Apparently along with review copies of Fable 2 Molyneux has sent out a series of requests that review sites such as IGN allow 'non-gamers' to review Fable 2. Which in my book is kind of like asking someone who doesn't drive to judge a new car. "It looks nice I suppose" being the best answer you can hope for.

I suppose there's the argument that the game's open world nature appeals more to someone looking at the overall experience rather than simply the gameplay but I can't help feeling that there's a little bit of condescension in his request as well. That subtle (or not so subtle) implication that gamers won't get it because... well... because you're all a a bunch of fucking nerds

Opinions?

It is a bit silly since reviewers do generally take in to out the "casual" audience (EX.Wii Game reviews) and why try to mess with the review process like the MGS4 ordeal.

shatnershaman:
It is a bit silly since reviewers do generally take in to out the "casual" audience (EX.Wii Game reviews) and why try to mess with the review process like the MGS4 ordeal.

Oh they do shit like that all the time. There's a great topic around somewhere which links to an article about all the shady shit game companies do to and for reviewers.

I find it to be a bad idea personally. RPG's are not a good genre to try and use to entice new gamers as they tend to be far more detailed and complex as well as having a much more interactive and deeper setting than most games usually made to appeal to non-gamers. I completly understand his wish to increase the market but an RPG is not the right genre to try and do that with.

In the end I feel the game will either fail to entice non-gamers, fail to provide as deep an experience as it could have or both.

Decoy Doctorpus:
That subtle (or not so subtle) implication that gamers won't get it because... well... because you're all a a bunch of fucking nerds

I don't think this is what Mr Molyneux's getting at. I'm sure he's been around long enough to observe that as video gaming moves further into the mainstream, there's the risk of creating more of a divide between "casual" and "hardcore" gaming demographics; I think with his letter he's trying to blur the distinction - i.e. asserting so-called "casual" gamers can have a whale of a time with something a bit deeper.

I may be wrong, but hey, it'll probably fall on deaf ears anyway.

Agreed with Axoloti. If Molyneaux wants to make a DOWNSTREAM (because Casual gaming is a fallacy, as the birdmen taught us http://malstrom.50webs.com/birdman.html ) RPG is not the way to go. I'm not sure what he hopes to gain by marketing an RPG to 'casual gamers' and 'non-gamers', as if Casual Gamers and Non Gamers somehow like things -different-. The fact is they don't, a good game is a good game. The only difference is normal gamers are more likly to be more FORGIVING of a games foibles for various reasons- a casual gamer is not.

Of course we should all play it before we judge the game, it could be fun- the combat looks interesting anyway. I just fear that the fact he made it for casual gamers ripped any difficulty or fun out of it - and don't hand me that Co-op shit! I'm tired of shitty singleplayer being held up on the crutch of good multiplayer. Make all of the aspects of the game good or don't make it, filthy developer n00bs.

TsunamiWombat:
Agreed with Axoloti. If Molyneaux wants to make a DOWNSTREAM (because Casual gaming is a fallacy, as the birdmen taught us http://malstrom.50webs.com/birdman.html ) RPG is not the way to go. I'm not sure what he hopes to gain by marketing an RPG to 'casual gamers' and 'non-gamers', as if Casual Gamers and Non Gamers somehow like things -different-. The fact is they don't, a good game is a good game. The only difference is normal gamers are more likly to be more FORGIVING of a games foibles for various reasons- a casual gamer is not.

RPG not casual? The Sims (West) or Final Fantasy series(Japan) are casual.

Casual or Non gamers are forgiving (Wii graphics/shovelware/online).

I really don't like this "casual" and "hardcore" segregation. What next "casual" gamers have to sit in the back of the bus while "hardcore" gamers sit in the front of the bus.

Molyneux needs to sit down, shut up and realize he is not the greatest game designer out there. People who have never gamed probably won't even get a 360 anyway as nearly every old person and their dog have a Wii. While this is a stupid point, most people that start gaming would like to start with a simpler game like a generic racing or FPS game.

shatnershaman:

TsunamiWombat:
Agreed with Axoloti. If Molyneaux wants to make a DOWNSTREAM (because Casual gaming is a fallacy, as the birdmen taught us http://malstrom.50webs.com/birdman.html ) RPG is not the way to go. I'm not sure what he hopes to gain by marketing an RPG to 'casual gamers' and 'non-gamers', as if Casual Gamers and Non Gamers somehow like things -different-. The fact is they don't, a good game is a good game. The only difference is normal gamers are more likly to be more FORGIVING of a games foibles for various reasons- a casual gamer is not.

RPG not casual? The Sims (West) or Final Fantasy series(Japan) are casual.

Casual or Non gamers are forgiving (Wii graphics/shovelware/online).

I really don't like this "casual" and "hardcore" segregation. What next "casual" gamers have to sit in the back of the bus while "hardcore" gamers sit in the front of the bus.

Well the point of the Birdman Article is that theres really no such -thing- as a casual game, only upstream and downstream. Successful 'casual' games aren't overly simplified or easy- they're intuitive freindly and cute like Braid (anyone who has played Braid knows it gets somewhat difficult and complex towards the end, defying the idea it is "forgiving"). The market has been focused on the UPSTREAM and hardware for so long it forgot it's roots in the downstream, a situation Nintendo is exploiting with the success of the Wii as well as all the new mini-titles from smaller developers coming out.

The whole idea of making a casual game is idiotic- because your setting your bar low from the start. A truly great game should net players in, then slowly increase in complexity until an apex of "i'm awesome!" is reached- then no more, because it's easy to overcomplicate. Making a really great game is an artform. You can usually tell which ones aren't because they have bewbs and glitzy graphics and such in it.

Personally I expect Fable 2 will be a passable, fun game that doesn't deliver on nearly anything it promised but it still fun in a traditional Action RPG sort of way. I only hope that Molyneaux's insistance on making it casual hasn't ripped out any of the challenge or fun from the game, making it nigh impossible for you to die or lose. Thats my only concern.

TsunamiWombat:

Successful 'casual' games aren't overly simplified or easy- they're intuitive freindly and cute like Braid .

Counterpoint: Wii Sports! Wii Fit! Wii Music!

EDIT:Mario 64 had glitzy graphics so did Super Mario Bros 3. are these not great games because of it?

I think he is trying to communicate to us that he wants us to look at this game as something not intended to be your every-day game.

shatnershaman:

TsunamiWombat:

Successful 'casual' games aren't overly simplified or easy- they're intuitive freindly and cute like Braid .

Counterpoint: Wii Sports! Wii Fit! Wii Music!

Wii Fit: so unintelligent overweight people can kid themselves that they're getting exercise!

Axolotl:
I find it to be a bad idea personally. RPG's are not a good genre to try and use to entice new gamers as they tend to be far more detailed and complex as well as having a much more interactive and deeper setting than most games usually made to appeal to non-gamers. I completly understand his wish to increase the market but an RPG is not the right genre to try and do that with.

In the end I feel the game will either fail to entice non-gamers, fail to provide as deep an experience as it could have or both.

RPGs are also very forgiving, however.

Most don't requires particularly strong reflexes. Many are dirt-simple tactically (some because the game is about plot and colorful scenes of eviscerated goblins; others because the designers couldn't tune the mechanics properly -- particularly likely if the game system is trying to be all complex and stuff).

Sure, there can be a of spells or skills or guns or whatever to choose from, and sometimes the interfaces are very unintuitive unless you've played a video-game RPG before, but, in general, basic gameplay in a typical RPG is rather unchallenging. The biggest obstacle is just getting the player to the first real action, and that can be solved with some hand-holding (e.g. a half-decent inventory tutorial, pre-assigned templates for games that feature character creation).

-- Alex

Alex_P:
RPGs are also very forgiving, however.

