Peter Molyneux - "Reviewers aren't real gamers"

With the recent release of Fable III, the review embargo curtain has been lifted to unveil some fairly mixed reviews to the new adventure/RPG title. The series creator, Peter Molyneux, had this to say on Twitter in response...

[The-Tentacle]

Lol damage control Peter?

[MAJ0R]

now Pete has reached an all time low XD

saying reviewers aren't gamers = fail

[Neckbear]

Reviewers normally have an obligation of playing games, even the ones they dislike.

We only play games for fun.

@avengers1978

Really, define "gamer". It's someone who likes gaming and enjoys the hobby, that's all. Reviewers aren't real "gamers" since, most of the time, they just DON'T enjoy many games and are much biased on their opinions, as well as different factors as marketing and how much money the game you're going to review is giving your page (In terms of ADs, anyways.)

Hell, I don't even like calling people "gamers" because it sounds stupid as hell, but he's right this time. These people just play a game and then rate the mechanics, they don't enjoy said game like ALOT of people do.

About Molyneux being pissed off, ah, he is, perhaps. You still gotta admit, he's right this time around.

[avengers1978]

@Neckbear wouldn't that make them more of a gamer. I mean they play just about everything; most of them have played games most of us have never even heard of.
Moly's just pissed that Fabel 3 didn't get a better score. Even though it got an 8 or 9 I think he wanted the 9 to 10 review.

[The Wood]

I'd be inclined to agree with him

[kancerkid]

What reviews have middling scores for this game. All I have seen are great reviews?

[gamerdude132]

Oh, nice, so I'm not a gamer despite SOMEWHAT ENJOYING MOST of the games to play to differing degrees. Sure, I play a bunch of horrible games, but to say "reviewers aren't real gamers because they're biased" (that's not how I am...) is like saying you are not a real gamer because you don't play as many games as us non-gamer reviewers do.

[Neckbear]

What I was trying to say is than reviewers usually don't really enjoy games because, most of the time, they feel OBLIGATED to play them.

Playing a game FOR FUN and playing a game BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO OR YOU WON'T GET PAID are two different things, silly.

One is enjoyable, and the other isn't. And, I would say, if you don't enjoy playing games, you ain't really a "gamer".

Ah, whatever. There are some reviewers who enjoy games too, but I'm sure the majority simply plays games as an obligation, rather than a hobby.

@dead_eye

Yes, that is right, but liking a game =/= playing a game for an obligation.

Think about it. Playing a game for work instead of for fun. That's simply something that will -probably- make you hate games.

Although, then again, alot of reviewers are cool guys, so yeah. I would say SOME don't enjoy games, and some do.

[dead_eye]

Sorry neckbear that just doesn't make sense. For one your making assumptions. And you don't have to like every game to be a gamer.

[Bigpappy]

Many of these reviewer bring their personal gripe in to the review process. Some of them just do it to pay their bills and aren't really gamers. Like pacther stiking his noise in gaming when is is actually a finacial guy. Knows nothing about gaming.

[Perjoss]

his speaks the truth, but he could have timed this better... because saying that now looks like he's being bitter about the fable 3 scores.

[outwar6010]

i agree with him alot of games that i love playing and thought were epic got pretty ordinary reviews

[HolyOrangeCows]

LOL, Fable III has some disappointing reviews, I see.

[Nihilism]

"Molyneux isn't a real developer"

[The Wood]

He's given me some great gaming experiences in the past....Yes it was a while ago but still he deserves credit for his past works...Now he's fallen in line with the MS 'devs must be hypemen' nonsense

[-Alpha]

I thought Molyneux always had a rep for overhyping things?

Anyways, I'm real g'dammit! Though I'm a gamer first and foremost. While I agree some reviewers are forced to review games they may not like it doesn't change the fact that most reviewers seemed to know what they were talking about with the Fable reviews-- or any review for that matter

[ryuzu]

Mean. But developers aren't real gamers either.

r.

[MNicholas]

Frankly, I don't know why people even read reviews.

Having said that, Molyneux hasn't produced anything good in years.

The first Fable on the original Xbox really was special and inspired many other games but it's been downhill since then.

[jellybalboa]

another xbox 360 exclusive hits the rocks

[josh14399]

i agree reviews should be ignored. Peter Molyneux problem is that he likes to streamline his recent games so much that there is no challenge and everything is too basic. i love games similar to fable but the ones i like have more depth. i'm not hating on the game because i know people new to RPG's will enjoy it but i can't see people who have played other RPG's loving the game.

