place to look for influence. Sure, we certainly do need the vague Matrix-style kick-and-slap fests that have constituted Hollywood action for about six years. When you're just about ready to fall asleep midway through a FIGHT sequence, something's wrong. Oh, and gunplay? How many generic double-fisting kung-fu movie heroes do we really need? Maybe the crappy videogame iterations just weren't complete without a hammy, Hollywood-style storyline and groan-worthy "punchlines." Ah, nobody's going to bother reading this, anyway. I give up. Screw Hollywood.

esk1m00k
esk1m00k

Humourguy,the games and times you speak of were the pioneering days of the industry,the love behind those titles was also a love for pushing boundaries and in my experience attempting to challenge the player as if he/she was yourself.15 years ago the internet had hardly impacted on the gaming world whereas now..well..i can't recall the actual amount of copies of doom3 that were downloaded on it first appearing for illegal download but it was huge and it's so easy to obtain illegal p.c games over the internet that anyone attempting a p.c specific single player game would be crazy to consider anything but online episodic purchasing even with its flaws.As for great games in the last year what about Bethesda finally comming true with the elder scrolls promises,the overlooked condemned i would recommend also. Anyhow,Pete M two words..Syndicate 3!!!! go on buddy you know its the 'game you always wanted to make'.

Humorguy_basic
Humorguy_basic

Companies will not spend the money on AI, as it cannot be seen or heard. Any way you can fool the gamer into 'thinking' its AI is good enough for most publishers. So, given that movies in many avenues are produced as art as much as entertainment, we are so far from movie games as to be recognisable. There are few games of the last 5 years that are made with 'love' like the first games on Atari, Commodore and early PC's. Games like the Ultima series, or X-Com, or the LucasArt flight sims like Battlehawks 1942. Even games like 'The Longest Journey (2000) can be considered in this light, as can Planescape Torment. What do these latter games have in common? They are written, from the ground up, with an adult market in mind. So here we are, in 2006, and we still have mostly games for teenagers, or written for a young male bent. Kill everything and everybody based on a usually spurious and bland reason/story for doing so. Between the above style of games and the slight incremental sports updates that are more and more self defeating with each release (and sales show it), we have a range of products that just do not match the marketplace. Up to 40% of home's have a PC in western nations, publishers should be writing games that tries to reach most of them,, and then sell to some of them. That's what the movie, book and TV markets do, and they are the markets publishers say they want to emulate. Instead, if you take away the first person shooters (which are all variations on a theme) and the yearly sports updates, what is being released nowadays? 15 years ago you would have serious flight sims, fun flight sims, side by side you had X-Com and Wing Commander and a market (and media) that accepted both. We had an industry that knew that most games had to run on pc's people actually owned. The Wing Commanders of the day were recognised as special games because they did demand hardware upgrades, but they were not the norm. We had platformers and side scrollers and interactive novels and serious simulations of attack boats, passenger planes, battles and wars (not RTS of FPS, but simulation, like SEAL Team, for example, a SIMULATION of the Vietnam war and squad actions within it. We are so far way from what made the games market so succesful in the early to mid 90's as to be anti-gaming and I say that of publishers and the gaming media. Most of what I have said above relates to PC gaming, but with the next-gen console games following the same route as PC gaming, just 10 year later, it will impact on the whole gaming market over the next couple of years or so. And the response of publishers to go the 'download' route or the episodic route is just going to put the final nail in the coffin of gaming. If we cannot sell 25 hour gameplay games for $40-50, I do not see how we will, in the long term, buy five 5 hour gameplay episodes, giving the same 25 hours of gameplay, but for over $100.

DarkGord
DarkGord

Press one button and the A.I. decides what my character does? Yes i can see how much fun such a game would be...

