Fable II - Peter Molyneux Retrospective Interview
Peter Molyneux takes us back to the land of Fable II.
by Aaron Sampson on
Did you enjoy this video?Sign In to Upvote
I like Fable, but I wish Molyneux would put it aside for a year or two and throw out another Dungeon Keeper or Magic Carpet. Those games were awesome, and any of you of the newer generation that missed them should try to get your hands on them and check em out. With today's technology and more than a decade to think on them, he could put out something great with those franchises.
its funny they actually made fun of how peter molyneux in the game(there is a tombstone in bowerstone cemetary)
@Thunderstarter I'm actually dyslexic and I'm a busy person if you can't tell from how long it took to reply to you but since the other reply's to you took the words out of my mouth I'll just say this because of the first stated point it's not worth my time i get A's in writing but it takes me a week to get the kinks out the paper and just not worth it too me on web posting where enough people just have trouble spelling if it bothers you or you don't like it don't read it but i get tired of people trying to validate their opinions on the subject simply because the other person forgot to cross a "t" or dot a "i" so to speak
Cutscene graphic were great, but gameplay graphics sucks. If they made the gameple like the cutscenes, it would be awesome.
@Siddha19: I have heard rumors that they MAYBE are going to bring it to PC must i'm not that sure about it =/
He really comes across as an intelligent, sensitive and highly educated individual. I think we can absolutely trust him to manage an excellent Fable III, but for god's sake man! Port it to the PC!!!
@Thunderstarter: Everyone is going to milk something good. Every heard of the phrase "If it ain't broke. Don't fix it," That's what they're doing. There's a reason that the games are so good. Square Enix puts so much love and care into their games that they CAN get milked. It's the same with Lionhead, Bungie, Bethesda, BioWare, etc. Betheda had 5 DLCs to Fallout 3. Alpha Protocol was announced in about, what, 2001? Bungie makes games out of popular demand. People have loved the Halo franchise ever since the books. They have been putting in time and effort and even released teh Halo: Reach Multiplayer beta specifaclly for the fans. If you want to talk about developers that just want a paycheck and could care less for the fans and popular demand, talk about EA. And note, Square Enix makes EVERY Final Fantasy different. X and X-2 were the only games based off each other. Aso, having such a pessimistic attitude towards things is a terrible attitude to have. With that attitude, it's hard to enjoy the game. Forget about what the developer wants. Embrace their work and make suggestions for them to work on rather than complaining and not doing anything about it.
@Thunderstarter: I think Fable II was worth 70 euros (sorry talking about euros because I live in Spain and I don't know much about dollars) at least more than most of the rubish 70 euros games that have been put in stock. And I'm totally agree with you, of course videogame makers make for profits, it's their job! Like any other job. But still to do a game need a lot of people to be involved with it. Just take a look at the credits of every game and you will see a lot of people that are involved on it. Sometimes even more that movies. Even that I think that there are a few videogame makers that still care about the opinions and likes and dislikes of players, Peter look like one of them, I don't know much about him but in all the interviews I have seen of him he looks like he cares about the opinions and try his best to make players experience better. But this is just my opinion and you are free to think what you want and I respect your opinion =) There's another thing I'm agree with you and is the Special Edition things or the DLC (I think it's right spelled XD), they even charge more money to get "new" things which in the end it's just a few new things that don't worth that money. Hope my english was easy to undestand =)
@OldKye: First, PLEASE use proper grammar in a comment. It's really hard to separate thoughts when I'm hit with a wall of text with no punctuation whatsoever. Second, you took my comment out of context, I never said it was BAD that they do it for money, I was stating that they do. How they do it, well, I've already said. @Lion_Man: You put your foot in your mouth with your Bungie example. It's called milking a franchise, Activision does it, Bungie does it, hell even MY favorite developer does it, Square Enix! All that media flies off the shelves and the money goes straight into their pockets! Again, it's not a BAD thing, what I merely was saying was the developers are just trying to make good games because in the long run good games=more money. They may enjoy the game, but I seriously don't think PM cares about what fans didn't get out of Fable II THAT much when he looks at his big, fancy paycheck.
you think fable to was good, then check out this vid. it will rock your world!!! Video games rule!!! OMShnikes!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HViPJUgeMo
You know you have a good sequel coming when the maker of the game says that his completely amazing game has flaws that need working on. I absolutley cannot wait for Fable III!
Fable II made me laugh, it made me smile, and above all, it made me think. But when Lucien shot my goddamn dog, that's where I drew the line. Keep doing what you do, Molyneux, and Fable III should turn out just as immersive and innovative as Fable II was, or even more so - in which case I can officially say I can't wait for this next installment.
The ending at the end was my biggest disappointment. Without spoiling it, there was no boss fight, so it felt rushed. I agree with Molyneux - the characters were "wooden." Very boring and unlikeable, especially the pistol-wielding rogue... what a jerk, AND he ends up ruining the ending depending on what you do. If you're going to introduce a character like him, make him either become more evil or see the errors in his ways. I want my personality to have a direct or indirect effect on the cast. Beyond that, I enjoyed Fable 2. Molyneux just needs a solid story with an interesting evolving cast of characters.
@Thunderstarter: I dare you to go up to Cliff Blitzensky (Don't know how to spell his name) and say that he only wants a profit. He literally has a Google alert set to the phrase "Gears of War," He and his teams try their hardest to make every single Gears game to the point of perfection with constant patches and listening to the players. Bungie has so many games and books, and even a movie. How can you say that their only in it for a profit? EA I can understand because most of their games are half-ass. Dante's Inferno was mainly an alteration of the God of War story with Ninja Gaiden-like combos, without the fluidity. You think that because of your prejudices. Everyone worries about money. EVERYONE. Of course their going to be in for a profit, but they love making the game. I have designed charcters and made animaions in what professionals use today. Once you get the hang of it, it's fun. They're making games because it's fun, they probably love video games and they want a paycheck so they can pay off a house, car, food, and help get what their families want.
I really think they messed up fable 2. The first was fun for what it was but I think fable 2 took some steps away from what the franchise could have been. Molyneux always promises too much.
I have a feeling Fable III will disappoint just as Fables I + II did. Peter just promises too much and raises gamer's expectations too high, higher than he has the ability to deliver. He does seem to be taking some of the criticism to heart, which I like, because Fable really is a few steps away from being a classic. Maybe he'll get it right this time.
Peter Molyneux often has great ideas but its not like he's creating the game's on his own. I must say i always did love the games he worked on especially Theme Park, Popolous 3, Syndicate, Dungeon Keeper.
Peter Molyneux, OMG, you shouldn't sell yourself short. Your games are so interesting, emotional and funny. Fable 1 was to me like A Legend Of Zelda made for adults. Fable II was more heartfelt, I actually felt bad when the sister dies or when Lucien shot the dog or visiting the heroes dream, As hard as I am, as abrasive as I can be I cried at that point...... No, your games are the best, Just keep improving what you do and we'll keep buying them.......
@Thunderstarter i love how negative you all get sometimes yeah they are trying to make a profit firefights and police save life's but don't do it for free either some love what they do but some it's just a job nothing more than that i work at a daycare i do cause i care about the kids but we still have to worry about money everyday cause without it we shut down i think he likes his job and i think it comes out in his games i mean why bash your own game this hard if you just want to make profit if that was his only care he be doing something like putting a fable 3 demo in number 2 to try to get you to buy it twice lol yeah it use to come with the game then again took 5 people and a year tops to make half those games now it takes hundreds of people and years to make games you complain about how did you think those peoples checks get payed magic?
@diegobrosso While I somewhat agree with you insomuch as I enjoyed Fable II, your defense of Molyneux, however, is laughable. You're saying that, because we don't make games, we can't be objective? I can't play the violin, but I know good violin work when I hear it. I do believe that Molyneux has the heart to create a game he originally sets out to, but he knows that he can put in half the effort and still get a nice paycheck.
I think there gonna have a really immersive story in Fable 3 get that sense from Molynuex in this interview. Hope they've been eating humble pie.
I've gained back a little respect for Molynuex after that. He hyped fable 2 so much, then it didn't deliver. I really hope fable 3 is three things. 1. LONGER. 2. more open world. 3. more in depth cause - effect system.