[Super-Brad]

I agree too, I've been playing MoH lately and despite the reviews, me being a gamer, I have enjoyed the game much more than I expected.

Game reviewers, although sometimes good at their job of critically analysing a game, forget the important part, 'Is it fun?'

[StanLee]

I don't think it's that he wants there to be no challenge but he wants gamers to enjoy the experience, without frustration. He tries to make his games accessible to all. If you're a more experienced gamer, you'll get more out of the combat and side quests than someone who just wants to enjoy the story. My wife finished Fable II, here first role playing game. Black and White was the same way in that it was about the experience and it's one of the greatest games ever. He's right, reviewers aren't gamers because it's not about the experience for them. They have to finish a game in such a short window that it's about the instant gratification. How else can you explain reviewers lauding Modern Warfare 2's campaign? Because in the short time of reviewing the game, it was thrilling and exciting, nevermind that the experience was hollow. I put 40 hours into Fable II. Simple things like moving my family to Oakvale and redecorating our cottage with luxury items were an enjoyable experience for me. A reviewer doesn't have time to indulge in those game mechanics and its those kinds of interactions that make Fable great.

[ironcreed]

Best comment here.

[Zinc]

Interesting observation. I think you are likely on to something. I'm suprised you only have 1 bubble, but I haven't looked at your comment history.

[DARK WITNESS]

to be fair it's not just him trying to stream line ( make noob friendly )his games, All dev's or nearly all devs seem to be going down the root. its getting really annoying.

[StanLatMarveldotCom]

You see, that's the problem though. I would gather 85% of the gamers on N4G.com finish games but they're a very small minority, the core gamer. You see the figures; Only 40% of gamers finished that game or this game and the reality is, the majority of gamers, the casual gamers who buy a game for it to be successful, get frustrated with dying over and over again and just quit. They don't finish games. Look at Enslaved, reviewers called the platforming simplistic but it's that way to encourage gamers to experience the story without the frustration of an ill timed jump. More gamers will finish these games. Core gamers think they're the majority and games should be made for them but they're not; They're just a very vocal minority and developers see the numbers. Lionhead can tell you how many people didn't change clothing or hair styles or weapons in their playthrough of Fable II because it wasn't simple enough. I read a review where a reviewer criticized Fable III for its simplicity where in one quest there is a key in a room with arrows pointing to the key or the cookie crumb trail which returns, but what reviewers and core gamers don't understand is that the majority of gamers need that hand holding.

[DARK WITNESS]

I agree with you but that does not make it any less annoying.

it's like many things in this day and age, everyone wants it done for them, everyone wants the fastest easiest way of doing stuff with the littlest effort possible on their part.

I agree with all your points, which is more and more the reason I am loosing interest in gaming. it does not matter because as you put it, I am a core gamer and we don't make up the majority anymore. times have changed, gaming has changed.

back in the days you had to "look" for the key because that was part of the game, the excitment of exploring a room, you would find the key hidden somewhere, you would pick it up and it would trigger a boss fight or something. Now the arrow points to the key, you pick it up and a boss appears along with a press x, then press why to beat him.

still some people need that, and they need to be catered for in someway. I don't mean to sound like a di%k head, even though I know I am being one.

[dagamdagee]

I don't even know if Peter knows what a game is anymore. He's gone overboard with this silly little notion that games are "emotional" experiences. Reviewers are gamers. However, Peter Molyneux is no longer a gamer. He's an interactive movie auteur.

[StanLatMarveldotCom]

So games shouldn't be emotional experiences? You shouldn't connect with the characters and the world? So I gather for you, gaming should be solely about gameplay without a narrative to tie it all together? If that's the case, what is your motivation to finish a game other than to see it end? It doesn't sound like you're much of a gamer. Gaming has evolved to be an interactive, entertainment medium. If developers thought like you did, we'd still be playing Pong and Tetris.

[dagamdagee]

Nice knee-jerk reaction. You're missing my point completely. Peter is sacrificing play for the emotional experience. I'm all for the emotional experience, and I've written on this topic before. You can't have an emotional experience with a game when your avatar's only reaction to situations are: A) Fart B)Kill it with fire C) Thumbs Up. That's not emotional, that is a tacky replacement for actually trying to do something innovative. You cannot even hope to match me on comprehension of narrative design if you keep trying to play the knight in shining armor role for video games. Especially when dealing with developers and publishers who, despite your hopes and dreams, do not care about your emotional reaction to a game. They do, however, enjoy grabbing that $60 from you with the guise of providing a "rich emotional experience." Please.

[Baka-akaB]

It's one of the only few times i agree with Peter Molyneux ... damages control or not

[N4WAH]

Most reviewers are not real gamers.
I rarely ever agree with Peter but this is one time I agree 100%.
I have been saying this for years. I rarely agree with reviews. Reviews are just an extension of advertising / marketing.

[karl]

yep i have to agree aswell... im not fable fun

the last good game he made was black and white (the first one)

but damage control or not... he said something true... even though all reviewers start as gamers eventually so much criticism on games make them forget whats really important...

and for the most important part... being objective over a game is impossible

[AlienFodder]

"and for the most important part... being objective over a game is impossible."

This is so very true. Sometimes I feel like some reviewers let the mood they were in at the time they played a game totally influence their opinion of it. :) I also think that if a reviewer doesn't like a particular genre of games, he or she should simply not write about them. But that's just my own opinion.

[Drjft]

Liars aren't real developers.

Can I get an AMEN?!

[NexGen]

I think Molyneux should go back to making games and stop trying to create interactive therapy sessions, or games with this deep emotional connection. Kojima ends up pulling it off without that being the main focus or trying to directly be overly emotional - it seems that Kojima looks to the whole experience, whereas Molyneux looks at one aspect of it, just to compare the two.

[darx]

.

[Garnett]

Your saying SCEA and SCEJ aren't real developers? Shocking...

[HinakoNinomiya]

for once he may be on to something.....but fable's still boring though.

[Genecalypse]

What a strange thing to say, Fable 3 is hardly getting panned by reviews. Its at 85 on gamerankings. What I think he means is, he always has these grandiose promisies, and now the 3rd installment is rated lower than 1, and 2. What are we going to do with you Peter

[divideby0]

wow.... best he said nothing at all... I didnt buy Fall Out or Fable... I was planning but after reading the reviews and hearing about the bugs in FO and just the not glowing reviews of Fable, I didnt buy either game. I still will buy them when they are like 30 bucks..

I just refuse to buy bug ridden games and games which are just ok...

[visualb]

you don't know what you're missing out.

its one of the most unfairly rated games i've played in years.

mind you I speak on behalf of the PC version that has crashed on me ONCE in 25 hours.

strongly underrated GAME (not engine, not developer. GAME)

if you even remotely enjoyed FO3 you'll love NV =)

[boing]

reviewers = opinions

[Trunkz]

Sometimes I wonder if a reviewer has a bad day if it would effect the score they give to a game (or movie).

[visualb]

just what mood you're in

if I had to play a FPS when I'm in the mood to play a RTS game...i'm def. going to enjoy it less no matter how good it is.

[Lazy_Gamer]

I think it's more accurate to say that most reviews nowadays aren't real.
Hint: $$$

[callahan09]

I actually fully agree with him. Reviewers have totally different attitudes and sensibilities towards games than actual gamers who play games purely for their own enjoyment and who spend their own hard earned money and free time on games. Reviewers are paid to spend their time playing games, they don't get to choose which games they play, they are jaded, they don't have any investment in games, they are purposefully critical (obviously, it's in the job description), etc. etc. There's just not really any common ground between a reviewers mindset and a gamers mindset.

[Lirky]

REVIEWERS GET PAID TO REVIEW A GAME RATING IT... THEY DONT EVEN FINISH THE GAMES THEY JUST SAMPLE THEM FOR 9HRS THEN THEY ARE DONE LOL.

[Rowland]

some are, some aren't. Simple. - even kids know this.

But it's abundantly clear that peter molyneux has gone down the casual gaming route after promising and failing to deliver an RPG masterpiece - a complete mystery as he & Lionhead Studios are undoubtedly very talented and capable of doing so.

Of course financial success has been forthcoming but then that's the case with many disappointing games such as movie tie-ins and mediocre FPS's. What a wasted opportunity to be great and what a huge let down for the non-casual gaming community.

The Fable series is cartoony, goofy, linear, and has shallow RPG gameplay mechanics - a disappointing series that would be more at home on the Wii and iPhone.

[NeoKnight]

i am a reviewer and gamer lol?

it's just, a review is an overal summary of some of the aspects of the game which is reviewed. What is good and what is bad. It is also for developers so that they know what is good and what is less good right?

when you develop games, you should be able to analyse mistakes you made, and reviewers help them, and we also notify these for the normal gamers so that they won't be disappointed when they buy a game.

And that's not all

In a review, one person tells his of her opinion about the game, which could be totally different, it's all about the gaming experience you get from a game. Some reviewers will give grand theft auto iv a 6 and someone else will give it an 8. people are diffent, games are different, experiences are different and so are reviews.