TheNameless2477
TheNameless2477

"Peter, Peter, little Pete ...... How childish you are ...... It is ironic for Peter Molyneux to talk about these things, when his own games like Fable and Black or White contained nothing of what he boasted and babbled on about. Just look at his totally pathetic fighting system in Fable...... You call that innovation ? He should stop embarassing himself. He should change his studio name to "DumbHead" studio - and stop talking crap like an idiot."-mkurts You're the idiot. He stated that he didn't like how he made Fable which is why he's trying to make the second one more interactive and innovative.

mkurts
mkurts

Peter, Peter, little Pete ...... How childish you are ...... It is ironic for Peter Molyneux to talk about these things, when his own games like Fable and Black or White contained nothing of what he boasted and babbled on about. Just look at his totally pathetic fighting system in Fable...... You call that innovation ? He should stop embarassing himself. He should change his studio name to "DumbHead" studio - and stop talking crap like an idiot.

gorilaboy
gorilaboy

The only reason Molyneux thinks the Wii is too tiring is because he's already been aligned with Microsoft. It would allow for a much more dynamic fighting system for his one button fighter, because it sounds very boring as is.

boocreepyfootdr
boocreepyfootdr

At least certain game makers really really care about taking the industry to the "next level."

CaptainDingo
CaptainDingo

The idea sounds okay, but he shouldn't pat himself on the back too much over it. This is the kind of thing I've been asking for since a few years ago, at least in terms of more interactive, truly skill-based fights. Something not depending on your little number in X attribute, making you always more powerful than a statistically-weaker foe no matter what. If he wants to get the developers really excited over this idea, maybe he should have shown this demo to gamers and tried for a positive reaction with the entire gaming community instead of 400 developers who were probably sleeping. I do think the man has lost touch. He has good ideas, but he can't bring them to life; especially recently. Look how many of the GOOD features got axed from Black & White 2 at the last minute. Very sloppy practice.

fetusfart18
fetusfart18

Just because he hasn't made any games in the genres he's "attacking", doesn't mean he has no room to form an opinion as a gamer. I've never made a sandbox game, but I can surely think of some things that would improve said genre. Point being, he PLAYS the genres of games that he's talking about, so he sees firsthand the problems that these games face when it comes to actually being fun.

huntersq
huntersq

"Any man who *invents a genre* can talk whatever talk he wants to, because he's already shown he can walk the damned walk." yah, that was ten YEARS ago, i have no problem of him inventing genres, and i give him all the credit in the world for his first few games (dungeon keeper, populous, and especially magic carpet, it blew my mind when i was playing it) and even his recent games the MOVIES which i think is a great game. BUT, what i can't ignore is his recent critical analysis on genres, where he has no relations and has no business criticizing in, and when HE HIMSELF DOESN'T OFFER ANYTHING INNOVATIVE TO IT. That's just hyprocrisy. I'm not saying his recent games are bad, they are just average. The games gives no credibility to his previous statments of being able to "revolutionize" the genre. I'm just saying that in a professional world of game development, PEOPLE SHOULD BACK UP THEIR CLAIMS, and not release a half done, unpolished, bug ridden, plays only on pentium processors game (a.k.a B&W2, yes i am still bitter about it). I loved his old games, they are classics. And i'm actually sad that now, he's delegated to using tactics of degrading other genres to convince people that he's still the genius that he used to be, and his upcoming games will be be the savior of the supposed genre.

HuxleyHobbes
HuxleyHobbes

"NOW! he comes out again and say the Fighting genre needs a kickstart? does NO ONE see a pattern here? Is anyone still taking this guy seriously? he's been attacking genre after genre, and when it's time for him to put his money where his mouth is, he had FAILED everytime." Any man who *invents a genre* can talk whatever talk he wants to, because he's already shown he can walk the damned walk. Populous Syndicate Magic Carpet Theme Park Dungeon Keeper The man could say the moon's made of cheese and it'd carry weight. Just because Fable didn't have as much freedom as was promised - let's be honest, it's still a great game - and Black and White has some flaws, doesn't mean his previous achievements are nonexistant. Honestly, I can see where he's coming from. Figting games could use a lot more variation - even Soul Calibur and Tekken are getting somewhat stale. I think he's on the money, although I don't think the number of buttons need to be reduced that far.

UltimaCloudX
UltimaCloudX

From what I understand from the article, I think he is talking about possibly using one button (like many others here have said here, that other games utilize), you would control the motions of how the combat was happening with the other control stick. I don't know exactly how it would work, but the idea is kind of intriguing. Relative to your position in combat, and using the sticks to swing downward, while you have the advantage of higher ground, sounds good to me, but would take a lot of time probably to tweak it correctly. The one hit kill system has been done before (I remember a strange game I played called Bushido Blade a long time ago); but I agree, that if games were to be a little more realistic in terms of how it would be in real life, you could imagine yourself fighting an enemy with very sharp swords. If you or your opponent, say, hacked off a limb, or been run through with the others' sword, If you weren't dead/dying already, you would probably be in such a state of shock, that your first impulse would probably not be to jump right back to it and perform the dance of death with your swords again. Its an interesting thought, and I applaud anything coming from the industry that tries to enhance or revolutionize our experiences from the norm of what we are used to everyday.

Neolucifer999
Neolucifer999

stop saying "his idea" , as none of those were his for starters ^_^ . "This coming from a guy who said RPGs lacks innovation, and claims Fable to revolutionize the genre. NOW! he comes out again and say the Fighting genre needs a kickstart? does NO ONE see a pattern here? Is anyone still taking this guy seriously? he's been attacking genre after genre, and when it's time for him to put his money where his mouth is, he had FAILED everytime. All this guy does now is rip on genres in an attempt to make himself look good. How this guy still has credibility in the game industry is beyond me." I agree completely here . Sure i'm biased , and i'm not saying that his games might not be fun and interesting for other people ... But i'm still getting tired of claims from that guy about revolutionizing the genre , or his followers claims , when most of his recent games are as classic as it gets , and as late as it can be . Black and white was nothing more than a Creatures/Tamagotchi with an optional Populous mode , or a Populous with an optional Tamagotchi if you prefer . the sequel was buggy as told earlier , and mostly improved graphics and interface . When i seek really innovative strategy games i can look towards games like Homeworld , Sacrifice , Battlezone and a few others .. when you think about it , the game doesnt even really involves strategy anyway... Fable , now fable ... imo a quite average that doesnt live up as usual to its hype . For starters being in a open world and rpg with alot of apparent freedom doesnt mean you shouldnt get any story at all ... The game's engine is good , but everything looks the same , every npc so homogeinous . Its as if they only focused on making your character fancy .. yet even so you had quite some limited good looks possible .but i might be exagerating ... except that i'm really tired of having the same horned guy look when i'm evil Alignment changes how you look, but all that it actually does to affect game play is that people will clap for you if you're good, and run from you if your bad, the game plays out the same way anyways. The famous alignement system is nothing different from most pc rpgs so far ... and even more generic when you get past the cosmetic effect . Thought kotor did that too . Overall no new idea , for a hack and slash quite linear despite its claim of being open.

BloodreaverSlut
BloodreaverSlut

I think that Dark Messiah of Might and Magic is the sort of game that he likes. Of course you have the block button, but combat is dynamic, enemies and you can use the environment very easily, (most) fighting is done with 1 button. I like his idea, but it will turn out to be a: stand over here and press X to kill enemy #1 and #3, stand over there and you can take out #2... might seem dynamic, but if forces you to use the environment, which makes it NOT dynamic. A game like DMoMM ALLOWS you to use the environment but doesnt FORCE you to, not in combat anyway.

huntersq
huntersq

This coming from a guy who said RPGs lacks innovation, and claims Fable to revolutionize the genre. The result, Fable came out as a lackluster and unfinished game, where it adds nothing to the genre. SW:KOTOR has already been doing what FABLE claims to be an "innovation" 3 years before FABLE was announced. Then he has the balls to come out to say the RTS genre is stail, and will be making a EPIC RTS game in Black and White 2. Well, the only thing "EPIC" about the game was the huge amounts of bugs which came with the game when it was released, and the gameplay was nothing new from B&W 1. The RTS part of the game is nothing different from SHOGUN: total war which was made10 YEARS before B&W2! In fact, SHOGUN was a BETTER and more polished game then B&W2. NOW! he comes out again and say the Fighting genre needs a kickstart? does NO ONE see a pattern here? Is anyone still taking this guy seriously? he's been attacking genre after genre, and when it's time for him to put his money where his mouth is, he had FAILED everytime. All this guy does now is rip on genres in an attempt to make himself look good. How this guy still has credibility in the game industry is beyond me.

thug33
thug33

dragons lair had 1 stick 1 button controls, with context sensitive environments, and it was s#!t

Phoenix73nj
Phoenix73nj

Mr. Molyneux is taking a great idea and in my humble opinion pushing it into a fanatical mantra. Context sensitive actions in fights are good. Dropping the entire "simulation" aspect of combat in videogames is bad. I think that GTA games get the ratio right. Let me choose to fight "fair" (shooting fight against an armed enemy or an oblivion like sword fight). I also however want to take advantage of environmental opportunity (push an enemy off a buildings edge), or even create environmental opportunities (create a trap by moving multiple explosive barrels around or balancing a heavy object somewhere it can be dropped by a gun shot). My belief is that games that mix context sensitive physics based dangerous environments with old school FPS and RPG fighting elements are the future. At least the future of games I'll be paying for. p.s. Still ya gotta love Molyneux! Defending the lazy gamer lolz.

ele975
ele975

YEAH! this game will kcik ass! and as i thought from the beginning Fable 2 will woob Oblivions ass i'm afraid. Can't wait until more info! :D

soulknight63133
soulknight63133

This is an old one but, the combat system used in Vagrant Story was pretty cool on PS1. "Timed Impact Attack" works pretty well especially for chained weapons or whips. Using different combat sytems for different weapons goes a long way towards enhancing gameplay. Though it was a turn-base game Gladius had a nice system as well.

Al3xki
Al3xki

I've been wondering if any developer would come up with this idea for the past 4 months. I mean a fidhting game where you have to know how to avoid attacks is much more exciting than knowing how to do all the moves.

alcoholhamster
alcoholhamster

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

NeonNinja
NeonNinja

Personally I'm still excited to see what this man has up his sleeve. He has always had great ideas but technology wasn't powerful enough to push his ideas forward (Fable) but now it seems as if it's catching up. I really want to see if this idea will be used well. Not to mention I'm totally excited about Fable 2. I also don't see why everyone is freaking out about one button combat. You only attack with one button in Zelda, you only fire a weapon with one button in most shooters, you only attack with one button in Oblivion. What's the big deal about that? I'm more interested in his one hit kill idea. I mean don't you gusy find it funny that after hitting a guy 20 tiems in Zelda/Soul Calibur/Fable that they're still alive? It's not even liek these guys are wearing magical armor or something liek in other games such as Oblivion...these are just dudes in cloth clothing getting cut and not dieing.

inYuashiaZero
inYuashiaZero

its a good concept but it could be problematic. ok jump on to the chandalear. no...dont eat the cheese. put your pants back on. o god what am i doing now........

Zifhael
Zifhael

cant wait for the day virtual reality becomes possible, even if only to simple polygon graphics, heck, wireframe would be fine, just to have a complete vr system...course, ill probably die before that happens...anyway, see below comments and give opinions, please

carpepoon
carpepoon

His ideas and concepts seem quite forward thinking. Hopefully as time progresses more and more people will be able to take ideas like what Peter was proposing and turn it into some really innovative new games. It is refreshing to know that there are always a select few people in the game development community that are true artists of their craft, who are working on changing the way we think and play. Gaming is improving right under our noses and before too long we are going to be able to do things in games we never before thought possible.