6. More variety in story and mission structure. What they did in Fable I worked extremely well, not only in story, but in gameplay, and it just felt that in Fable II they tried to just fill in the same formula with different things. Instead of revenge for your family, it's for yourself and your sister, instead of the guild, there's the gypsy camp, instead of the arena, there's a much less interesting version of the arena(which was really boring by the way), and most noticeably, instead of prison there is the spire. I don't want to play the same game twice, especially not when it's a regression, instead of progression. I just want the mood and atmosphere back. Fable I had character, charm, wit, it was beautiful, it was creepy, it was the marriage between Sleepy Hollow and the Legend of Zelda in the most perfect way possible. Fable II just felt like what World at War was to Modern Warfare, a game trying to capitalize on great concepts but without renovating much. I will say that I had fun with Fable II, and they did some things very well(the dog, demon doors got MUCH better), but for the most part, I was pretty disappointed.
4. Less bugs. To this day Fable II is one of the glitchiest games I've ever played, it's not just graphical glitches either, it's all sorts of things that genuinely affect the game poorly. 5. More variety in mood. Fable I was one of the best games for setting mood I've ever played. Oakvale was perfectly innocent and felt like summer. Bowerstone was this simple bustling town but with something hidden under the surface. Darkwood was creepy and brooding. Knothole Glade was absolutely terrifying, the Balverines scared the crap out of me. In Fable II, although the art direction SHOULD make you feel those things, it doesn't. I don't know what it was, the sound, the graphics, the music, but it all felt very mundane, and I wasn't even remotely scared of balverines anymore.
I think there was a lot of good and bad in Fable II, but what I would like to see in Fable III are a few things, those mainly being: 1. A greater focus on story and choices, much like Mass Effect did.(Or even Fable I did) 2. More musical presence. The soundtrack was so great in both games, but you hardly even hear it in Fable II. 3. Immersion. In Fable I you felt connected to the story, because you start the game as just a boy trying to save up some money for your sister's birthday present, then the bandits come and massacre the town. Even though you were just introduced to these characters, you felt this need to avenge your family. The world grows on you, you fall in love with the guild, and you care about the people. Even the annoying characters do what they're supposed to do, get under your skin. In Fable II it just feels like it's trying to do the same thing, but it doesn't. I didn't care about the sister at all, I didn't feel the need to kill the bad guy, and the world just seemed so empty. All of the character interaction felt dry and meaningless, and it felt like nothing I did made any impact on the game.
Everything positive you said was not true. There were 6 abilities in the game. No one cares about the outfits. The menus look forever and you had to use them so much. The choices were bland. I would return it for free just to hope you dont get another new game sale.
lol hes sad that more than half the people who played Fable 2 didnt use the features. Well I did and it was bland, waste of time crap. No gameplay values in any of them, did not change anything for you if you did any of it.
@diegobrosso: Sorry that I didn't feel that Fable II was worth $60. Face it. Video game makers make games for profit, rarely its for the love of the game. I don't care what they say in interviews, because they all know that once they release the next big game they're getting a large paycheck. That's why companies hype the games, so they get you excited to buy this. Infinity Ward and Bungie are pros at this, and Molenyuex is really good at getting you excited over a game that's all flash and no substance. No matter how hard it is to make, you're still going to have to pop out $60 for a new copy of the game, or even $80 for the special edition with nothing more than a new outfit and a book of artwork that *ahem* used to be included at the end of video games as a reward. And YES The Legend of Zelda defined modern ARPGs.
FAble 2 retrospective...what? This is almost as dumb as if a game maker put out commercials about a beta for one of their games. LOL, like that would happen. Pete's head is the size of that oil spill in the gulf at the moment. dude needs to chill.
Im not sure if Peter Molyneux played Fable II because alot of the positives he highlighted simply werent. I didnt bond with my dog at all and it was primarily a dig up treasure tool. The ending was completely horrible and was the worst ending I have seen in a video game since i began playing during the SNES era. He complained about no one caring about outfits, well duh they were almost completely useless. The multiplayer was so horrid that I really dont understand why they even bothered implementing it. Why would someone play coop and not be allowed to use their own character. For Fable III, im waiting to see every review possible so i dont make the same mistake again. Beat Fable II in a couple days and returned it.
I didn't like the game that much... He promised an open world game but it really wasn't! There were a few open instances but then you had to travel between those with loading screens. Didn't feel at all like an open world, and the city was really small! Just three areas. You were also promised the chance to create a hero to your liking and look the way you wanted but there were only like 5-6 clothing sets and about a dozen hairstyles. Also, as some have already said, I wanted a quick and lean character but there was no way for me to be effective with that, I still wanted to do some damage but there was no way for me to improve that without looking like a big brute. Time didn't pass at all, there was just one occasion where you were gone for ten years and another were your youth was drained from you. You did the same quests in the same order on every playthrough, nothing changed if you were good or evil except you and your dogs looks. Every playthrough is the same. Also, Peter said that combat was going to be made more fun than in the last one but you character STILL holds his weapon in that inefficient way, swinging away on a bandit 5-6 times and even more to kill him, while the sword makes a "thud" sound, kind of. It doesn't feel like a sword, you just work up a frustration with each blow. I don't really like it, I'd say it's the same game as the first one but with a dog and with way better graphics.
@55592 It's an action RPG and they use to be labeled action RPG's as well(look up the original zelda)... in till people started getting it into their bright little heads that RPG's require some sort of leveling system which is a dumb argument considering the amount of none RPG's with lvling systems look up the definition of an RPG and it never says anything about "needing" a leveling system... if leveling is what defined RPG's tons of games that are obviously not RPG's would be considered RPG's I don't get why people like to deny so hard that Zelda is an RPG yet when a game exactly like it comes out and has stats they don't question it for a second.... makes no sense... its like painting a rabbit pink and claiming its a new species when really it's pretty much the same thing
Like a few others have also stated, There were things i liked and disliked about the game. I bought it because of the RPG label and had hoped they had improved on their RPG elements, but they had focused more into making it a so-called sandbox game. My experience with the game overall was a positiv one, i did enjoy it altho it really felt shallow and i was just waiting and waiting for a boss battle, but it never really came. There were no fights where you really had to use the game mechanics, beside the golems that spawned which was disappointing. Most fields they did try to improve on also came short. Like the cities, You bought houses, or spendt alot of money there and that was it, nothing more. Money making was so simplistic that currency really had no value, you just had to be patient with the mini games, like wood chopping. With the customiztation i felt you were forced to take stats even tho you did not want your character to end up the way it led to. Like i wanted a small stealthy character but i felt forced to take stamina which would make my character this huge monster. With the clothes you could choose from, again if you wanted to appeal to certain people you just had to take out your pimpest clothes.
diegobrosso Posted May 9, 2010 7:37 am GMT It's funny to see how people is so good at criticizing games and being mad at some things, but have you stopped for a minute and think how hard is to make a game? --- Worst defense of a video game…ever! Games are hard to make, so are cars and sky scrapers. I can just see it now, the President of Toyota called before congress, shrugs his shoulders and says "cars are hard to make". You can disagree with people’s harsh criticism of Fable 2. I suppose if PM didn't over hype every game he makes, they wouldn't be so easy to criticize but please have a better defense than "games are hard to make".
I'm one of those who loves Fable II Peter ,keep going with the awesome work :) It's funny to see how people is so good at criticizing games and being mad at some things, but have you stopped for a minute and think how hard is to make a game? I mean games are not easy to do and there are a lot of people involved on them working hard, so stop acting like super game makers. I must say that there are some aspects which I don't like of Fable II, one of them is the cooperative, of course it would be awesome a free coop around the world and even that the 2nd player could create his/her own heroe/in, but that takes more time and work which I hope they can improve it in Fable III =) Other than that I love the doggie, the weapons, guns, skills, towns, the world of Fable, to be able to have families... On my opinion this is one the greatest and most human game made at the moment and I just hope that Fable III would be even better than the second one =)
@CptnBiddlesBurg: If you knew your gaming history, you would know that The Legend of Zelda on the NES defined the RPG video game. Other RPGs involved a first-person and decision-making system that was confusing and flawed. LOZ made it accessible, gave it an overworld and multiple dungeons and side quests. The series continues with that tradition. LOZ is, without a doubt, an RPG.
Thanks for taking out Stealing weapons from shops. And are you kidding me half the features? Why dont you make a good game with promises well kept.
Is Molyneux saying that half of the X360 players who played this game were retarded to figure it out? I ain't surprised at all.
Its good to see Peter is admitting some mistakes; this is a sure sign that Fable 3 will be much better, as he knows whats right and wrong this time and what works and what doesnt work. Im a hardcore Fable fan and while Fable 2 wasent "spectacular", it was by no means "bad". Peter still has my loyalty :) .