[Blaster_Master]

I wish he would just take his own advice.

[Corrwin]

Full of good ideas and promises, but good games? 25 years of gamers have been happy with a menu for their RPGs, and you turn it into a shard of Playstation Home, without the community.

[muttonface]

not that I know what he means by it. What Ipersonally think is that reviewers's minds are so jaded therefore they don't represent what most gamers are thinking when playing a game. Reviewers will over analyse things, which for a gamer who comes in with a fresh mind will not, compare, contrast, look for the pros and cons as much as reviewers will. Though Molyneux has to be more specific, or else it'll seem he is just acting like a douche

[OhMyGandhi]

why do people continue to attack this guy?
I happened to absolutely love fable 1 and 2 and have no problem with designers who feel the need to speak of their grand visions, that are ambitious in design and theory.

no wonder why have so little innovation in games nowadays, because gamers love to heckle the creators, especially ones that are outspoken.
give the guy a break. seriously.
I'd take this guy rather than 100 average joe shmoes with an idea of designing a military or futuristic FPS.

and to his point, I believe he is both right and wrong.
reviewers, like game testers, have to play crap games sometimes. they sit through them, and let the titles, like Hannah Montana's sing along for the 360 to build up around them, like a pool of human waste.
I believe that game reviewers, or game "critics" oversaturate themselves, and may not reflect on a game as they should had they played the game alone and had enough time to sit on the experience.

honestly though, this comment does nothing for anyone.
but I would much rather have said "reviewers aren't real gamers", then "eastern design is better than western design" by Hideo kojima.

[yogaflame]

Hahaha in your face with those poor scores to overrated Peter Molyneux

[BrutallyBlunt]

I'm wondering if it was taken out of context? I think he will retract his statement soon or correct it because it does sound like damage control on his part.

Sure some reviewers may play his games or other games as if it's work. But i tend to think the vast majority of them are just like anyone else, those who enjoy videogames. That's probably what got them into the it in the first place.

From the reviews i have read so far they seem to suggest the main game is fairly short but you can spend dozens of hours doing side-quests which is what i think he's referring to. It's not meant to be played going from point A to B and calling it a day. There's much more to it.

[Johnny Cullen]

So, what, are quoting from fake Twitter accounts now?

Open season for me, then.

FYI: Molyneux's real Twitter is @pmolyneux.

[gamerdude132]

Big FUCK YOU to me then. I think I'll listen to Cee-Lo Green while I cut myself with a knife while I realize how sad my life is. Man, I liked Peter up until now. *sigh*

[SquareEnixFan]

I started ignoring reviews a long time ago but he shouldn't say reviewers aren't real gamers. "People who let reviews decide what games they buy aren't real gamers" would have been the better statement.

[ThatIrishGamer]

For Fable 1 they weren't real gamers. . . for Fable 2 they were great gamers. . . now for Fable 3 they're back to being fake gamers.

This man has no shame.

[dirigiblebill]

The Twitter account in question has this for a blurb: "Obviously this isn't the real Peter Molyneux, just a twisted character based on my favourite British Game Dev."

Sooooooooooooooooo, yeah.

[Baka-akaB]

Thing is i dont even care , it's just a pretty true statement imo , regardless of who said it .

Many churns out generic wall of texts that are almost template , and almost just ads .

With the rise of the net and blogs , some dont have much knowledge of gaming history are are just happy comparing whatever game to the current king of a genre .

A few are just happy to further their campaign as fanboys of a particular console .

Some pick some unlucky games , conveniently enough , often foreign and fairly low profiled , and while having not particular detailed complains , will trash it for the sake of providing their readers some blood and posturing as an harsh and edgy review sites .

Some , and yet far too many , posts erroneous data and facts about games . When it's even so easy to check with the net .

I'll just stop there i think

[yogaflame]

along with John Carmack , he is one of the most overrated developer ever

[Snack_Raccoon]

If Fable 3 is anything like Fable 2, I'd give it a 6/10 personally, such a disappointing game... BUT! I don't know what Fable 3 is like, could be brilliant, I'll find out in a few months when there are no more games to buy and I have some spare cash.

Either way, Peter Moly... err... yeah. He sucks, such a ... tool.

EDIT: A fake twitter aye? Oh well, Peter's still a tool. (For previous comments, especially his Milo/Natal video)

[aviator189]

This isn't his real twitter account, so obviously someone wants to make the man look bad.

[SolidSystem]

How do you figure? I see the same arguments over and over talking about how because they do it for work they are somehow bias. I dont get this notion.

