Not for me. I like hearing him talk so passionately about his games even though some of his ideas dont make it in his game. This guy is my inspiration its because of him I want to be a game developer.

"This guy is my inspiration its because of him I want to be a game developer"

So you want to make promises you obviously know yourself you can't keep and use these lies to exploit gamers hype so they will rush out and buy your game which really, at the end of the day is nothing to what you actually hyped up and promised

You want to be like that....yeah I don't think you would be liked very much if that was your mind set. Gamers and the community would have shot you down early in your career before you even get started. Before you know it you'll be working on smartphone gamers.

A block of cheese? Molyneux is a genius, look at what happened to Fable when he left. No one can deny Black & White, Fable, and Fable 2. All 3 are classic games that are imaginative and fresh, Fable 2 is a masterpiece imo.

Molyneux is 1 of the best idea men in the industry, he alone was the reason for Lionhead's success. Show some respect.

"Id rather have someone who thinks big than someone who delivers on all of their simple-minded ideas"

Thank you!

End of discussion.

"He was almost too forward thinking for the hardware."

Except, he's a game designer and director, and as such, he is required to work within the limitations in which he chooses to release his visions.

Almost all game productions aim big, and almost all have stuff scrapped due to processing restrictions. Other reasons can include they just don't work when implemented, or they aren't as compelling to the overall experience. Then of course, there are the ones that get scrapped due to time.

I've sat in, or been part of pre-production meetings where the concept and design are discussed at great length on how to achieve them. I've heard some crazy things that designers want to do, that honestly would be quite amazing should they be possible. But, when software engineers are part of such things, sometimes they have to curb these ideas, because sometimes they just aren't possible. Sometimes though, they are possible in a different form, and that's what these meetings are for....to discuss what's possible, and try to make happen what can be done in some way. Often times, an almost innocuous concept can be discussed for hours just to determine if it's possible on a technical level.

You may think that is limiting ourselves or the games to pre-conceived notions of what we expect, and us devs need to work harder. But that's not it at all. It's about being realistic and pragmatic. Some people, particularly programmers who aren't the artistic type, can look at things logically, but most of them will go over in their heads, or discuss among others possible ways to make it happen, and at times say they'll see what they can do. But ultimately, there is only so much time and resources that can be devoted to a project, and producers and directors want that time to be utilized in the most efficient and productive way possible...not spent spending 2-3 months on a concept which isn't possible, or won't improve the game, or worse, be completed, and just not actually come together with the rest of the game.

Anyhow, side note aside...know it was long...sorry.

The difference is when you talk about how he shared concepts.

That's a great thing, and I do wish more developers would talk about this kind of stuff. However, they should do so on a philosophical level, or if they don't want to delve to deep, as an developer diary type thing where they talk about some of the things they wanted to do, but couldn't.

Molyneux has a very bad habit of discussing these things as if they will be actual features of the game. He's applying his vision and dreams and using them as a way to discuss a product, which is then applied as a selling feature of the product by the consumer base. When this happens, people set their expectations higher, and because of the way Molyneux presents his ideas, I can't fault others who think it could be so.

If one is going to present these ideas in such a way, they should do so after they are sure they can achieve what they want to do, and as a game developer, he has to be acutely aware of what constraints he will have to adhere to...money, time, hardware, etc.

You can use the Kinect as an SLS camera for paranormal investigations. So it wasn’t a complete failure.

Remember Star Wars Kinect announcement? Biggest laughable acting seen

Project Milo could not have been released even if it existed. Why would a grown man want to simulate talking to young kids?

Unfortunately its the haters who will always set the agenda on any such discussion. Peter is a visionary who delivered some exceptional games and invented genres. I consider myself blessed to have worked at Bullfrog and seen such creativity up close. The fact he over promissed on several projects later in his career is hardly an issue limited to just him, and certainly does not undo the huge legacy he has.
I was impressed by the showing at the event, and Im pleased to see he's learnt to shutup and just deliver a game. Maybe one two people can let go of the hate if he delivers on this project, but I doubt it - people love to hate.

Amen. I respect Peter as a dreamer of interesting and grand ideas. Those who remember the golden years of Bullfrog knows how interesting their games were (and still remain) and the glorious feel of manipulating all the little simulation mechanics. If you understand many of his promises were "wouldn't it be cool if" hypotheticals that were strived for but ultimately not achieved (ie the realities of game dev) it makes far more sense than him being deliberately misleading.