Indeed, however they are also generally far more complex and detailed than most other genres. With 3 seperate good/evil sliders, a decent ammounty of equipment customisastion, a plethora of sidequests and general mini-missions, marrige, poligamy, a detailed fantasy world and I'm sure many other features. I don't feel that taking that and then simply making the game easy with a simple control scheme will make it appeal to people who don't play games.

I think Molyneaux is just trying to pull a fast one, encouraging reviewers to employ inexperienced gamers rather than the jaded, once-burned reviewers that might otherwise be rating his game. I believe he's selfishly trying to market his product to those who don't remember what a flop (in some ways) the original game was.

It's a bit weak, really, to get a non-gamer to play the game for a review. I mean what are they going to say? Best game they've ever played? Worst game they've ever played? I mean if they're a non-gamer, it would be the only game they've ever played.

Sounds to me like he's worried experienced gamers will find it too dumbed down (that 1 button magic thing looks like it will annoy me, at least), so he's trying to target it for non-gamers.

I think Molyneux is off his rocker.

Hopefully no reviewer will be whipped enough to listen to him. To me, it screams that he's got a confidence issue about his game. Maybe his hope is that if it's shown to a non-gamer (who, lets face it, is less discerning than a hardcore gamer) will sway the reviewer's opinion.

eg. A gamer would probably say the graphics are pretty standard for the current generation, whereas a non-gamer, with nothing to compare against, would probably say the game looks very good.

I think it's a dumb idea. If a non-gamer said "This is the best game I've ever played" it sure as hell won't mean much to us.

It's pretty darn obvious that Molyneux either thinks gamers are all to nerdy to "get" his game (probable given his history), or he knows that Fable 2 is going to be sub-par and wants non-gamers to review it so it gets some decent scores.(not likely since most reviews will still come from actual gamers)

I'm reminded of scene out of the movie Sideways (One of the most unfunny comedies ever, mostly just whiny relationship bullshit, but it's definitely got some choice moments):

Miles Raymond: [while tasting wine] It tastes like the back of a fucking L.A. school bus. Now they probably didn't de-stem, hoping for some semblance of concentration, crushed it up with leaves and mice, and then wound up with this rancid tar and turpentine bullshit. Fuckin' Raid.
Jack: Tastes pretty good to me.

Just make Miles a gamer and Jack the non-gamer that Molyneux would love to have 'review' his game, and that's basically what we're going to get.

By definition, wouldn't anyone who played through enough of the game to review it be a gamer?

Pseudonym2:
By definition, wouldn't anyone who played through enough of the game to review it be a gamer?

And thus Molyneaux's devious plan becoems apparent- it can NEVER be reviewed!

It's things like this that truly annoy me. I can understand trying to bring in other possible "new" gamers and such but by having a non-gamer review it, it makes the review irrelevant and false. These kind of games are made for those who already consider themselves a "gamer" and as such should be reviewed by one. Most non-gamers wouldn't have the patience to play through these kind of games and would see these kind of games as "too difficult to understand"

Axolotl:

Alex_P:
RPGs are also very forgiving, however.

Indeed, however they are also generally far more complex and detailed than most other genres. With 3 seperate good/evil sliders, a decent ammounty of equipment customisastion, a plethora of sidequests and general mini-missions, marrige, poligamy, a detailed fantasy world and I'm sure many other features. I don't feel that taking that and then simply making the game easy with a simple control scheme will make it appeal to people who don't play games.

Yeah, Molyneux's predilection for this kind of fiddly complexity definitely doesn't help make the game accessible.

-- Alex

I don't see the point in getting a non-gamer to play Fable 2.

Would they even be able to appreciate the open world design? It seems counter-intuitive. Surely the game's strongest points are things that regular gamers are more likely to be impressed with--aforementioned open world design, choice, dog & family AI, etc.

We think this.

He probably just wants someone who won't pull out the ear plugs as soon as he starts speaking to talk to.