I dont get payed to play games, I dont get my games free to review, I buy all my games cause I want to play them or pray this game delivers. even I can form an opinion like "combat is too simple"

people seem to have forgotten what Reviews are. they are not fact. they are not a number you should track. they are that persons personal feelings on the matter. just because he doesnt like the game, does that mean you cant? no, I think its more or less the reviewers job to talk about mechanics and other technical things and mention legit problems and other things that bother them. you as the user need to decide if those pros and cons kill the game for you.

so please get off reviewers backs, just because they do it for a living doesnt mean they dont enjoy games. I doubt they would want to be a game reviewer if they DIDNT like games. you dont see me covering sports now do you?

[Baka-akaB]

nvm wrong reply

[The Hillman]

Well aside from those comments not actually coming from Molyneux I still felt compelled to reply.

As a Games Journalist it's my job evaluate on a basic level whether a game is technically competent, but more importantly whether it is actually fun. Very often those two points come hand in hand.

Yes I get games to review for free but I still always ask myself whether I would have been happy to put down £50 (or whatever) if I was to buy it myself. Just because I'm a critic doesn't mean that I'm not also a consumer. I still buy games too.

I also find it strange when developers say "the reviewer wasn't playing the game correctly"; well we play games just like everyone else, if something is not coming across properly, be it the narrative or the actual game design, then the developer hasn't done a good job in getting those points across.

At the end of the day when I score a game (to look at it on a macro level) it's based on a) is the game fun to play, b) is the game technically sound and if not does it hamper the experience and c)does the product achieve what I think the developer set out to do?

Each review I do is quite simply my subjective opinion, it might not match what you think but it really is up to the reader to have a look through the review and think "can I see where this person is coming from?" "do they seem to have similar opinions to myself about gaming?" etc etc

Too many people are fixated on scores, the actual content in the review is where the real value lies.

Cheers,

T

[The Preacher]

One statement, "Leave the guy alone".

Thank you

[Godmars290]

Why is the guy complaining about reviews that have been largely favorable? At worst they might be saying its more of the same only polished, but they're still good reviews.

[Elven6]

He isn't complaining, this site found a fake Peter Molyneux Twitter account and thinks it's real.

This is Peter's real account, verified by Lionhead and Peter himself.

http://twitter.com/pmolyneu...

[Monkey521]

I think he is over-generalizing the entire group. Sure, there are definitely some reviewers that I question whether or not there is a game that they enjoy, but I wouldn't say all reviewers are this way. The problem is when you have reviewers that can't see good design even if it smacked them in the face.

For example, the IGN Naruto: UNS2 review. The reviewer started saying he hates anime and fighting games.... not a good start for me. Then he goes on to say he likes the game, but he hates that he actually has to play the game to unlock characters for the MP...... so, he doesn't want to have an incentive to beat the game?

Anyways, what I am trying to get at is that both sides are right in this case. There are some AWFUL games out there that should never be bought, and I feel it's the reviewers/critics' duty to let us, the consumer, know which ones those are without a personal vendetta against that particular genre.

[T3MPL3TON]

I don't like him but he's right.. 80% of reviewer don't even complete the games they review.. hell some of them don't even play the games themselves they have other people play them and then give a review based on said persons opinion.

A friend of mine is payed by a guy who writes for a magazine to play games and give his opinion.

[MathiasT-s]

He didn't say this, you all wrote in vain.

"The Twitter account from whence this quote came is indeed NOT the real Peter Molyneux. Therefore, this article is merely a speculation on the perpetration of somebody else's opinion on Molyneux's name. My apologies for the incorrect info."

[Hades1337]

Articles proven false should just be deleted.

[blackburn5]

Fable 3 not going too good huh? I think that it very presumptous of Peter to jump and say reviewers aren't gamers.Just because you disagree with the score doesn't mean that the person who played it doesn't enjoy games or isn't a gamer. It's another excuse that developers use to justify the careless crap and shortcuts they used in development. Either blame the reviewers that saw through your tricks and sloppy designs or the consumers who weren't stupid enough to accept your glitchy or underwhelming game. All scores are not justified, I agree with that, e.g. IGN 3.5 Tumble, but when ever a developer's game doesn't do as well as expected they start pointing fingers at everyone and putting the blame on anyone they can. You, the gamer, should buy the game or decide to listen to reviews and not listen to the butthurt developer who will make any excuse or say anything to push sales of his game.

[soundslike]

Gamers are pretty retarded in general. Yes, me, yes you, ALL OF US. Now stop pretending like you know more about game design than a developer.