Zifhael
Zifhael

i do agree, however, that the one-button thing is a little bit of a stretch, maybe have 4 buttons, each one performing a different TYPE of action, and maybe some kind of combo system, but hard to do combo's without having button mashing...maybe the ability to stop time to set up a series of actions, and the watch as it plays out, and be able to stop the sequence at any time to create a new plan...you wouldnt technically be directly controlling a character, but you would be the creator of all the action on the screen, and you could intervene and change tactics if you feel like you are losing control of the action...but definitely would NOT want 100% scripted abilities...maybe a combination of Will Wright's progressive animation(Spore) and this would keep it original, giving you new animations based on what the computer thinks you are going to/trying to do with an object, with a couple of different general actions for it to go off of(depending on button press), what direction you are facing, where the enemy is in relation to you, your health, enemy's health, etc, etc, etc...sorry about the run-on message...

Zifhael
Zifhael

Peter Molyneux, Will Wright, it's about time people started experimenting with games again... always wondered why that giant laser attack in an rpg did about 500 damage, while a single punch from one character did about 4000....

Neolucifer999
Neolucifer999

"This guy is a genius. Im really excited to see how combat changes in the coming years.... Peter knows his ****" He knows how to spin people's heads yes... There is basically nothing really in what he just said . He sure does talk alot and in a pompous way , for someone that hasnt done anything really new since Populous . Of course i'm as biased as i sound , i'll admit i dont like his games . however enough with the bull**** already !! Plenty people , sadly for Molyneux , know their game history ... Like said many time there have been games like Bushido Blade and even on ps2 stuff like Kengo , addressing the whole one hit and heavy injury things . As for simplicity , he sure knows there are games like Smash Power , and even anime games like Naruto , and also DOA that simplfied to the extreme the antics of fighting games . he's just trying to spin doctor it , with the one button thing , an extreme that we know wont be deep and efficient enough . Unless you go the ,spectacular but not at all deep and technical as he claims , way of QTE initiated with the likes of Dragon's lair , later on heavily used in Resident Evil , God of war and prince of Persia ... Said in another word you're asking for a almost non interactive gameplay ... You found button mashing and complex pad techniques borng ? well welcome to a world where your chracter does a whole kung fu sequence with a chair , when pressing the button at the right moment ... "Shady" and controversial game background or not , his article wouldnt be so irritating , if instead of making pre existing ideas his own , he merely did the same explanations while giving the games the credits of their features . I doubt i'll ever want "his vision" to becomes the norm , but once everywhile in a few different games it wouldnt hurt to see such gameplays reappears and be improved . As for his WIimote comments .. please .. the guy is on a microsoft payroll now , so we cant expect any objectivity here . As plenty pointed out , while the easy way out , the wiimote could be the perfect tool for such a game . Also his bias shows even further , i have many troubles believing he doesnt know the wii doesnt requires you to stand like a tool in front of the tv swinging around over 4 meters , and instead remains in his little sofa ...

DrCLos
DrCLos

I think it's funny that Molyneux downplays the Wii-mote but it is the Wii that would be ideal in bringing to fruition his idea of a simple one button fighting game. Since with the Wii-mote you'd be able to choose the weapon on screen by pointing at it and pressing the action button. Then point at your opponent and press the action button to attack. You couldn't do that so easily with another controller if you have so many options on screen. Molyneux is beginning to embarrass himself as much as Kaz Hirai. They need to learn to keep quiet and think before speaking.

Cainekass29
Cainekass29

Molyneux should work on living up to some of the hype to his games.

peeweeshift
peeweeshift

molyneux is not fable 2 blah blah blah....so when is fable 2 coming out!!!

pustoi
pustoi

fable was a really good game with some heavy (-) , i hope fable2 will be without those (-)