Hellfire Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 My apologies, I thought it said that Galaxy had good camera control. Which it doesn't. Galaxy has an awesome camera, which is why it hardly needs control. It can be confusing when you're upside down which is the point. You can say the control isn't good in the sense that you can't use it all the time and whatnot, but the camera's great. Never, ever had a single problem with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grazza Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I didn't mean to cause any trouble mentioning the camera etc, I'm just genuinely interested in game design. I also think Peter Molyneux was offering food for thought, not just bashing Nintendo. At the moment, he is releasing/promoting Fable 2, which does try to appeal to everyone. How successfully it works, we'll have to see, but at least he's offering up something to judge. For example, I read that when you are defeated in battle, you are merely "knocked out". Also, there is a "gingerbread trail" so you don't get lost if you don't want to. Again, how well any of this works, I don't know. For me, one of the biggest questions is "How can you take the frustration out of games whilst keeping the challenge?" I like darkjak's ideas and I think Star Fox, Mario, Zelda (anything really) could have secret challenges that only present themselves if you are good at the game. There's also the idea of automatic saves. This was used in the sublime Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath. The key is to autosave, but not at moments when you are in a tight spot. I think this would make games flow so much more smoothly if you didn't have to think about saving (but could if you wanted to). Personally, I'm not keen on set save points (eg. Final Fantasy XII). I think they're a tad old-fashioned, because if you fail, you have to do so much again. I know there's the possibilty it could save where you don't want to, but there could be good teleportation options, combined with the next idea... ...Rechargeable health, which both Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath and Shadow of the Colossus had. It was used better in the latter, because if you had trouble fighting a colossus, you could just hide and recharge. Some battles took 10 minutes, some 60 minutes! I felt exausted after each one, but not frustrated. That said, neither game sold very well, so perhaps they're not good examples! Perhaps people are right in that there's not really a medium. However, I look forward to seeing how they can improve games generally, whether that means making parts of them more "casual" or parts more "core". The key is to have enough challenge, control and depth for those who want it, but be easy enough for those who don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cube Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 At the moment, he is releasing/promoting Fable 2, which does try to appeal to everyone. I would have labelled Fable 2 as a game that's almost as far away from "casual" as possible.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grazza Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I would have labelled Fable 2 as a game that's almost as far away from "casual" as possible.. Whether the masses will appreciate it or not, I don't know (I think Fable was quite a mainstream game - some of my colleagues loved it), but I do know that Lionhead were trying to make Fable 2 playable to everyone: simple combat, gingerbread trail etc. A lot of self-proclaimed "hardcore" gamers on forums were concerned about those very things ruining it. I'm not agreeing with them (I haven't played it yet), but it certainly wasn't made to appease hardcore or casual gamers. I think Peter Molyneux's being genuine in that he thinks he's created a bridge that can appeal to anyone. An awful lot of it is advertising, though. Fable was far better known than Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath (both for the Xbox), when arguably the latter was a much more accessible and better designed game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellfire Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I didn't mean to cause any trouble mentioning the camera etc, No trouble at all, we're here to discuss, not to hold back :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McPhee Posted October 28, 2008 Share Posted October 28, 2008 I would have labelled Fable 2 as a game that's almost as far away from "casual" as possible.. That's the point Molyneux is making. Fable is far away from being a casual franchise, but Fable 2 is a step in the right direction to making that type of game accesible. He's saying "why are we making new games for a new audience when there's nothing wrong with the old ones?". Playing Fable and thinking about all of this stuff it is clear to me that he's not just spouting rubbish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazkarieh Posted October 28, 2008 Share Posted October 28, 2008 That's the point Molyneux is making. Fable is far away from being a casual franchise, but Fable 2 is a step in the right direction to making that type of game accesible. He's saying "why are we making new games for a new audience when there's nothing wrong with the old ones?". The difference is that Nintendo does it beautifully (Mario Kart, Mario Galaxy), and Molyneux don't. Fable 2 it's a shame for anyone who has played and enjoyed the first one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumo73 Posted November 1, 2008 Share Posted November 1, 2008 Peter Molyneux shouldn’t be completely dismissed by what he is saying. He is still respected for the games he has been a part of (Syndicate, Magic Carpet, Black & White and the Fable games). Not really casual games however. This is also the same man who’s Lionhead Studios were bought by Microsoft and also said that he felt gamers wouldn’t like the Wii’s control scheme when it came out. If Peter feels that he can heal the casual v hardcore video gaming rift with Fable 2 for the Xbox 360 then good luck to him. I heard it’s a great game by the way. I would really like him to produce a game to show Nintendo how he thinks it should be done and release it on the Wii but I guess Microsoft wouldn’t allow him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emasher Posted November 2, 2008 Share Posted November 2, 2008 Though, they'd probably let him make a DS game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tellyn Posted November 2, 2008 Share Posted November 2, 2008 Which would most likely be Black and White, which was actually in development before Lionhead were bought out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts